Search

Introduction Limited data were published on the management of direct oral anticoagulants in the insertion of pacemaker and cardiac monitoring devices. This study describes the management and outcomes of edoxaban, a direct oral factor Xa inhibitor, in patients undergoing pacemaker or monitoring device implantation in routine clinical practice. Methods and results EMIT-AF/VTE collected data of patients from Europe, Korea, and Taiwan. Timing and duration of peri-procedural interruption of edoxaban were at the treating physician's discretion. Pacemakers or monitoring devices were implanted into 136 patients who were evaluated from five days pre- until 30 days post-procedure. The primary outcomes were the incidences of acute thromboembolic events (ATE), ischemic events, and International Society on Thrombosis and Haemostasis defined Major Bleeding; secondary outcomes included incidence of Clinically Relevant Non-Major Bleeding (CRNMB) and perioperative edoxaban interruption times. Conformance with European Heart Rhythm Association (EHRA) Guidance on interruption of DOAC therapy was variable: of the cardiac monitoring device patients, where no interruption of therapy would be expected, nonetheless, 62.5% had interruption of treatment, whereas in pacemaker procedures, where interruption would be expected, 23.4% had no interruption. No ATE or ischemic events occurred. One case of CRNMB and two of minor bleeding occurred. All bleedings occurred more than three days after the procedure. Conclusion/relevance The periprocedural complication risk for edoxaban treated patients undergoing pacemaker or invasive cardiac monitoring implantation was low. This population of patients was well managed in routine practice. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

BACKGROUND The role of direct oral anticoagulants as compared with vitamin K antagonists for atrial fibrillation after successful transcatheter aortic-valve replacement (TAVR) has not been well studied. METHODS We conducted a multicenter, prospective, randomized, open-label, adjudicator-masked trial comparing edoxaban with vitamin K antagonists in patients with prevalent or incident atrial fibrillation as the indication for oral anticoagulation after successful TAVR. The primary efficacy outcome was a composite of adverse events consisting of death from any cause, myocardial infarction, ischemic stroke, systemic thromboembolism, valve thrombosis, or major bleeding. The primary safety outcome was major bleeding. On the basis of a hierarchical testing plan, the primary efficacy and safety outcomes were tested sequentially for noninferiority, with noninferiority of edoxaban established if the upper boundary of the 95% confidence interval for the hazard ratio did not exceed 1.38. Superiority testing of edoxaban for efficacy would follow if noninferiority and superiority were established for major bleeding. RESULTS A total of 1426 patients were enrolled (713 in each group). The mean age of the patients was 82.1 years, and 47.5% of the patients were women. Almost all the patients had atrial fibrillation before TAVR. The rate of the composite primary efficacy outcome was 17.3 per 100 person-years in the edoxaban group and 16.5 per 100 person-years in the vitamin K antagonist group (hazard ratio, 1.05; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.85 to 1.31; P���=���0.01 for noninferiority). Rates of major bleeding were 9.7 per 100 person-years and 7.0 per 100 person-years, respectively (hazard ratio, 1.40; 95% CI, 1.03 to 1.91; P���=���0.93 for noninferiority); the difference between groups was mainly due to more gastrointestinal bleeding with edoxaban. Rates of death from any cause or stroke were 10.0 per 100 person-years in the edoxaban group and 11.7 per 100 person-years in the vitamin K antagonist group (hazard ratio, 0.85; 95% CI, 0.66 to 1.11). CONCLUSIONS In patients with mainly prevalent atrial fibrillation who underwent successful TAVR, edoxaban was noninferior to vitamin K antagonists as determined by a hazard ratio margin of 38% for a composite primary outcome of adverse clinical events. The incidence of major bleeding was higher with edoxaban than with vitamin K antagonists. (Funded by Daiichi Sankyo; ENVISAGE-TAVI AF ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02943785.).

Funding Acknowledgements Type of funding sources: Private company. Main funding source(s): Daiichi Sankyo Background The optimal periprocedural management of direct oral anticoagulants (DOAC), including edoxaban, in patients undergoing catheter-based cardiovascular procedures is unknown, and mainly based on physician opinion and experience. Purpose To assess real-world management of edoxaban in patients undergoing cardiovascular procedures, and to report their clinical events. Methods Global EMIT-AF/VTE is a prospective study of periprocedural management in edoxaban-treated patients undergoing diagnostic and therapeutic procedures. We report the data from patients undergoing cardiovascular procedures. Timing and duration of edoxaban interruption were at the treating physician’s discretion. Outcomes were collected from 5 days before until 30 days post procedure. Primary outcome was the incidence of major bleeding (MB); secondary outcomes included incidence of clinically relevant non-major bleeding (CRNMB) and acute thromboembolic events (ATE). Results Data was collected from 301 and 311 procedures with arterial or venous access, respectively. Baseline characteristics are shown in Table 1. Edoxaban was not interrupted in 36.9% of arterial and 52.7% of venous procedures. Edoxaban was interrupted pre-procedure in 41% of arterial and 32.8% of venous procedures. The median periprocedural interruption was 2 days. The overall incidence of bleeding was very low. Any bleeding was reported in 8 patients undergoing arterial and 10 patients undergoing venous procedures (2.7% and 3.2%). MB or CRNMB occurred in 2 arterial and 3 venous procedures (0.7% and 1.0%) and ATE occurred in 5 arterial and 1 venous procedure (1.7% and 0.3%, Table 1). Conclusions In this study, the periprocedural risks of bleeding and thrombotic events were low. About a third of arterial access procedures and half of venous access procedures were performed without edoxaban interruption. Arterial(n = 301) Venous(n = 311) Baseline characteristics Age, year, mean (SD)Male, n (%)Weight (kg), mean (SD) 71.9 (8.5)211 (70.1%)80.8 (16.7) 64.6 (11.1)215 (69.1%)84.1 (17.4) CrCL (mL/min), mean (SD) CHA2DS2-VASc score, mean (SD)HAS-BLED score, mean (SD) 73.5 (29.8) 3.3 (1.5)2.0 (1.0) 88.9 (35.5) 2.2 (1.5)1.3 (1.0) Edoxaban 60 mg / 30 mg, % 73% / 26% 88% / 26% Coronary heart disease, n (%) Congestive heart failure, n (%) 101 (33.6%) 58 (19.3%) 51 (16.4%) 33 (10.6%) Interruption of edoxaban, n (%) No interruption Pre-procedure only Post-procedure only Pre- and post-procedure 111 (36.9%)125 (41.5%)12 (4.0%)53 (17.6%) 164 (52.7%)102 (32.8%)8 (2.6%)37 (11.9%) Clinical events, n (%) MB or CRNMBACSStroke/Transient ischemic attackCV mortalityAll-cause mortality 2 (0.7%)2 (0.7%)3 (1.0%)1 (0.3%)2 (0.7%) 3 (1.0%) 01 (0.3%)00

Sin financiación 4.153 JCR (2019) Q2, 35/138 Cardiac & Cardiovascular Systems 2.902 SJR (2019) Q1, 17/362 Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine No data IDR 2019 UEM

Annually 10% of patients with atrial fibrillation on oral anticoagulation undergo invasive procedures. Optimal peri-procedural management of anticoagulation, as judged by major bleeding and thromboembolic events, especially in the elderly, is still debated.Procedures from 1442 patients were evaluated. Peri-procedural edoxaban management was guided only by the experience of the attending physician. The primary safety outcome was the rate of major bleeding. Secondary outcomes included the peri-procedural administration of edoxaban, other bleeding events, and the main efficacy outcome, a composite of acute coronary syndrome, non-hemorrhagic stroke, transient ischemic attack, systemic embolic events, deep vein thrombosis, pulmonary embolism, and mortality.Of the 1442 patients, 280 (19%) were 65, 550 (38%) were 65-74, 514 (36%) 75-84, and 98 (7%) were 85 years old or older. With increasing age, comorbidities and risk scores were higher. Any bleeding complications were uncommon across all ages, ranging from 3.9% in patients 65 to 4.1% in those 85 years or older; major bleeding rates in any age group were ≤ 0.6%. Interruption rates and duration increased with advancing age. Thromboembolic events were more common in the elderly, with all nine events occurring in those 65, and seven in patients aged 75 years.Despite increased bleeding risk factors in the elderly, bleeding rates were small and similar across all age groups. However, there was a trend toward more thromboembolic complications with advancing age. Further efforts to identify the optimal management to reduce ischemic complications are needed.NCT# 02950168, October 31, 2016.

Background In ENSURE-AF study, edoxaban had similar efficacy and safety profile versus enoxaparin–warfarin (enox–warf) in patients undergoing electrical cardioversion of non-valvular atrial fibrillation. Objectives To evaluate the efficacy and safety of edoxaban versus enox–warf in patients who were vitamin K antagonists (VKA) naïve or experienced at time of randomisation into ENSURE-AF trial. Methods The primary efficacy endpoint was a composite of stroke, systemic embolic event, myocardial infarction, and cardiovascular death during the overall study period, 28 days on study drug after cardioversion and 30 days follow-up. The primary safety endpoint was the composite of major and clinically relevant nonmajor bleeding during the on-medication period from time of first dose to last dose of study drug taken + 3 days. Results Of 2199 patients enrolled in ENSURE-AF, 1095 were randomised to edoxaban and 1104 to enox–warf. There were numerically fewer primary efficacy endpoint events with edoxaban than enox–warf irrespective of whether VKA experienced or naïve (0.5% vs. 0.9%, 0.3% vs. 1.4%, respectively). There were no significant differences in the primary safety endpoint [odds ratio (OR) 2.09, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.72–6.81 in anticoagulant experienced patients, OR 0.77, 95% CI 0.15–3.60 in anticoagulant naïve patients] and in major bleeding rates regardless of treatment or VKA experience (OR 0.69, 95%CI 0.06–6.04, OR 0.48, 95% CI 0.01–9.25, respectively). Conclusions Edoxaban had comparable efficacy and safety to optimized anticoagulation with enox–warf. The primary efficacy and safety endpoint outcomes were broadly similar between VKA experienced or naïve patients.

Background EdoxabaN versus warfarin in subjectS UndeRgoing cardiovErsion of Atrial Fibrillation evaluated use of nonvitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulant edoxaban vs enoxaparin‐warfarin in patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation undergoing electrical cardioversion. Hypothesis To assess clinical factors related to successful or unsuccessful cardioversion. To evaluate whether differences in adverse events based on anticoagulation strategy may exist. Methods In this multicenter prospective randomized open‐label blinded end‐point evaluation trial, 2199 patients were randomized to edoxaban 60 mg once daily (30 mg for creatinine clearance 15‐50 mL/min, weight ≤ 60 kg, and/or concomitant use of P‐glycoprotein inhibitor) or enoxaparin‐warfarin. Successful cardioversion was confirmed by 12‐lead electrocardiography‐documented sinus rhythm. Results Cardioversion was successful in 1578 patients; in 355 patients, cardioversion was unsuccessful. Male, high body weight, high body mass index (BMI), coronary artery disease, concomitant aspirin, or prior statins use were more common in patients with unsuccessful cardioversion; international normalized ratio control did not differ by cardioversion success. On multivariate analysis, gender (P

Aims In ENSURE-AF (NCT02072434), the oral Factor Xa inhibitor edoxaban showed similar efficacy and safety vs enoxaparin–warfarin in patients undergoing electrical cardioversion of nonvalvular atrial fibrillation (AF). This ancillary analysis compares primary efficacy and safety end points for patients receiving vs not receiving concomitant antiplatelet therapy (APT) in ENSURE-AF. Methods The primary efficacy end point was a composite of stroke, systemic embolic events, myocardial infarction, and cardiovascular death during 28 days on study drug after cardioversion plus 30 days of follow-up. The primary safety end point was the composite of major and clinically relevant non-major bleeding occurring between the first and the last dose of study drug. Results Of 2199 patients enrolled, 1095 were randomized to edoxaban and 1104 to enoxaparin–warfarin. Patients receiving concomitant APT were older; more naïve to vitamin K antagonist; had lower creatinine clearance; and more likely to have history of coronary artery disease, hypertension, diabetes, or ischemic stroke/transient ischemic attack. In patients receiving vs not receiving concomitant APT, primary efficacy event rate was numerically higher (0.92% vs 0.60%, p = 0.64) and primary safety event rate was significantly higher (3.21% vs 0.92%, p = 0.0096). Stepwise logistic regression analysis identified age and APT as covariates correlated with bleeding. There was a trend toward increased bleeding risk in elderly patients receiving vs not receiving concomitant APT. Conclusion In ENSURE-AF, thromboembolic events were rare and absolute bleeding event rates were higher with concomitant APT. These findings may be relevant for AF-patients considered for dual therapy; even for a short treatment duration of 1 month. Sin financiación 5.460 JCR (2020) Q2, 36/142 Cardiac & Cardiovascular Systems 1.838 SJR (2020) Q1, 41/349 Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine No data IDR 2020 UEM

Background: The optimal interruption schedule for NOACs in patients undergoing invasive procedures has not been determined. This analysis describes periprocedural interruption of edoxaban in real world EMIT AF/VTE study. Methods: EMIT AF/VTE was a prospective, non-interventional study conducted in 7 European countries that collected detailed information on periprocedural management of edoxaban from 5 days before to 30 days after procedure in patients with AF or VTE. Results: Among 1155 patients, pre-procedural interruption occurred in 781 (68%) patients (median 2 days, IQR 1.0-2.0) and post-procedural interruption in 308 (27%) patients (median 3 days, IQR 1.0-8.0); 279 (24.2%) patients had both pre- and post-procedural interruption. Edoxaban interruption in some patients differed from 2018 EHRA Recommendations for NOAC use in AF. Of 294 patients receiving minor risk procedures, for whom no interruption is recommended, 173 (58.8%) had preprocedural interruption (median 1 day). Of 581 patients with low bleeding risk procedures, for whom ≥24h preprocedural interruption is recommended, 188 (32.4%) had no interruption. Of 280 patients receiving high bleeding risk procedures, for whom ≥48h interruption is recommended, 46 (16.4%) had no interruption. Clinical events are shown in Table. Conclusion: Edoxaban interruption schedules in routine practice were not always consistent with EHRA guidelines; nevertheless, rates of clinically significant bleeding or acute thromboembolic events or coronary syndromes were low in the EMIT study. Table Disclosures Colonna: Boehringer Ingelheim: Honoraria; Daiichi Sankyo: Honoraria; BayerAG: Honoraria; Italian Cardiology Association: Other: Non-financial support; European Society of Cardiology: Other: Non-financial support; Pfizer/BMS: Honoraria. von Heymann:Daiichi Sankyo: Honoraria, Research Funding; Boehringer Ingelheim: Honoraria; Bayer AG: Honoraria; Pfizer GmBH: Honoraria; CSL Behring: Honoraria; NovoNordisk Pharma: Honoraria; EACTA and EACTS: Other; DGGG: Other; Mitsubishi Pharma: Honoraria; Ferring GmbH: Honoraria; Biotest GmbH: Honoraria; Leo Pharma GmBH: Honoraria; German Society of Anaesthesiology and Intensive Care Medicine: Other. Saxena:Daiichi Sankyo: Honoraria, Research Funding. Vanassche:Boehringer Ingelheim: Honoraria; 367 Leo Pharma: Honoraria; Bayer: Honoraria; Daiichi Sankyo: Honoraria, Research Funding. Jin:Daiichi Sankyo: Current Employment. Wilkins:Daiichi Sankyo: Honoraria. Chen:Daiichi Sankyo: Current Employment. Unverdorben:Daiichi Sankyo: Current Employment.

In the EdoxabaN versus warfarin in subjectS UndeRgoing cardiovErsion of Atrial Fibrillation study (NCT 02072434), edoxaban showed similar efficacy and safety versus enoxaparin-warfarin in patients underwent electrical cardioversion of nonvalvular atrial fibrillation. In this ancillary analysis, we compared the primary efficacy (composite of stroke, systemic embolic event, myocardial infarction, cardiovascular death, and overall study period) and safety (composite of major and clinically relevant nonmajor bleeding, on-treatment) end points in relation to body mass index (BMI; = 30 kg/m(2)). We also compared cardioversion outcomes in relation to BMI. Of 2,199 patients enrolled, 1,095 were randomized to edoxaban and 1,104 to enoxaparin-warfarin. Mean age was 64 +/- 10 and 64 +/- 11 years and mean BMI 30.6 and 30.7 kg/m(2), respectively. Cardiovascular and metabolic diseases were more prevalent in obese (n = 1067) than nonobese patients. Overall ischemic event rates were low; rates in the BMI = 30 kg/m(2) subgroup, but not significantly different (odds ratio [OR], 0.74 [95% confidence interval 0.23, 2.24]). Composite major + clinically relevant nonmajor bleeding rates were low and numerically lower, but not significantly different (OR 0.88 [0.38, 2.04]), between the edoxaban and enoxaparin-warfarin arms and across weight categories. Successful cardioversion rate was higher in the BMI = 30 kg/m(2) subgroup (73.9% vs 69.9%; OR 1.22 [1.01 to 1.48]). In EdoxabaN versus warfarin in subjectS UndeRgoing cardiovErsion of Atrial Fibrillation, BMI did not significantly impact the relative efficacy and safety of edoxaban versus enoxaparin-warfarin. Nevertheless, the nonobese group had a higher rate of cardioversion success than the obese group. Daiichi Sankyo 2.570 JCR (2019) Q2, 63/138 Cardiac & Cardiovascular Systems 1.479 SJR (2019) Q1, 54/362 Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine No data IDR 2019 UEM

Background Anticoagulation in patients with malignancy and atrial fibrillation is challenging because of enhanced risks for thrombosis and bleeding and the frequent need for invasive procedures. Data on direct oral antagonists in such patients are sparse. Methods and Results The ENGAGE AF ‐ TIMI 48 (Effective Anticoagulation With Factor Xa Next Generation in Atrial Fibrillation–Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction Study 48) trial randomized 21 105 patients with atrial fibrillation to edoxaban or warfarin. Patients with malignancy, defined as a postrandomization new diagnosis or recurrence of remote cancer, were followed up over a median of 2.8 years. Adjusted Cox proportional hazard models were used to evaluate the safety and efficacy of edoxaban versus warfarin. Over a median of 495 days (interquartile range, 230–771 days), 1153 patients (5.5%) were diagnosed with new or recurrent malignancy, most commonly involving the gastrointestinal tract (20.6%), prostate (13.6%), and lung (11.1%). Malignancy was associated with increased risk of death (adjusted hazard ratio [HR], 3.12; 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.78–3.50) and major bleeding (adjusted HR, 2.45; 95% CI, 2.07–2.89), but not stroke/systemic embolism (adjusted HR, 1.08; 95% CI, 0.83–1.42). Relative outcomes with higher‐dose edoxaban versus warfarin were consistent regardless of malignancy status for stroke/systemic embolism ( HR , 0.60 [95% CI, 0.31–1.15] for malignancy versus HR , 0.89 [95% CI, 0.76–1.05] for no malignancy; interaction P =0.25) and major bleeding ( HR , 0.98 [95% CI, 0.69–1.40] for malignancy versus HR , 0.79 [95% CI, 0.69–1.05] for no malignancy; interaction P =0.31). There was, however, a significant treatment interaction for the composite ischemic end point (ischemic stroke/systemic embolism/myocardial infarction), with greater efficacy of higher‐dose edoxaban versus warfarin in patients with malignancy ( HR , 0.54; 95% CI, 0.31–0.93) compared with no malignancy ( HR , 1.02; 95% CI, 0.88–1.18; interaction P =0.026). Conclusions In patients with atrial fibrillation who develop malignancy, the efficacy and safety profile of edoxaban relative to warfarin is preserved, and it may represent a more practical alternative.

In the EdoxabaN versus warfarin in subjectS UndeRgoing cardiovErsion of Atrial Fibrillation (ENSURE-AF) study, edoxaban was compared with enoxaparin–warfarin in patients who underwent electrical cardioversion of nonvalvular atrial fibrillation, showing comparable low rates of bleeding and thromboembolism. The present study is an ancillary analysis investigating differences in relation to stroke and bleeding risk profiles. It also determined the relation of patients’ clinical risk profiles to the quality of anticoagulation control in the warfarin arm. Primary efficacy (composite of stroke, systemic embolic event, myocardial infarction, and cardiovascular death) and safety (composite of major and clinically relevant nonmajor bleeding) outcomes and time to therapeutic range (TtTR) and time in therapeutic range (TiTR) were analyzed in relation to CHA2DS2-VASc (congestive heart failure, hypertension, age ≥75 years (2 points), diabetes mellitus, stroke (2 points), vascular disease, age 65–74 years, sex category) and HAS-BLED (hypertension, age, stroke, bleeding tendency/predisposition, labile INRs, elderly age/frailty, drugs such as concomitant aspirin/nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs or alcohol excess) scores. A total of 1,095 patients were randomized to edoxaban and 1,104 received enoxaparin–warfarin. Mean age was 64.3 ± 10 and 64.2 ± 11 years, respectively. Mean CHA2DS2-VASc score was 2.6 (standard deviation [SD] 1.5 and 1.4, respectively) and mean HAS-BLED score was 0.9 (SD 0.8) in both arms. There were nonsignificant trends toward lower odds ratios (ORs) for the efficacy end point in patients with CHA2DS2-VASc scores >2 and higher ORs with HAS-BLED score ≥3. Mean TiTR was >67%, with no differences between stroke or bleeding risk strata. The correlation between CHA2DS2-VASc and TtTR (p = 0.0286) and HAS-BLED and TiTR (p = 0.0286) were statistically significant. In patients who were at high risk of stroke, edoxaban had numerically lower primary efficacy end-point events and showed a trend for higher ORs, with HAS-BLED scores ≥3 compared with enoxaparin–warfarin. TtTR was shorter with higher CHA2DS2-VASc scores, whereas bleeding risk was inversely correlated with quality of anticoagulation control. Sin financiación 2.843 JCR (2018) Q2, 59/136 Cardiac & Cardiovascular Systems 1.734 SJR (2018) Q1, 43/365 Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine No data IDR 2018 UEM

Background Edoxaban, an oral factor Xa inhibitor, is non-inferior for prevention of stroke and systemic embolism in patients with atrial fibrillation and is associated with less bleeding than well controlled warfarin therapy. Few safety data about edoxaban in patients undergoing electrical cardioversion are available. Methods We did a multicentre, prospective, randomised, open-label, blinded-endpoint evaluation trial in 19 countries with 239 sites comparing edoxaban 60 mg per day with enoxaparin–warfarin in patients undergoing electrical cardioversion of non-valvular atrial fibrillation. The dose of edoxaban was reduced to 30 mg per day if one or more factors (creatinine clearance 15–50 mL/min, low bodyweight [≤60 kg], or concomitant use of P-glycoprotein inhibitors) were present. Block randomisation (block size four)—stratified by cardioversion approach (transoesophageal echocardiography [TEE] or not), anticoagulant experience, selected edoxaban dose, and region—was done through a voice-web system. The primary efficacy endpoint was a composite of stroke, systemic embolic event, myocardial infarction, and cardiovascular mortality, analysed by intention to treat. The primary safety endpoint was major and clinically relevant non-major (CRNM) bleeding in patients who received at least one dose of study drug. Follow-up was 28 days on study drug after cardioversion plus 30 days to assess safety. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02072434. Findings Between March 25, 2014, and Oct 28, 2015, 2199 patients were enrolled and randomly assigned to receive edoxaban (n=1095) or enoxaparin–warfarin (n=1104). The mean age was 64 years (SD 10·54) and mean CHA2DS2-VASc score was 2·6 (SD 1·4). Mean time in therapeutic range on warfarin was 70·8% (SD 27·4). The primary efficacy endpoint occurred in five (

Background Elderly patients with atrial fibrillation are at higher risk of both ischemic and bleeding events compared to younger patients. In a prespecified analysis from the ENGAGE AF ‐ TIMI 48 trial, we evaluate clinical outcomes with edoxaban versus warfarin according to age. Methods and Results Twenty‐one thousand one‐hundred and five patients enrolled in the ENGAGE AF ‐ TIMI 48 trial were stratified into 3 prespecified age groups: P P trend Conclusions Age has a greater influence on major bleeding than thromboembolic risk in patients with atrial fibrillation. Given the higher rates of bleeding and death with increasing age, treatment of elderly patients with edoxaban provides an even greater absolute reduction in safety events over warfarin, compared to treatment with edoxaban versus warfarin in younger patients. Clinical Trial Registration URL : https://www.clinicaltrials.gov/ . Unique identifier: NCT 00781391.

In the ENSURE-AF study (NCT 02072434), the direct oral factor Xa inhibitor edoxaban (edox) showed similar efficacy and safety vs enoxaparin-warfarin (enox-warf) in patients (pts) undergoing electrical cardioversion of nonvalvular atrial fibrillation. This ancillary analysis compared the primary

OBJECTIVES: This double-blind study compared long-term efficacy, safety and tolerability of the oral direct renin inhibitor aliskiren and the angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor ramipril alone and combined with hydrochlorothiazide in patients with hypertension. METHODS: After a 2-4-week placebo run-in, 842 patients [mean sitting diastolic blood pressure (msDBP) 95-109 mmHg] were randomized to aliskiren 150 mg (n = 420) or ramipril 5 mg (n = 422). Dose titration (to aliskiren 300 mg/ramipril 10 mg) and subsequent hydrochlorothiazide addition (12.5 mg, titrated to 25 mg if required) were permitted at weeks 6, 12, 18 and 21 for inadequate blood pressure control. Patients completing the 26-week active-controlled treatment period were re-randomized to their existing regimen or placebo for a 4-week double-blind withdrawal phase. RESULTS: Six hundred and eighty-seven patients (81.6%) completed the active treatment period. At week 26, aliskiren-based therapy produced greater mean reductions in mean sitting systolic blood pressure (17.9 versus 15.2 mmHg, P = 0.0036) and msDBP (13.2 versus 12.0 mmHg, P = 0.025), and higher rates of systolic blood pressure control (< 140 mmHg; 72.5 versus 64.1%, P = 0.0075) compared with ramipril-based therapy. During withdrawal, blood pressure increased more rapidly after stopping ramipril than aliskiren-based therapy; median blood pressure reached 140/90 mmHg after 1 and 4 weeks, respectively. Blood pressure reductions were maintained with continued active treatment. Aliskiren therapy was well tolerated. Overall adverse event rates were similar with aliskiren (61.3%) and ramipril (60.4%); cough was more frequent with ramipril (9.5%) than aliskiren (4.1%). CONCLUSIONS: Aliskiren-based therapy was well tolerated and produced sustained blood pressure reductions in patients with hypertension over 6 months, greater than those with ramipril-based therapy.

Background: Elderly patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) treated with anticoagulants are at higher risk of both ischemic and bleeding events compared to younger patients. Intracranial bleeding (ICH) remains one of the most concerning complications of anticoagulation therapy, and risk is strongly related to age. The ENGAGE AF-TIMI 48 trial showed that both the high (HD) and low dose (LD) regimens of the once daily oral factor Xa inhibitor edoxaban were non-inferior to well-managed warfarin (TTR 68.4%) in preventing stroke and systemic embolic events (SEE) while reducing major bleeding. Methods: 21,105 patients were enrolled in ENGAGE-TIMI 48 trial and stratified into pre-specified age categories: Results: Regardless of treatment, the risk of major bleeding and stroke/SEE increased with age (p Conclusion: The efficacy and safety of edoxaban compared to well-managed warfarin are consistent regardless of age in patients with AF. Due to the higher risk of bleeding with increasing age, the absolute benefits of edoxaban are greater in the elderly.

Background: Anticoagulation in cancer pts with AF is a challenge due to the prothrombotic state and potential for bleeding associated with malignancy. Data on NOACs in cancer are sparse. Our aim is to evaluate the efficacy and safety of edoxaban in AF pts with active malignancy. Methods: ENGAGE AF

We designed a prospective, randomized, open-label, blinded end point evaluation parallel group Phase 3b clinical trial comparing edoxaban (a new oral factor Xa inhibitor) with enoxaparin/warfarin followed by warfarin alone in subjects undergoing planned electrical cardioversion of non-valvular atrial fibrillation. The primary efficacy end point is the composite end points of stroke, systemic embolic event, myocardial infarction, and cardiovascular (CV) mortality, from randomization until the end of follow-up (day 56 post cardioversion). The primary safety end point is the composite of major and clinically-relevant non-major bleeding, from the first administration of study drug to end of treatment (Day 28 post cardioversion) +3 days. The primary efficacy analysis will be conducted on the intention-to-treat population whereas the primary safety analysis, on the safety population. The study includes stratification on the following levels: (i) approach to cardioversion (transoesophagel echocardiography or non-transoesophagel echocardiography) as determined by the Investigator; (ii) subject's experience in taking anticoagulants at the time of randomization (anticoagulant-experienced or anticoagulant-naïve); and (iii) assigned edoxaban dose (full 60 mg QD or reduced 30 mg dose QD). A subject with one or more factors (CrCl ≥15 mL/min and ≤50 mL/min, low body weight [≤60 kg], and concomitant use of p-pg inhibitors (excluding amiodarone) will receive a reduced dose (30 mg) of edoxaban if the subject is randomized to the edoxaban group. ENSURE-AF will be the largest prospective randomised trial of anticoagulation for cardioversion, also involving a Non-VKA Oral Anticoagulant-edoxaban.

Background: Aliskiren is approved for the treatment of hypertension at once-daily doses of 150 or 300 mg by the US Food and Drug Administration and the European Commission. It is generally well tolerated and provides 24-hour, dose-dependent blood pressure (BP) reduction; however, the effect of the 75-mg dose has been inconsistent in previous trials. Objectives: This study was designed to assess the efficacy and tolerability of once-daily administration of aliskiren 75 mg and to evaluate the dose-response relationship across all 3 doses of aliskiren (75, 150, and 300 mg). Methods: In this 8-week, multicenter, randomized, double-blind, parallel-group, placebo-controlled study, patients aged ≥18 years with stage 1 or 2 essential hypertension entered a 3- to 4-week, single-blind, placebo run-in period. Eligible patients were randomized (1:1:1:1) to receive oral, once-daily doses of aliskiren 75, 150, or 300 mg or placebo. The primary efficacy variable was the change from baseline in mean sitting diastolic BP (msDBP) at the week-8 end point. Tolerability was assessed by monitoring and recording all adverse events (AEs). Results: A total of 642 patients (mean [SD] age, 52.0 [10.73] years; 60.0% male; 80.8% white; mean body weight, 89.2 [18.4] kg [range, 50–160 kg]) were included in the study. Overall, 576 patients (89.7%) completed the double-blind treatment period. The most frequent reasons for discontinuation were unsatisfactory therapeutic effect (27/642 randomized patients [4.2%]) and AEs (17/642 [2.6%]). At end point, aliskiren 150 and 300 mg significantly reduced msDBP (both, P < 0.001) and mean sitting systolic Conclusions: This study found a positive linear dose-response relationship in BP reduction with aliskiren 75, 150, and 300 mg dosed once daily, but only aliskiren 150 and 300 mg provided statistically significant reductions from baseline compared with placebo. All 3 doses of aliskiren were generally well tolerated.

Introduction. This subgroup analysis assessed the effects of treatment based on the direct renin inhibitor, aliskiren, or the angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor, ramipril, on plasma renin activity (PRA), plasma renin concentration (PRC) and other biomarkers in a 26-week randomised, double-blind trial. Changes in PRA and PRC after stopping treatment were also assessed. Methods. After placebo run-in, 842 patients (mean sitting diastolic blood pressure (BP) 95—109 mmHg) were randomised to aliskiren 150 mg or ramipril 5 mg. Dose titration and hydrochlorothiazide addition were allowed after Week 6 and 12, respectively, for inadequate BP control. Patients completing active treatment were re-randomised to current regimen or placebo during a 4-week posttreatment phase. Results. BP reductions were independent of baseline PRA at Week 12, were greater with aliskiren- than ramipril-based therapy at Week 26 (17.9/13.3 vs. 15.2/12.0 mmHg, p Conclusions. Aliskiren-based therapy produced sustained BP and PRA reductions over 26 weeks; ramipril-based therapy lowered BP and increased PRA. PRA reductions persisted 4 weeks after stopping aliskiren, suggesting an inhibitory effect beyond the elimination half-life of the drug.

1533-4406 (Electronic) 0028-4793 (Linking) Comparative Study Journal Article Multicenter Study Randomized Controlled Trial Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't; BACKGROUND: Fingolimod (FTY720), a sphingosine-1-phosphate-receptor modulator that prevents lymphocyte egress from lymph nodes, showed clinical efficacy and improvement on imaging in a phase 2 study involving patients with multiple sclerosis. METHODS: In this 12-month, double-blind, double-dummy study, we randomly assigned 1292 patients with relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis who had a recent history of at least one relapse to receive either oral fingolimod at a daily dose of either 1.25 or 0.5 mg or intramuscular interferon beta-1a (an established therapy for multiple sclerosis) at a weekly dose of 30 microg. The primary end point was the annualized relapse rate. Key secondary end points were the number of new or enlarged lesions on T(2)-weighted magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) scans at 12 months and progression of disability that was sustained for at least 3 months. RESULTS: A total of 1153 patients (89%) completed the study. The annualized relapse rate was significantly lower in both groups receiving fingolimod--0.20 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.16 to 0.26) in the 1.25-mg group and 0.16 (95% CI, 0.12 to 0.21) in the 0.5-mg group--than in the interferon group (0.33; 95% CI, 0.26 to 0.42; P