Skip to main content

Apixaban: A Good Choice for AF Patients With Renal Dysfunction?


August 29, 2012 (Munich, Germany) — A new prespecified analysis of the ARISTOTLE study has shown that the new oral anticoagulant apixaban (Eliquis, Bristol-Myers Squibb/Pfizer) was better than warfarin at preventing the primary outcome, stroke or systemic embolism, in atrial-fibrillation patients, regardless of renal function [1]. And patients with kidney disease seemed to have the greatest reduction in major bleeding with apixaban.
These findings are important, because patients with renal insufficiency pose a problem for any kind of anticoagulant treatment due to their increased risk for both thromboembolic and bleeding events. Up to 20% of those with AF have some renal dysfunction, making treatment decisions difficult in this patient group.
These new results suggest that "apixaban may be particularly suited to address the unmet need for more effective and safer stroke prevention in patients with AF and renal dysfunction," say Dr Stefan H Höhnloser (JW Goethe University, Frankfurt, Germany) and colleagues in their paper published online August 29, 2012 in the European Heart Journal. Höhnloser also reported the results today in a clinical trial and registry update session at theEuropean Society of Cardiology (ESC) 2012 Congress.
In a commentary accompanying the paper [2], Dr Jan Steffel (University Hospital Zurich, Switzerland) and Dr Gerhard Hindricks (University of Leipzig–Heart Center, Germany) concur. "This new substudy of ARISTOTLE provides solid evidence for the superiority of apixaban in patients with atrial fibrillation and chronic kidney disease. In the light of these data, apixaban appears to be a very appealing option for these individuals." However, they caution that this conclusion does not necessarily extend to those with severe renal disease (estimated glomerular filtration rate [eGFR] of <30 mL/min), since they made up only 1.5% of the study population.
And discussant of the trial at the ESC meeting, Dr Keith AA Fox (University of Edinburgh, Scotland), agrees: "In my view, ARISTOTLE provides a treatment option and advantages over warfarin in patients with moderate renal dysfunction, a group that is currently suboptimally treated."
Doctors Torn Deciding on Anticoagulation in AF With Renal Impairment
The main ARISTOTLE results were first reported at the ESC meeting last year and published simultaneously in theNew England Journal of Medicine; they were widely viewed as the "most positive" data among the major randomized trials comparing new oral anticoagulants with warfarin for prevention of stroke in AF. Despite this, the US FDA has failed to yet approve apixaban for this indication for reasons that remain unclear. Apixaban is not approved for AF in the European Union, either, although it was cleared for marketing there for prevention of venous thromboembolism.
Steffel and Hindricks say doctors are torn when having to decide whether or not--and if so, how--to anticoagulate patients with atrial fibrillation and renal insufficiency. A recent study has even shown, for instance, that the net clinical benefit of warfarin is unclear in patients with AF and renal disease.
ARISTOTLE provides a treatment option and advantages over warfarin in patients with moderate renal dysfunction, a group that is currently suboptimally treated.
And the initial enthusiasm associated with the novel anticoagulants--such as dabigatran (Pradaxa, Boehringer Ingelheim) and rivaroxaban(Xarelto, Bayer/Johnson & Johnson)--"was dampened shortly after their introduction, when reports of major hemorrhages surfaced," they note. "Indeed, it quickly became clear that especially dabigatran, which is 80% renally cleared, has a significant potential for severe bleeding in patients with reduced renal function."
To try to address this problem, Höhnloser and colleagues evaluated the ARISTOTLE data, comparing apixaban--which is partially excreted by the renal system--with warfarin in relation to renal function. They note that a reduced dose of apixaban (2.5 mg twice daily instead of the usual 5 mg twice daily) was given to patients with two of the following criteria: age >80 years, weight <60 kg, and serum creatinine >133 mmol/L (1.5 mg/dL).
There were 7518 patients (42%) with no renal dysfunction (eGFR of >80 mL/min), 7587 (42%) with eGFR between 50 and 80 mL/min, and 3017 (15%) with an eGFR of <50 mL/min.
The rate of cardiovascular events and bleeding was higher in those with impaired renal function (<80 mL/min), as would be expected.
"The present analysis represents the largest experience of anticoagulation therapy in patients with AF and impaired renal function, and the superiority of apixaban relative to warfarin for preventing stroke or systemic embolism was consistent, irrespective of degree of renal impairment," say the researchers.
Those With Worse Kidney Function Had the Least Major Bleeding on Apixaban
Apixaban was also associated with fewer major bleeding events across all ranges of eGFR, with the relative risk reduction in major bleeding being greater in patients with an eGFR of <50 mL/min (hazard ratio 0.50; 95% CI 0.38–0.66' interaction p=0.005].
To examine whether the reduction in bleeding in patients with impaired renal function was due to the more frequent use of the lower apixaban dose (2.5 mg twice daily), two sensitivity analyses were conducted, first by adjusting for dose and second by excluding all patients on low-dose apixaban and repeating the analysis only in the patients on the standard dose. In both, the interaction between treatment and renal function remained statistically significant for major bleeding.
Steffel and Hindricks seem convinced by this analysis: "The finding of a statistically significant greater reduction in major bleeding in patients with impaired renal function implies a particularly pronounced benefit of apixaban compared with warfarin in this patient population," they observe.
Further Analysis Of Existing Studies Will Provide More Guidance
They then wonder, "Should every patient with atrial fibrillation and renal insufficiency hence be anticoagulated with apixaban?" and "How does apixaban compare with rivaroxaban and dabigatran in these patients?"
Unfortunately, comprehensive cross-trial comparisons with the other novel anticoagulants are impossible to perform, given--among other factors--the different study designs, different patient populations, and (partly) different bleeding definitions, they state. But as all three trials compared the respective novel agent with warfarin, it would be interesting to compare matched subsets of patients from each trial; "such data, however, are not yet available."
Nevertheless, data from large registries and from real-world use will provide additional evidence for further guidance, they note.
Höhnloser has served as a consultant, member of steering committee, or speaker for Bayer Healthcare, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Boehringer Ingelheim, Boston Scientific, Cardiome, Forest RI, Johnson & Johnson, Medtronic, Pfizer, Portola, Sanofi, and St Jude Medical. Disclosures for the coauthors are listed in the paper. Steffel has received consulting and/or speaker's fees from AstraZeneca, Bayer HealthCare, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol-Myers Squibb, and Pfizer and research support from Bayer Healthcare. Hindricks declared no conflicts of interest. Fox has received grant funding and honoraria from Sanofi, Lilly, Bayer, Johnson & Johnson, AstraZeneca and Boehringer Ingelheim.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Missing Data Lead FDA Panel to Vote Against Rivaroxaban for ACS May 23, 2012 (Updated May 24, 2012) (Silver Spring, Maryland) — The missing data issues plaguing the ATLAS ACS 2 TIMI 51 trial of the factor Xa inhibitor rivaroxaban (Xarelto, Bayer Healthcare/Janssen Pharmaceuticals) have prevented the drug from earning the endorsement of the FDA Cardiovascular and Renal Drugs Advisory Committee. At its May 23 meeting, the panel voted six to four (with one abstention) against recommending that the FDA approve rivaroxaban for reducing the risk of thrombotic cardiovascular events in patients with acute coronary syndrome or unstable angina in combination with aspirin, aspirin plus clopidogrel, or ticlopidine. Janssen's application is based on the results of the ATLAS ACS 2 phase 3 and the ATLAS ACS TIMI 46 phase 2 trial. The placebo-controlled ATLAS ACS 2 showed rivaroxaban reduced the risk of both all-cause and cardiovascular mortality while increasing the risk of bleeding and intracranial hemorrhage, but the studies were hindered by early patient withdrawals and missing data. We Don't Know What We're Missing Based on the ATLAS ACS 2 results, FDA reviewer Dr Karen Hicks recommended approval of rivaroxaban for the requested indications except all-cause mortality. However, another FDA reviewer, Dr Thomas Marciniak, was adamant that the trial results are not interpretable because about 12% of the patients had incomplete follow-up, far higher than the 1% to 1.5% differences in the end-point rates between rivaroxaban and placebo. A total of 1294 subjects discontinued the trial prematurely, and the company was only able to contact 183, of which 177 were confirmed to be alive. Because of the patient dropouts, the company adopted a "modified intention-to-treat analysis," whereby patients were observed for 30 days after randomization or the global end date for the trial, instead of observing all the patients until the end of the trial as the FDA originally suggested. Marciniak criticized the sponsor's efforts to follow the patients and said that three patient deaths not counted in the modified intention-to-treat analysis may just be the "tip of the iceberg." Because the percentage of patients whose ultimate vital status remains unknown is much greater than the reported differences in mortality rates, the claimed mortality benefits are not reliable. The majority of the panel sided with Marciniak. For example, Dr Sanjay Kaul (University of California, Los Angeles) voted "no" because "there was enough uncertainty in the quality and robustness of the data that dissuaded me from voting yes. . . . The 'missingness' of the data doesn't invalidate it, but it certainly makes it hard to infer [the conclusion]." Dr Steven Nissen (Cleveland Clinic, OH) said that the decision to use the modified intention-to-treat analysis had a "profound impact" on the interpretability of the data. "It's saying we don't care what happens after 30 days, [and] that colored the trial in ways we couldn't recover from." Given the risk of major bleeding, "I want to see better evidence that this strategy of adding an Xa inhibitor or a direct thrombin inhibitor or something else to a good antiplatelet agent is robustly better for the patient," Nissen said. He recommends that the companies run a new trial of the 2.5 twice-daily dose of rivaroxaban using a strict intention-to-treat approach, but, he said, "I don't expect the death benefit to be too robust." Several panelists said they were concerned that the patients who dropped out of the trial were disproportionately likely to have a bleeding event, which led them to quit the trial, or a "protopathic" event, as statistician Dr Scott Emerson (University of Washington, Seattle) put it. "We're worried that an impending event is what is changing their behavior. We see that all the time in clinical trials--that regularly measured end points do not pick up [all of] the events," he said. He said that since the company was only able to contact 183 of the over 1200 patients who dropped out, it is possible that the dropouts skew the outcomes comparison of the trial. "Differential event rates after dropout are the number-one thing we're afraid of, so you have to explore it" in a statistical sensitivity analysis of the potential impact of these unknown outcomes. "It would not surprise me if, at the end of the day, these data did not hold up under a proper sensitivity analysis," he said. "What I want to know is, among the people who had events, how differential was the follow-up, but I can tell you by just looking at it, there was a very slightly different amount of follow-up of the people in the treatment arm. But I don't know whether everyone in the treatment arm was cured and they were trekking in the Himalayas and everyone in the placebo arm went home to die. I don't know that that's not the case." Dr Maury Krantz (University of Colorado, Denver) voted in favor of approval but said he does not know how rivaroxaban would perform in general clinical practice, especially when used with aspirin and clopidogrel. "I felt very much torn by this. This isn't a simple paradigm shift. It means going to triple therapy, which is really a three-headed monster in many ways. I think that what you're going to see in practice, if this is not done carefully with the proper labeling and secondary studies, is really dramatic magnification of bleeding and perhaps minimization of the efficacy benefit."

May 23, 2012   (Updated May 24, 2012)  (Silver Spring, Maryland)  —  The missing data issues plaguing the  ATLAS ACS 2 TIMI 51   trial of the factor Xa inhibitor  rivaroxaban  (Xarelto, Bayer Healthcare/Janssen Pharmaceuticals) have prevented the drug from earning the endorsement of the  FDA  Cardiovascular and Renal Drugs Advisory Committee. At its May 23 meeting , the panel voted six to four (with one abstention) against recommending that the FDA approve rivaroxaban for reducing the risk of thrombotic cardiovascular events in patients with acute coronary syndrome or unstable angina in combination with aspirin, aspirin plus  clopidogrel , or  ticlopidine . Janssen's application is based on the results of the ATLAS ACS 2 phase 3 and the  ATLAS ACS TIMI 46   phase 2 trial. The placebo-controlled ATLAS ACS 2 showed rivaroxaban reduced the risk of both all-cause and cardiovascular mortality while increasing the ri...
Post a Comment
Read more

Antidepressants Linked to Higher Diabetes Risk in Kids

Pediatric patients who use antidepressants may have an elevated risk for type 2 diabetes, the authors of a new study report. In a retrospective cohort study of more than 119,000 youths 5 to 20 years of age, the risk for incident type 2 diabetes was nearly twice as high among current users of certain types of antidepressants as among former users, Mehmet Burcu, PhD, and colleagues report in an article  published online October 16 in  JAMA Pediatrics . The risk intensified with increasing duration of use, greater cumulative doses, and higher daily doses of these antidepressants. The findings point to a growing need for closer monitoring of these products, including greater balancing of risks and benefits, in the pediatric population, the authors caution. They undertook the study because, despite growing evidence of an association between antidepressant use and an increased risk for type 2 diabetes in adults, similar research in pediatric patients was scarce. "To our know...
Post a Comment
Read more

EHR Work Measures Proposed to Address Burnout

Electronic health record (EHR) vendors should imbed metrics into their systems to measure how EHRs affect clinicians' work, experts write in a commentary  published online  October 10 in the  Annals of Internal Medicine . Yumi T. DiAngi, MD, a fellow in clinical informatics at Stanford University School of Medicine in Palo Alto, California, and colleagues propose six areas metrics should cover and recommended the creation of a "national council of clinicians" to design measures and create guidelines to address privacy and other issues. "The EHR, which was intended to improve patient care, has had the ironic and unintended consequence of impairing practice efficiency, largely because of poor design, a focus on regulatory reporting, and the burden placed on clinicians by data entry," they write. EHRs have also led to high levels of burnout as physicians' satisfaction in their work has declined, they note. To gain insight into the stresses that have pro...
Post a Comment
Read more