Search

Aims: Frailty is common in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF), with possible impact on therapies and outcomes. However, definitions of frailty are variable, and may not overlap with frailty perception among physicians. We evaluated the prevalence of frailty as perceived by enrolling physicians in the Edoxaban Treatment in Routine Clinical Practice for Patients With Non-Valvular AF (ETNA-AF)-Europe registry (NCT02944019), and compared it with an objective frailty assessment., Methods and Results: ETNA-AF-Europe is a prospective, multi-centre, post-authorization, observational study. There we assessed the presence of frailty according to (i) a binary subjective investigators' judgement and (ii) an objective measure, the Modified Frailty Index. Baseline data on frailty were available in 13 621/13 980 patients. Prevalence of perceived frailty was 10.6%, with high variability among participating countries and healthcare settings (range 5.9-19.6%). Conversely, only 5.0% of patients had objective frailty, with minimal variability (range 4.5-6.7%); and only <1% of patients were identified as frail by both approaches. Compared with non-frailty-perceived, perceived frail patients were older, more frequently female, and with lower body weight; conversely, objectively frail patients had more comorbidities. Non-recommended edoxaban dose regimens were more frequently prescribed in both frail patient categories., Conclusions: Physicians' perception of frailty in AF patients is variable, mainly driven by age, sex, and weight, and quite different compared with the results of an objective frailty assessment. Whatever the approach, frailty appears to be associated with non-recommended anticoagulant dosages. Whether this apparent inappropriateness influences hard outcomes remains to be assessed., Competing Interests: Conflict of interest: I.D. reports having received speaker fees from Boehringer Ingelheim, Bayer, Bristol-Myers Squibb/Pfizer, Daiichi-Sankyo, Medtronic, Boston Scientific, and Biotronik. A.B. reports being involved in research sponsored by and is a member of advisory panels and speakers’ bureau for Daiichi Sankyo, Pfizer, BMS, Bayer, and Boehringer Ingelheim. P.-E.R., M.C.M., and J.A.G.d.S. are employees of Daiichi Sankyo Europe GmbH. L.P. has received fees and honoraria from Daiichi-Sankyo, SOTIO Biotech, and Beckman-Coulter. P.K. receives research support from European Union, British Heart Foundation, Leducq Foundation, Medical Research Council (UK), and German Centre for Cardiovascular Research, from several drug and device companies active in atrial fibrillation, and has received honoraria from several such companies. He is listed as inventor on two patents held by the University of Birmingham (Atrial Fibrillation Therapy WO 2015140571, Markers for Atrial Fibrillation WO 2016012783). He is co-principal investigator of ETNA-AF-Europe. R.D.C. co-authored ESC Guidelines on Atrial Fibrillation 2010–2012; acted as a Steering Committee member and National Coordinator for Italy, and co-authored manuscripts published on APPRAISE-2, ARISTOTLE, AVERROES, ENGAGE AF-TIMI 48, and Re-DUAL PCI. R.D.C. has received fees, honoraria, and research funding from Sanofi-Aventis, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bayer, Bristol-Myers Squibb/Pfizer, Daiichi-Sankyo, Novartis, Portola, Roche, and Merck. He is co-principal investigator of ETNA-AF-Europe. All remaining authors have declared no conflicts of interest., (© The Author(s) 2022. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology.)

Background: Direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) have replaced vitamin K antagonists as the standard of care for stroke prevention in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF). However, DOAC prescriptions at dosages that do not adhere to labeling are common in daily practice. This analysis from the observational Global Edoxaban Treatment in routiNe clinical prActice (ETNA)-AF program focuses on edoxaban-treated patients from South Korea and Taiwan to identify patient baseline characteristics that may be associated with non-recommended dosing., Methods: We report baseline data from ETNA-AF, including patient demographics, clinical characteristics, and bleeding/stroke history of patients receiving recommended or non-recommended edoxaban dosing., Results: A total of 2677 patients were enrolled. Among 1543 patients who did not meet dose-reduction criteria, 1033 (66.9%) were prescribed the recommended 60-mg dose, and 510 (33.1%) were prescribed the non-recommended 30-mg dose. Among 1134 patients meeting ≥1 of the dose-reduction criteria, 863 (76.1%) were prescribed the recommended 30-mg dose; 271 (23.9%) were prescribed the nonrecommended 60-mg dose. Compared with the recommended 60-mg group, the nonrecommended 30-mg group had a higher proportion of patients aged ≥75 years, higher stroke and bleeding risks, and a history of major bleeding. The non-recommended 60-mg group had a lower proportion of patients aged ≥75 years, a higher history of stroke, and lower history of bleeding compared with the recommended 30-mg group., Conclusion: The baseline data from ETNA-AF indicate that physicians take patient clinical characteristics (e.g., bleeding risks) into consideration when deviating from the dosing recommendation per label., Competing Interests: Conflicts of interest: The authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest related to the subject matter or materials discussed in this article., (Copyright © 2021, the Chinese Medical Association.)

Non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants such as edoxaban are the standard of care for stroke prevention in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF). The Global Edoxaban Treatment in routiNe clinical prActice (ETNA)-AF program integrates prospective, observational, noninterventional regional studies from Europe, Japan, and other Asian countries, collecting data on patient characteristics and clinical outcomes in unselected patients treated with edoxaban for stroke prevention in AF. Overall, 26,823 patients completed a 1-year follow-up and were treated with edoxaban; either 60 or 30 mg once daily. The majority (82.6%) of patients received the recommended doses according to the local label. At baseline, the median (interquartile range) age was 75 (68, 80) years, the CHA 2 DS 2 -VASc score was 3.0 (2.0, 4.0), and the hypertension, abnormal renal and liver function, stroke, bleeding, labile international normalized ratio, elderly, drugs, or alcohol (HAS-BLED) score was 2.0 (2.0, 3.0). At one year, there were 273 (1.12%/year) major bleeding events, including 75 (0.31%/year) intracranial hemorrhages and 140 (0.57%/year) major gastrointestinal (GI) bleeds. There were 214 ischemic strokes (0.87%/year). Mortality was 3.03%/year (745 deaths), and cardiovascular mortality accounted for 40% of all deaths (1.22%/year, 299 cardiovascular deaths). In conclusion, stroke, intracranial hemorrhage, and other major bleeding events were low in patients with AF treated with edoxaban in routine care. Even on anticoagulation, cardiovascular death remained common.

Aims: This post hoc analysis of ELIMINATE-AF evaluated requirements of unfractionated heparin (UFH) and procedure-related bleeding in atrial fibrillation (AF) patients undergoing ablation with uninterrupted edoxaban or vitamin K antagonist (VKA) therapy., Methods and Results: Patients were randomized 2:1 to once-daily edoxaban 60 mg (or dose-reduced 30 mg) or dose-adjusted VKA (target international normalized ratio: 2.0-3.0). Uninterrupted anticoagulation was mandated for 21-28 days' pre-ablation and 90 days' post-ablation. During ablation, UFH administration targeted an activated clotting time (ACT) of 300-400 s. Periprocedural bleeding was differentiated between procedure-related (bleeding at puncture side, cardiac tamponade) and unrelated events. Of 614 randomized patients, 553 received study drug and underwent catheter ablation (edoxaban n = 375; VKA n = 178). The median (Q1-Q3) time from last dose to ablation procedure was 14.8 (13.3-16.5) vs. 16.5 (14.8-19.5) h (edoxaban vs. VKA group, respectively). Mean ACT (SD) ≥300 s was observed in 52% edoxaban- vs. 76% VKA-treated patients, despite a higher mean (SD) UFH dose in the edoxaban vs. VKA group [14 261 (6397) IU vs. 11 473 (4300) IU; exploratory P-value < 0.0001]. In the edoxaban group, 13 patients (3.5%) had procedure-related bleeds of whom 9 had received an UFH dose above the median (13 000 IU). In the VKA arm, 7 patients (3.9%) had procedure-related bleeds of whom 3 had received an UFH dose above the median (10 225 IU)., Conclusion: The rate of procedure-related major/clinically relevant non-major bleeding did not differ between the treatment arms despite higher doses of UFH used with edoxaban vs. VKA to achieve a target ACT during AF ablation., (© The Author(s) 2020. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology.)

Aims: To compare the safety and efficacy of edoxaban combined with P2Y12 inhibition following percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) presenting with an acute coronary syndrome (ACS) or chronic coronary syndrome (CCS)., Methods and Results: In this pre-specified sub-analysis of the ENTRUST-AF PCI trial, participants were randomly assigned 1:1 to edoxaban- or vitamin K antagonist (VKA)-based strategy and randomization was stratified by ACS (edoxaban n = 388, VKA n = 389) vs. CCS (edoxaban n = 363, VKA = 366). Participants received edoxaban 60 mg once-daily plus a P2Y12 inhibitor for 12 months, or VKA combined with a P2Y12 inhibitor and aspirin 100 mg (for 1-12 months). The primary bleeding endpoint at 12 months occurred in 59 (15.2%) vs. 79 (20.3%) ACS patients [hazard ratio (HR): 0.73, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.59-1.02, P = 0.063], and in 69 (19.0%) vs. 73 (19.9%) CCS patients (HR: 0.94, 95%CI: 0.68-1.31, P = 0.708) with edoxaban- and VKA-based therapy, respectively [P for interaction (P-int) = 0.2741]. The main secondary endpoint (composite of CV death, myocardial infarction, stroke, systemic embolic events, or definite stent thrombosis) in ACS patients was 33 (8.5%) vs. 28 (7.2%) (HR: 1.16, 95%CI: 0.70-1.92), compared with 16 (4.4%) vs. 18 (4.9%) (HR: 0.91, 95%CI: 0.47-1.78) CCS patients with edoxaban and VKA-based therapy, respectively (P-int = 0.5573)., Conclusions: In patients with AF who underwent PCI, the edoxaban-based regimen, as compared with VKA-based regimen, provides consistent safety and similar efficacy for ischaemic events in patients with AF regardless of their clinical presentation., (© The Author(s) 2020. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology.)

Background: Randomized controlled trials showed the nonvitamin K oral anticoagulant (NOAC) edoxaban was effective and safe for stroke and systemic embolism prevention in nonvalvular atrial fibrillation (AF) and for the prevention and treatment of venous thromboembolism (VTE; including pulmonary embolism and deep vein thrombosis). Additional research is needed to evaluate the effects of edoxaban in routine clinical practice. Therefore, the Edoxaban Treatment in routine cliNical prActice (ETNA) program is being conducted to provide routine clinical care data on characteristics and outcomes in patients with AF or VTE receiving edoxaban., Methods: The Global ETNA program integrates prospectively collected data from edoxaban patients in regional ETNA noninterventional studies across Europe, Japan, and East and Southeast Asia into indication-specific databases for AF and VTE. Targeted enrollment is >31 000 patients (AF >26 000; VTE >4500), with a follow-up of 2 years for AF and 1 year for VTE. Data integration will be possible using consistent terminology, parameter definitions, and data collection across the regional noninterventional studies. Safety and effectiveness data will be assessed. Crude rates of outcomes including bleeding and thromboembolic events will be reported., Results: Globally, enrollment began in early 2015 and is ongoing., Conclusions: Global ETNA will generate the largest integrated prospective repository of routine clinical care data for a single NOAC in patients with AF or VTE. It will provide important information on the safety of edoxaban in routine clinical care and gather further information on its effectiveness., (© 2019 The Authors. Clinical Cardiology published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc.)

Aims: Edoxaban is a direct factor Xa inhibitor approved for stroke prevention in atrial fibrillation (AF). Uninterrupted edoxaban therapy in patients undergoing AF ablation has not been tested., Methods and Results: The ELIMINATE-AF trial, a multinational, multicentre, randomized, open-label, parallel-group study, was conducted to assess the safety and efficacy of once-daily edoxaban 60 mg (30 mg in patients indicated for dose reduction) vs. vitamin K antagonists (VKAs) in AF patients undergoing catheter ablation. Patients were randomized 2:1 to edoxaban vs. VKA. The primary endpoint (per-protocol population) was time to first occurrence of all-cause death, stroke, or International Society of Thrombosis and Haemostasis-defined major bleeding during the period from the end of the ablation procedure to end of treatment (90 days). Overall, 632 patients were enrolled, 614 randomized, and 553 received study drug and underwent ablation; 177 subjects underwent brain magnetic resonance imaging to assess silent cerebral infarcts. The primary endpoint (only major bleeds occurred) was observed in 0.3% (1 patient) on edoxaban and 2.0% (2 patients) on VKA [hazard ratio (95% confidence interval): 0.16 (0.02-1.73)]. In the ablation population (modified intent-to-treat population including patients with ablation), the primary endpoint was observed in 2.7% of edoxaban (N = 10) and 1.7% of VKA patients (N = 3) between start of ablation and end of treatment. There were one ischaemic and one haemorrhagic stroke, both in patients on edoxaban. Cerebral microemboli were detected in 13.8% (16) patients who received edoxaban and 9.6% (5) patients in the VKA group (nominal P = 0.62)., Conclusion: Uninterrupted edoxaban therapy represents an alternative to uninterrupted VKA treatment in patients undergoing AF ablation., (© The Author(s) 2019. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology.)

Background: Non-vitamin K antagonist (VKA) oral anticoagulants (NOACs) have substantially improved anticoagulation therapy for prevention of stroke and systemic embolism in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF). The available routine care data have demonstrated the safety of different NOACs; however, such data for edoxaban are scarce. Here, we report baseline characteristics of 13,638 edoxaban-treated patients with AF enrolled between November 2016 and February 2018., Methods: ETNA-AF-Europe is a multinational, multi-centre, post-authorisation, observational study conducted in 825 sites in 10 European countries. Patients will be followed up for four years., Results: Overall, 13,980 patients were enrolled of which 342 patients were excluded from the analysis. Mean patient age was 73.6 years with an average creatinine clearance of 69.4 mL/min. 56.6% were male. The calculated CHA 2 DS 2 -VASc and HAS-BLED mean scores were 3.1 and 2.6, respectively. Overall, 3.3, 14.6 and 82.0% of patients had low (CHA 2 DS 2 -VASc = 0), intermediate (CHA 2 DS 2 -VASc = 1) and high (CHA 2 DS 2 -VASc≥2) risks of stroke, respectively. High-risk patients (those with prior stroke, prior major bleeding, prior intracranial bleed or CHA 2 DS 2 -VASc ≥4) comprised 38.4% of the overall population. For 75.1% of patients edoxaban was their first anticoagulant prescription, whilst 16.9% switched from a VKA and 8.0% from another NOAC. A total of 23.4% of patients in ETNA-AF-Europe received the reduced dose of edoxaban 30 mg. Overall, 83.8% of patients received an edoxaban dose in line with the criteria outlined in the label., Conclusion: Edoxaban was predominantly initiated in older, often anticoagulation-naïve, unselected European patients with AF, with a good overall adherence to the approved label., Trial Registration: NCT02944019; Date of registration: October 24, 2016.

The efficacy and safety of olmesartan medoxomil (OM) vs active control (AC) monotherapy among elderly patients aged 60-79 years (N = 4487) was evaluated by meta-analysis (25 studies). In all patients, change from baseline to end point in blood pressure (BP) was significantly greater with OM vs AC (-19.5/-11.9 vs -16.8/-10.7 mm Hg). Greater proportions of OM- vs AC-treated patients achieved BP goals. In patients with impaired renal function (estimated glomerular filtration rate <60 mL/min/1.73 m 2 ), OM treatment resulted in a greater mean change from baseline in systolic BP vs AC (-21.2 vs -18.7 mm Hg, respectively) and a greater proportion of patients achieving BP goals. These parameters were similar in both groups for elderly patients with diabetes. OM was well tolerated with few adverse events. OM monotherapy can be used as an initial treatment for hypertension in elderly patients, including those with renal impairment or diabetes., (©2018 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.)

Antihypertensive monotherapy is often insufficient to control blood pressure (BP). Several recent guidelines advocate for initial combination drug therapy in many patients. This meta-analysis of seven randomized, double-blind studies (N = 5888) evaluated 8 weeks of olmesartan medoxomil (OM)-based single-pill dual-combination therapy (OM+amlodipine/azelnidipine or hydrochlorothiazide) vs OM monotherapy in adults with hypertension. BP-lowering efficacy, goal achievement, and adverse events were assessed in the full cohort and subgroups (elderly/nonelderly and patients with and without chronic kidney disease). In the full cohort at week 8, for dual therapy vs monotherapy, seated BP was lower (137.5/86.1 mm Hg vs 144.4/89.9 mm Hg), and the mean change from baseline in BP and BP goal achievement (<140/90 mm Hg) were greater (-22.7/-15.0 mm Hg vs -16.0/-11.3 mm Hg and 51.2% vs 34.7%, respectively). Adverse events were similar between groups. BP-lowering efficacy among subgroups mirrored the findings in the full cohort whereby changes were significantly greater following OM dual-combination therapy vs OM monotherapy., (© 2017 The Authors. The Journal of Clinical Hypertension published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc.)

Objective: To compare local tolerance and clinical efficacy after i.m. or s.c. injection of recombinant FSH (Puregon; NV Organon, Oss, The Netherlands)., Design: An open-label, prospective, randomized, group-comparative, multicenter study., Setting: Twelve IVF clinics in 10 countries., Patient(s): Two hundred eighteen infertile pituitary-suppressed women undergoing IVF-ET were randomized, of whom 195 (i.m., n = 77; s.c., n = 118) received recombinant FSH., Intervention(s): One cycle of controlled ovarian hyperstimulation induced by either i.m. or s.c. injection of recombinant FSH, followed by IVF-ET., Main Outcome Measure(s): Local tolerance symptoms, number of oocytes retrieved, ongoing pregnancy rate., Result(s): The incidences after i.m. injection of bruising, pain, redness, swelling, and itching were 37.7%, 31.2%, 13.0%, 7.8%, and 6.5%; after s.c. injection, the corresponding figures were 54.2%, 28.0%, 16.1%, 5.9%, and 3.4%. Only bruising was significantly lower in the i.m. group, which could be attributed to the more visible superficial injection site with s.c. administration. The overall occurrence of local symptoms were 63.6% after i.m. injection and 68.6% after s.c. injection. The mean numbers of oocytes recovered were 9.8 (i.m) and 10.4 (s.c.) and the ongoing pregnancy rates per attempt were 27.1% (i.m.) and 26.1% (s.c.), respectively., Conclusion(s): There were no marked differences in local tolerance symptoms and clinical efficacy between i.m. and s.c. administration of recombinant FSH.