Welcome Ask The Experts March 24-27, 2007 New Orleans, LA.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Efficacy and Safety of Exercise Training as a Treatment Modality in Patients With Chronic Heart Failure: Results of A Randomized Controlled Trial Investigating.
Advertisements

Cardiac Resynchronization Heart Failure Study Cardiac Resynchronization Heart Failure Study Presented at American College of Cardiology Scientific Sessions.
Update on Indications for Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy Maria Rosa Costanzo, M.D., F.A.C.C., F.A.H.A. Medical Director, Midwest Heart Specialists-Advocate.
Chronicle Offers Management to Patients with Advanced Signs and Symptoms of Heart Failure Presented at American College of Cardiology Scientific Sessions.
Welcome Ask The Experts March 24-27, 2007 New Orleans, LA.
COURAGE: Clinical Outcomes Utilizing Revascularization and Aggressive Drug Evaluation Purpose To compare the efficacy of optimal medical therapy (OMT)
CHARM-Alternative: Candesartan in Heart failure: Assessment of Reduction in Mortality and morbidity - Alternative Purpose To determine whether the angiotensin.
CHARM-Preserved: Candesartan in Heart failure: Assessment of Reduction in Mortality and morbidity - Preserved Purpose To determine whether the angiotensin.
Adverse Events, Unanticipated Problems, Protocol Deviations & other Safety Information Which Form 4 to Use?
0902CZR01NL537SS0901 RENAAL Altering the Course of Renal Disease in Hypertensive Patients with Type 2 Diabetes and Nephropathy with the A II Antagonist.
Risk Assessment and Comparative Effectiveness of Left Ventricular Assist Device and Medical Management in Ambulatory Heart Failure Patients Assessment.
S ystolic H eart failure treatment with the I f inhibitor ivabradine T rial Main results Swedberg K, et al. Lancet. 2010;376(9744):
The Prospective Pravastatin Pooling Project L I P I D CARECARE PPP Project Investigators Am J Cardiol 1995; 76:899–905.
Vorapaxar for Secondary Prevention in Patients with Prior Myocardial Infarction Benjamin M. Scirica, MD, MPH On behalf of the TRA 2°P-TIMI 50 Steering.
HOPE: Heart Outcomes Prevention Evaluation study Purpose To evaluate whether the long-acting ACE inhibitor ramipril and/or vitamin E reduce the incidence.
Naotsugu Oyama, MD, PhD, MBA A Trial of PLATelet inhibition and Patient Outcomes.
COMET: Carvedilol Or Metoprolol European Trial Purpose To compare the effects of carvedilol (a β 1 -, β 2 - and α 1 -receptor blocker) and short-acting.
Heart rate in heart failure: Heart rate in heart failure: risk marker or risk factor? A subanalysis of the SHIFT trial on behalf of the Investigators M.
Relationship of background ACEI dose to benefits of candesartan in the CHARM-Added trial.
Long-term Cardiovascular Effects of 4.9 Years of Intensive Blood Pressure Control in Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus: The Action to Control Cardiovascular Risk.
Prospective Evaluation of EECP in Congestive Heart Failure (PEECH) Trial PEECH Trial Presented at The American College of Cardiology Scientific Sessions.
Rosuvastatin 10 mg n=2514 Placebo n= to 4 weeks Randomization 6weeks3 monthly Closing date 20 May 2007 Eligibility Optimal HF treatment instituted.
Early Eplerenone Treatment in Patients with Acute ST-elevation Myocardial Infarction without Heart Failure REMINDER* Gilles Montalescot, Bertram Pitt,
Long-Term Tolerability of Ticagrelor for Secondary Prevention: Insights from PEGASUS-TIMI 54 Trial Marc P. Bonaca, MD, MPH on behalf of the PEGASUS-TIMI.
Long-Term Tolerability of Ticagrelor for Secondary Prevention: Insights from PEGASUS-TIMI 54 Trial Marc P. Bonaca, MD, MPH on behalf of the PEGASUS-TIMI.
ASCEND-HF Acute Study of Clinical Effectiveness of Nesiritide in Subjects with Decompensated Heart Failure Duke Heart Failure Research Pager:
Powered by Infomedica Infomedica Conference Coverage* of 26 th European Meeting on Hypertension and Cardiovascular Protection Paris (France), June 10-13,
Cardiovascular Disease and Antihypertensives The RENAAL Trial Reference Brunner BM, and the RENAAL study group. Effects of losartan on renal and cardiovascular.
Digoxin And Mortality in Patients With Atrial Fibrillation With and Without Heart Failure: Does Serum Digoxin Concentration Matter? Renato D. Lopes, MD,
Total Occlusion Study of Canada (TOSCA-2) Trial
Nephrology Journal Club The SPRINT Trial Parker Gregg
Clinical Trial Commentary
ACCORD Design and Baseline Characteristics
These slides highlight a presentation at the Late Breaking Trial Session of the American College of Cardiology 52nd Annual Scientific Sessions in Chicago,
Title slide.
Hypertension in the Post SPRINT era
Trial profile SAS denotes the Simvastatin in Aortic Stenosis Study
Revascularization in Patients With Left Ventricular Dysfunction:
NYHA III* or IV heart failure ACE-I + loop diuretic ± digoxn
HOPE: Heart Outcomes Prevention Evaluation study
The Anglo Scandinavian Cardiac Outcomes Trial
CLINICAL DILEMMAS IN HEART FAILURE:
O’Connor Efficacy and Safety of Exercise Training as a Treatment Modality in Patients With Chronic Heart Failure: Results of A Randomized Controlled.
EMPHASIS-HF Extended Follow-up
Avoiding Cardiovascular events through COMbination therapy in Patients LIving with Systolic Hypertension (ACCOMPLISH): Design Randomized, double-blind.
Digoxin And Mortality in Patients With Atrial Fibrillation With and Without Heart Failure: Does Serum Digoxin Concentration Matter? Renato D. Lopes, MD,
The following slides highlight a presentation at the Late-Breaking Clinical Trials session of the American Heart Association Scientific Sessions, November.
SERIOUS ADVERSE EVENTS REPORTING
Barrios C et al. SABCS 2009;Abstract 46.
Section III: Neurohormonal strategies in heart failure
The Hypertension in the Very Elderly Trial (HYVET)
These slides highlight an educational report from a late-breaking clinical trials presentation at the 58th Annual Scientific Session of the American College.
Effects of Intensive Blood Pressure Control on Cardiovascular Events in Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus: The Action to Control Cardiovascular Risk in Diabetes.
Long-term Data: INPULSIS®-ON
CV Risk Management in T2DM: What Did We Learn from ADA 2016?
CIBIS II: Cardiac Insufficiency Bisoprolol Study II
MK-0954 PN948 NOT APPROVED FOR USE (date)
Glycemic control for macrovascular disease in type II diabetes: Evidence and insights from recent trials  Sanjay Rajagopalan  Journal of Indian College.
Erasmus MC, Thoraxcenter
Section III: Neurohormonal strategies in heart failure
The American College of Cardiology Presented by Dr. Timothy Henry
ARISE Trial Aggressive Reduction of Inflammation Stops Events
Systolic Heart failure treatment with the If inhibitor ivabradine Trial Effect of ivabradine on recurrent hospitalization for worsening heart failure:
Welcome Ask The Experts March 24-27, 2007 New Orleans, LA.
These slides highlight a report from a Hotline Session and a Satellite symposium held at the European Society of Cardiology Congress, 2003 in Vienna Austria,
The FAIR-HF Trial Reference
The efficacy and safety of omalizumab in pediatric allergic asthma
Atlantic Cardiovascular Patient Outcomes Research Team
Simvastatin in Patients With Prior Cerebrovascular Disease: HPS
Serious Adverse Event Reconciliation
Presentation transcript:

Welcome Ask The Experts March 24-27, 2007 New Orleans, LA

FUSION II: Follow-Up Serial Infusions of Nesiritide for the Management of Patients With Heart Failure Clyde W. Yancy, MD, FACC, FAHA, FACP Medical Director Baylor Heart & Vascular Institute Dallas, TX

Results of the Follow-up Serial Infusions of Nesiritide for the Management of Patients With [Advanced] Heart Failure (FUSION II) Trial American College of Cardiology 56th Annual Scientific Session New Orleans, Louisiana March 25, 2007 Clyde W. Yancy, M.D. on behalf of the FUSION II Steering Committee Henry Krum, MD; Barry M. Massie, MD; Marc A Silver, MD; Lynne W. Stevenson, MD and the FUSION II Investigators

FUSION I: Mortality & All-cause Hospitalization (High Risk Patients- ACC/AHA Stage D HF or ‘CDHF’) P-value for FUSION I (Nes 0.005 vs Nes 0.01) time to death/all-cause hospitalization is 0.2338 (NS) *High risk defined as patients with 4 of 7 prespecified indicators of high risk: SCr >2 mg/dL; NYHA Class IV; 65 years; history of sustained VT; ischemic etiology; diabetes; previous outpatient nesiritide or inotropic use Log-rank Test: Standard Care vs. Nesiritide (0.005 mcg/kg/min) P=0.019 Standard Care vs. Nesiritide (0.01 mcg/kg/min) P=0.269 Standard Care vs. All Nesiritide P=0.034

FUSION II Study Design Nesiritide* 2x/wk + Intensive Disease Management (n = 300) Placebo 2x/wk + Intensive Disease Management (n = 150) n = 900 Nesiritide* 1x/wk + Intensive Disease Management (n = 300) Phase IIb Double-blind Randomized Multi-center Placebo 1x/wk + Intensive Disease Management (n = 150) 12 week treatment period 12 week blinded follow-up period *Dosing: 2 g/kg bolus, then 0.01 g/kg /min infusion x 4-6 hours 1° and 2° Endpoints Additional Endpoints Yancy CW et al. Am Heart J 2007; in press. Available online 3/10/2007, DOI: 10.1016/j.ahj.2007.02.004

Efficacy Endpoints Primary Time to all cause death or first CV and/or renal hospitalization through Week 12 Secondary* Number of CV and/or renal hospitalizations adjusted for observation period duration Days alive and out of hospital Change in KCCQ summary score Time to CV death *from day of randomization through week 12, or week 13 for KCCQ Yancy CW et al. Am Heart J 2007; in press. Available online 3/10/2007, DOI: 10.1016/j.ahj.2007.02.004

Demographics Placebo Combined Groups N=306 Nesiritide N=605 Age, years, Mean  SD, 65  13 Male, (%) 72.2% 70.4% Ethnicity, (%) Caucasian African American Hispanic Asian 60.1% 23.5% 6.2% 6.5% 64.8% 20.3% 6.0% 6.4% Ischemic etiology, (%) Ischemic Idiopathic Hypertensive 63.4% 20.6% 4.2% 64% 18.7% 5.6% LVEF, Mean  SD 25%  8% Body Mass Index, Mean  SD 28.9  7.1 28.3  6.8 NYHA class, (%) III IV 46.1% 53.9% 47.1% 52.9%

Baseline Therapy FUSION I vs. FUSION II 530% increase 56% increase 160% increase Percent of patients treated *Includes both carvedilol and extended release metoprolol in FUSION II and any beta- blocker in FUSION I

Inotrope Infusions FUSION I vs FUSION II Percent of patients treated FUSION II FUSION II Pre-randomization Inotropes Outpatient Inotropes During Study *Refers to exposure to inotropes within 2 weeks of randomization

FUSION II: Primary Composite Endpoint Through Week 12 Placebo Combined N=306 Nesiritide Combined N=605 *P-value All cause mortality and CV/renal hospitalization† 36.8% 36.7% 0.79 All Cause Mortality 9.6% 9.5% 0.98 CV/renal hospitalization 33.9% 32.9% 0.95 *P value: NES vs. placebo stratified by dose group †Modified ITT: all treated ITT patients

FUSION II: Secondary Endpoints Week 12 Placebo Combined N=306 Nesiritide Combined N=605 *P-value Number of CV/renal Hospitalizations Mean  SD 0.8  1.88 1.0  3.95 0.38 Days Alive and Out of Hospital 74.8  17.5 72.5  20.5 0.09 Change in KCCQ Mean  SD 14.2  21.1 13.0  24.1 0.52 CV Mortality 9.2% 8.1% 0.68 *P value nesiritide vs. placebo stratified by dose group

SAFETY Any Adverse Event Placebo Combined Groups N=306 Nesiritide N=605 P-value All AEs 86.9% 88.7% 0.45 All drug-related AEs 27.5% 42.0% <0.01 All SAEs 56.5% 60.4% 0.29 All drug-related SAEs 8.2% 8.0% 0.90 All AEs that caused permanent study drug discontinuation 25.5% 27.0% 0.63 AE, adverse event: any untoward medical occurrence in a subject from the time of randomization through 7 days after the subject’s last dose of study drug SAE, serious adverse event: any adverse drug experience occurring at any dose level that is fatal, life-threatening, requires new or prolonged hospitalization, causes a persistent or significant disability, incapacity, congenital anomaly or birth defect, or requires intervention to prevent any of these outcomes. AE: Adverse event SAE: Serious adverse event that results in death, is life-threatening, requires inpatient hospitalization, or prolongation of existing hospitalization, or results in persistent or significant disability/incapacity.

SAFETY Protocol Specified Changes in Serum Creatinine* Percent of patients with SCr increases P=0.931 P=0.458 *Outpatient Clinic Visit Values Only

FUSION II – Conclusions In this patient population with advanced HF and serial infusions of nesiritide: No evidence of drug induced renal harm compared to placebo No evidence of increased mortality at pre-specified endpoints

FUSION II - Conclusions In the context of optimal adherence to evidence based medical and device therapies and in concert with excellent disease management, serial infusions of nesiritide did not result in a demonstrable clinical benefit over intensive outpatient management of patients with CDHF Adherence to guideline based therapy AND meticulous follow-up should be optimized for patients with CDHF

Question & Answer

Thank You! Please make sure to hand in your evaluation and pick up a ClinicalTrialResults.org flash drive