Search

OBJECTIVE: The aim of these analyses was to investigate the rate of decline in forced vital capacity (FVC) in patients with SSc-associated interstitial lung disease (SSc-ILD) with and without cough or dyspnoea in the SENSCIS trial. METHODS: Patients in the SENSCIS trial were randomized to receive nintedanib or placebo. Subgroups with and without cough or dyspnoea at baseline were defined by responses to the St George's Respiratory Questionnaire. RESULTS: At baseline, 114/575 patients (19.8%) did not have cough and 172/574 patients (30.0%) did not have dyspnoea. In the placebo group, the rate of FVC decline over 52 weeks was similar in patients with and without cough (-95.6 and -83.4 mL/year, respectively) or dyspnoea (-95.8 and -87.7 mL/year, respectively). The effect of nintedanib vs placebo on reducing the rate of FVC decline was numerically more pronounced in patients without than with cough [difference: 74.4 (95% CI -11.1, 159.8) vs 31.5 (-11.1, 74.1)] and without than with dyspnoea [79.8 (9.8, 149.7) vs 25.7 (-19.9, 71.3)], but interaction P-values did not indicate heterogeneity in the treatment effect between these subgroups (P = 0.38 and P = 0.20, respectively). CONCLUSION: In the placebo group of the SENSCIS trial, the rate of FVC decline was similar irrespective of the presence of cough or dyspnoea at baseline. The effect of nintedanib on reducing the rate of FVC decline was numerically more pronounced in patients without than with cough or dyspnoea at baseline, but no statistically significant heterogeneity was observed between the subgroups. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, https://clinicaltrials.gov, NCT02597933.

OBJECTIVE: We used data from the SENSCIS trial to assess the effects of nintedanib versus placebo in subgroups of patients with SSc-ILD based on characteristics associated with progression of SSc-ILD in previous studies. METHODS: Patients with SSc-ILD were randomized to receive nintedanib or placebo, stratified by anti-topoisomerase I antibody (ATA) status. We assessed the rate of decline in forced vital capacity (FVC) (mL/year) over 52 weeks in subgroups by baseline ATA status, modified Rodnan skin score (mRSS) (<18 versus ≥18), and SSc subtype (limited cutaneous SSc [lcSSc] versus diffuse cutaneous SSc [dcSSc]). RESULTS: At baseline, of 576 patients treated, 60.8% were ATA-positive, 51.9% had dcSSc, and 77.5% of 574 patients with mRSS data available had mRSS <18. The effect of nintedanib versus placebo on reducing the rate of decline in FVC (mL/year) was numerically more pronounced in patients who were ATA-negative (difference: 57.2 [95% CI -3.5, 118.0]) than ATA-positive (difference: 29.9 [-19.1, 78.8]), in patients who had mRSS ≥18 (difference: 88.7 [7.7, 169.8]) than mRSS <18 at baseline (difference: 26.4 [-16.8, 69.6]), and in patients with dcSSc (difference: 56.6 [3.2, 110.0]) than lcSSc (difference: 25.3 [-28.9, 79.6]), but exploratory interaction P values did not indicate heterogeneity in the effect of nintedanib versus placebo between these subgroups (P > 0.05 for all). CONCLUSION: In patients with SSc-ILD, no heterogeneity was detected in the treatment effect of nintedanib in reducing the annual rate of decline in FVC across subgroups based on ATA status, mRSS, and SSc subtype.

AIMS Patients with atrial fibrillation undergoing coronary intervention are at higher bleeding risk due to the concomitant need for oral anticoagulation and antiplatelet therapy. The RE-DUAL PCI trial demonstrated better safety with dual antithrombotic therapy (DAT: dabigatran 110 or 150 mg bid, clopidogrel or ticagrelor) compared to triple antithrombotic therapy (TAT: warfarin, clopidogrel or ticagrelor, and aspirin). We explored the impact of baseline bleeding risk based on the PRECISE-DAPT score for decision-making regarding DAT vs. TAT. METHODS AND RESULTS A score ≥25 points qualified high bleeding-risk (HBR). Comparisons were made for the primary safety endpoint ISTH major or clinically relevant non-major bleeding, and the composite efficacy endpoint of death, thromboembolic events, or unplanned revascularization, analyzed by time-to-event analysis. PRECISE-DAPT was available in 2,336/2,725 patients, and 37.9% were HBR. Compared to TAT, DAT with dabigatran 110 mg reduced bleeding risk both in non-HBR (HR 0.42, 95%CI, 0.31-0.57) and HBR (HR 0.70, 95%CI, 0.52-0.94), with a greater magnitude of benefit among non-HBR (Pint=0.02). DAT with dabigatran 150 mg vs. TAT reduced bleeding in non-HBR (HR 0.60, 95%CI, 0.45-0.80), with a trend toward less benefit in HBR patients (HR 0.92, 95%CI, 0.63-1.34, Pint=0.08). Risk of ischaemic events was similar on DAT with dabigatran (both 110 and 150 mg) vs. TAT in non-HBR and HBR patients (Pint=0.45 and Pint=0.56, respectively). CONCLUSIONS PRECISE-DAPT score appeared useful to identify AF patients undergoing PCI at further increased risk of bleeding complications, and may help clinicians identifying the antithrombotic regimen intensity with the best benefit-risk ratio in an individual patient.

AIMS: To investigate the safety and efficacy of dabigatran dual therapy (110 or 150 mg twice daily, plus clopidogrel or ticagrelor) vs warfarin triple therapy in patients with atrial fibrillation undergoing PCI for ST elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI). METHODS AND RESULTS: In RE-DUAL PCI, 305 patients with STEMI were randomised to dabigatran 110 mg (n=113 versus 106 warfarin) or 150 mg (n=86 versus 84 warfarin). Primary endpoint was time to first major or clinically relevant non-major bleeding event (MBE/CRNMBE). The thrombotic endpoint was a composite of death, thromboembolic events, or unplanned revascularisation. In STEMI patients, dabigatran 110 mg (HR 0.39, 95% CI 0.20-0.74) and 150 mg (0.43, 0.21-0.89) dual therapy reduced the risk of MBE/CRNMBE versus warfarin triple therapy (p interaction vs all other patients = 0.31 and 0.16). Risk of thrombotic events, for dabigatran 110 mg (HR 1.61, 95% CI: 0.85-3.08) and 150 mg (0.56, 0.20-1.51) had p interactions of 0.20 and 0.33, respectively. For net clinical benefit, HRs were 0.74 (95% CI 0.46-1.17) and 0.49 (0.27-0.91) for dabigatran 110 and 150 mg (p interaction = 0.80 and 0.12). CONCLUSIONS: In patients after PCI for STEMI, dabigatran dual therapy had lower risks of bleeding events versus warfarin triple therapy with similar risks of thromboembolic events, supporting the use of dabigatran dual therapy even in patients with high thrombotic risk.

Background The RE-DUAL PCI trial demonstrated that in patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation (AF) undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), dual therapy with dabigatran and a P2Y12 inhibitor, either clopidogrel or ticagrelor, reduced the risk of bleeding without an increased risk of thromboembolic events as compared to triple therapy with warfarin in addition to a P2Y12 inhibitor and aspirin. What remains unclear is whether this effect is consistent between males and females undergoing PCI. Hypothesis The reduction in risk of bleeding without increased risk of thromboembolic events with dual therapy with dabigatran and a P2Y12 inhibitor in comparison to triple therapy with warfarin, a P2Y12 inhibitor and aspirin is consistent in females and males. Methods The primary safety endpoint was the first International Society on Thrombosis and Hemostasis (ISTH) major bleeding event (MBE) or clinically relevant non-major bleeding event (CRNMBE). The efficacy endpoint was the composite of death, thromboembolic event (stroke, myocardial infarction, and systemic embolism) or unplanned revascularization. Cox proportional hazard regression analyses were applied to calculate corresponding hazard ratios and interaction p values for each endpoint. Results A total of 655 women and 2070 men were enrolled. The risk of major or CRNM bleeding was lower with both dabigatran 110 mg dual therapy and dabigatran 150 mg dual therapy compared with warfarin triple therapy in female and male patients (for 110 mg: females: HR 0.69, 95% CI 0.47–1.01, males: HR 0.46, 95% CI 0.37–0.59, interaction p value: 0.084 and for 150 mg: females HR 0.74, 95% CI 0.48–1.16, males HR 0.71, 95% CI 0.56–0.90, interaction p value: 0.83). There was also no detectable difference in the composite efficacy endpoint of death, thromboembolic events or unplanned revascularization between dabigatran dual therapy and warfarin triple therapy, with no statistically significant interaction between sex and trea

AIMS: Patients with atrial fibrillation undergoing coronary intervention are at higher bleeding risk due to the concomitant need for oral anticoagulation and antiplatelet therapy. The RE-DUAL PCI trial demonstrated better safety with dual antithrombotic therapy (DAT: dabigatran 110 or 150 mg bid, clopidogrel or ticagrelor) compared to triple antithrombotic therapy (TAT: warfarin, clopidogrel or ticagrelor, and aspirin). We explored the impact of baseline bleeding risk based on the PRECISE-DAPT score for decision-making regarding DAT vs. TAT. METHODS AND RESULTS: A score ≥25 points qualified high bleeding-risk (HBR). Comparisons were made for the primary safety endpoint ISTH major or clinically relevant non-major bleeding, and the composite efficacy endpoint of death, thromboembolic events, or unplanned revascularization, analyzed by time-to-event analysis. PRECISE-DAPT was available in 2,336/2,725 patients, and 37.9% were HBR. Compared to TAT, DAT with dabigatran 110 mg reduced bleeding risk both in non-HBR (HR 0.42, 95%CI, 0.31-0.57) and HBR (HR 0.70, 95%CI, 0.52-0.94), with a greater magnitude of benefit among non-HBR (Pint=0.02). DAT with dabigatran 150 mg vs. TAT reduced bleeding in non-HBR (HR 0.60, 95%CI, 0.45-0.80), with a trend toward less benefit in HBR patients (HR 0.92, 95%CI, 0.63-1.34, Pint=0.08). Risk of ischaemic events was similar on DAT with dabigatran (both 110 and 150 mg) vs. TAT in non-HBR and HBR patients (Pint=0.45 and Pint=0.56, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: PRECISE-DAPT score appeared useful to identify AF patients undergoing PCI at further increased risk of bleeding complications, and may help clinicians identifying the antithrombotic regimen intensity with the best benefit-risk ratio in an individual patient.

Background and Objective In patients with atrial fibrillation following percutaneous coronary intervention, if a proton pump inhibitor is used, could that allow the use of warfarin triple therapy, or is there additional reduction in bleeding while using it with dual therapy? Methods The RE-DUAL PCI trial randomized 2725 patients with atrial fibrillation post-percutaneous coronary intervention to dabigatran dual therapy (110 or 150 mg twice daily, with clopidogrel or ticagrelor) or warfarin triple therapy (with clopidogrel or ticagrelor, and aspirin for 1-3 months). This prespecified subgroup analysis evaluated risks of a first major bleeding event or clinically relevant non-major bleeding event, all gastrointestinal bleeding, and a composite efficacy endpoint of all-cause mortality/thromboembolic event or unplanned revascularization according to baseline use of a proton pump inhibitor. Results Of 2678 analyzed patients, 1641 (61.3%) were receiving a proton pump inhibitor at baseline. Dabigatran 110 and 150 mg dual therapy reduced the risk of major bleeding events or clinically relevant non-major bleeding events vs warfarin triple therapy regardless of proton pump inhibitor use, with comparable risk of the composite efficacy endpoint (all interactionpvalues > 0.05). For gastrointestinal bleeding, no interaction was observed between study treatment and proton pump inhibitor use (interactionpvalues 0.84 and 0.62 for dabigatran 110 and 150 mg dual therapy, respectively, vs warfarin triple therapy). Conclusions Dabigatran 110 and 150 mg dual therapy reduced the risk of major bleeding events or clinically relevant non-major bleeding events vs warfarin triple therapy, regardless of proton pump inhibitor use at baseline, in patients with atrial fibrillation who underwent percutaneous coronary intervention. Risk of the composite efficacy endpoint appeared to be similar for dabigatran dual therapy vs warfarin triple therapy in patients receiving/not receiving a proton pump

Background In the RE-DUAL PCI trial of patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) who underwent percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), dabigatran dual therapy (110 or 150 mg bid, plus clopidogrel or ticagrelor) reduced International Society on Thrombosis and Haemostasis bleeding events compared with warfarin triple therapy, with noninferiority in overall thromboembolic events. This analysis assessed outcomes in relation to patient bleeding and stroke risk profiles, based on the modified HAS-BLED and CHA(2)DS(2)-VASc scores. Methods The primary endpoint, major bleeding event (MBE) or clinically relevant nonmajor bleeding event (CRNMBE), was compared across study arms in patients categorized by modified HAS-BLED score 0-2 or >= 3. The composite endpoint of death, thromboembolic event, and unplanned revascularization rates was compared in patients categorized by CHA(2)DS(2)-VASc score 0-1, 2, or >= 3. Results Risk of MBE or CRNMBE was lower with dabigatran dual therapy (both doses) versus warfarin triple therapy, irrespective of modified HAS-BLED category (treatment-by-subgroup interaction P-value 0.584 and 0.273 for dabigatran 110 and 150 mg dual therapy, respectively, vs warfarin). Risk of the composite thromboembolic endpoint was similar across CHA(2)DS(2)-VASc categories and consistent with overall study results (interaction P-value 0.739 and 0.075 for dabigatran 110 and 150 mg dual therapy, respectively, vs warfarin). Higher HAS-BLED scores were associated with higher risks of bleeding in AF patients after PCI in a treatment-independent analysis. Conclusion Dabigatran dual therapy reduced bleeding events irrespective of bleeding risk category and demonstrated similar efficacy regardless of stroke risk category when compared with warfarin triple therapy.