A step further in the management of stable coronary patients with ivabradine.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
patients, 51 countries, 1139 centers Fox K, Ford I, Steg PG, Tardif JC, Tendera M, Ferrari R. Rationale, design, and baseline characteristics of.
Advertisements

1 CAMELOT: Study Design A Morbidity and Mortality Study Patients with documented CAD on standard-of-care therapies* (n=1997) Clinical events (morbidity.
Effects of selective heart rate reduction with ivabradine on left ventricular remodelling and function: results from the SHIFT echocardiography substudy.
Discussant Inder Anand, MD, FRCP, D Phil (Oxon.)
The management of outpatients with stable coronary artery disease in clinical practice.
K Fox, W Remme, C Daly, M Bertrand, R Ferrari, M Simoons On behalf of the EUROPA investigators. The diabetic sub study of.
Valsartan Antihypertensive Long-Term Use Evaluation Results
Trial profile Fox K et al. Lancet 2008;372:
TNT: Study Design Treating to New Targets 2 5 years 10,001 Patients Clinically evident CHD LDL-C 130  250 mg/dL following up to 8-week washout and 8-week.
Efficacy and safety of angiotensin receptor blockers: a meta-analysis of randomized trials Elgendy IY et al. Am J Hypertens. 2014; doi:10,1093/ajh/hpu209.
S tudy assess I n G the morbidity-mortality be N efits of the I f inhibitor ivabradine in patients with coronar Y artery disease without heart failure.
S ystolic H eart failure treatment with the I f inhibitor ivabradine T rial Heart rate reduction with ivabradine and health related quality of life in.
analysis from the SHIFT study
Results Fox K, Ford I, Steg PG, Tardif JC, Tendera M, Ferrari R. N Eng J Med August 31. DOI: /NEJMoa
Kenneth W. Mahaffey Daniel M. Wojdyla Stefan K. James Hugo A. Katus Steen Husted Gabriel Steg Christopher P. Cannon Richard C. Becker Claes Held Nardev.
VBWG IDEAL: The Incremental Decrease in End Points Through Aggressive Lipid Lowering Study.
May 23rd, 2012 Hot topics from the Heart Failure Congress in Belgrade.
COURAGE: Clinical Outcomes Utilizing Revascularization and Aggressive Drug Evaluation Purpose To compare the efficacy of optimal medical therapy (OMT)
S ystolic H eart failure treatment with the If inhibitor ivabradine T rial Michel Komajda on behalf of the Investigators.
Ivabradine Dr.Rajesh Rajan M.D.,D.Card,FACC,FAHA,FESC PRESIDENT – IACC
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.
Effect of ivabradine on recurrent hospitalization for worsening heart failure: findings from SHIFT S ystolic H eart failure treatment with the I f inhibitor.
BEAUTI f UL: morBidity-mortality EvAlUaTion of the I f inhibitor ivabradine in patients with coronary disease and left ventricULar dysfunction Purpose.
European guidelines on the management of stable coronary artery disease Key points & new position for Ivabradine and Trimetazidine ESC 2013 Montalescot.
Clinical implications. Burden of coronary disease 56 millions deaths worldwide in millions deaths worldwide in % due to CV disease (~ 16.
VBWG CHARISMA Clopidogrel for High Atherothrombotic Risk and Ischemic Stabilization, Management, and Avoidance trial.
Clinical Outcomes with Newer Antihyperglycemic Agents
0902CZR01NL537SS0901 RENAAL Altering the Course of Renal Disease in Hypertensive Patients with Type 2 Diabetes and Nephropathy with the A II Antagonist.
CIBIS III Ronnie Willenheimer University Hospital, Malmö, Sweden, on behalf of the CIBIS III investigators Results of the randomized Cardiac Insufficiency.
Design and baseline characteristics. Trial hypothesis Fox K et al. Am Heart J. 2013;166(4): SIGNIFY is assessing whether heart rate reduction.
S ystolic H eart failure treatment with the I f inhibitor ivabradine T rial Objective, design and baseline Swedberg.
Effect of ivabradine on recurrent hospitalization for worsening heart failure: findings from SHIFT S ystolic H eart failure treatment with the I f inhibitor.
PPAR  activation Clinical evidence. Evolution of clinical evidence supporting PPAR  activation and beyond Surrogate outcomes studies Large.
S ystolic H eart failure treatment with the I f inhibitor ivabradine T rial Main results Swedberg K, et al. Lancet. 2010;376(9744):
Prasugrel vs. Clopidogrel for Acute Coronary Syndromes Patients Managed without Revascularization — the TRILOGY ACS trial On behalf of the TRILOGY ACS.
Avoiding Cardiovascular Events through COMbination Therapy in Patients LIving with Systolic Hypertension The First Outcomes Trial of Initial Therapy With.
André Lamy Population Health Research Institute Hamilton Health Sciences McMaster University Hamilton, CANADA on behalf of the CORONARY Investigators Disclosures.
S ystolic H eart failure treatment with the I f inhibitor ivabradine T rial Efficacy and safety of ivabradine in patients with severe chronic systolic.
The Prospective Pravastatin Pooling Project L I P I D CARECARE PPP Project Investigators Am J Cardiol 1995; 76:899–905.
Aim To determine the effects of a Coversyl- based blood pressure lowering regimen on the risk of recurrent stroke among patients with a history of stroke.
AIRE: Acute Infarction Ramipril Efficacy study Purpose To determine whether the ACE inhibitor ramipril reduces mortality in patients with evidence of heart.
SPARCL Stroke Prevention by Aggressive Reduction in Cholesterol Levels trial.
VBWG PROactive: Study design Dormandy JA et al. Lancet. 2005;366: Charbonnel B et al. Diabetes Care. 2004;27: Objective: Assess the effects.
CIBIS II Cardiac Insufficiency Bisoprolol Study
S ystolic H eart failure treatment with the If inhibitor ivabradine T rial Michel Komajda and Karl Swedberg on behalf of the Investigators.
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.
Baseline characteristics. Patient flow Completed Completed Perindopril Placebo Randomised Not randomised Registered.
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.
Clinical Outcomes with Newer Antihyperglycemic Agents FDA-Mandated CV Safety Trials 1.
Relationship of background ACEI dose to benefits of candesartan in the CHARM-Added trial.
Interim Chair, Medicine Brigham and Women’s Hospital Boston, MA
Ischemia Management with Accupril Post Bypass Graft via Inhibition of Angiotensin Converting Enzyme IMAGINEIMAGINE Presented at The European Society of.
SS-1 Candesartan Support Slides. SS-2 Baseline Beta-Blocker Charm Added β-blocker Of patients on β-blockers Mean daily dose of β-blocker CandesartanPlacebo.
New 2011 SHIFT quality of life substudy Quality of life ( QoL) in heart failure: where do we stand? Therapies that have survival benefits either have a.
European trial on reduction of cardiac events with perindopril in stable coronary artery disease Presented at European Society of Cardiology 2003 EUROPA.
Rosuvastatin 10 mg n=2514 Placebo n= to 4 weeks Randomization 6weeks3 monthly Closing date 20 May 2007 Eligibility Optimal HF treatment instituted.
The JUPITER Trial Reference Ridker PM. Rosuvastatin to prevent vascular events in men and women with elevated C-reactive protein. N Engl J Med. 2008;359:2195–2207.
Ten Year Outcome of Coronary Artery Bypass Graft Surgery Versus Medical Therapy in Patients with Ischemic Cardiomyopathy Results of the Surgical Treatment.
An analysis of 22,672 patients from the CLARIFY registry
Title slide.
CANTOS: The Canakinumab Anti-Inflammatory Thrombosis Outcomes Study
Avoiding Cardiovascular events through COMbination therapy in Patients LIving with Systolic Hypertension (ACCOMPLISH): Design Randomized, double-blind.
The following slides highlight a presentation at the Late-Breaking Clinical Trials session of the American Heart Association Scientific Sessions, November.
Baseline characteristics of patients
SIGNIFY Trial design: Participants with stable coronary artery disease without clinical heart failure and resting heart rate >70 bpm were randomized to.
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:
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,
Presenter Disclosure Information
Presentation transcript:

A step further in the management of stable coronary patients with ivabradine

Rationale

RATIONALE  In CAD patients, high heart rate is associated with higher mortality 1  CAD patients with associated LVD are at higher risk of mortality 2  Heart rate reduction could reduce mortality in CAD patients 3  Ivabradine is a pure heart rate reducing agent with proven antianginal and anti-ischemic efficacy 4,5, Diaz A,et al. Eur Heart J. 2005;26: Emond M. Circulation. 1994;90:2645– Cucherat Ml. Eur Heart J. 2007;28: Borer JS et al. Circulation. 2003;107: Tardif JC,et al. Eur Heart J. 2009;30: Tardif JC et al. Eur Heart J. 2005;26:

Design and Organization

Mor B idity-mortality E v A l U ation of T he I f inhibitor Ivabradine in patients with coronary disease and left ventric UL ar dysfunction  Clinical objective To examine the effects of elevated HR (>70 bpm) on cardiovascular events in these coronary patients  Pathophysiological objective To examine the effects of ivabradine on cardiovascular events in coronary patients with left ventricular dysfunction

Worldwide study participants with documented coronary artery disease and left ventricular dysfunction 781 sites in 33 countries across 4 continents

Inclusion criteria  Male or female  Nondiabetic  55 years, diabetic  18 years  Documented coronary artery disease  Sinus rhythm and resting heart rate  60 bpm  Documented left ventricular systolic dysfunction (<40%)  Clinically stable for 3 months with regards to angina or heart failure symptoms or both  Therapeutically stable for 1 month (appropriate or stable doses of conventional medications) K. Fox et al. Am Heart J. 2006;152:

Design of the study Visits Follow-up for 12 to 35 months–median 19 months Ivabradine 5 mg  7.5 mg bid Placebo bid  Multicenter (781 centers / 33 countries) randomized trial  patients with stable CAD and left ventricular dysfunction (EF <40%)  Already receiving appropriate conventional cardiovascular medical therapy Fox K et al. Lancet. 2008;372:

Patients and follow-up Median study duration: 19 months Maximum: 35 months randomized 5479 to ivabradine5438 to placebo 5438 analyzed5479 analyzed screened Fox K et al. Lancet. 2008;372:

Baseline characteristics Values in parentheses are standard deviations PlaceboIvabradine History of diabetes (%) Time since last MI (years) 6.2 (6.0) 5.9 (5.7) 6.0 (5.9) Time since CAD diagnosis (years) 8.2 (7.1) 8.1 (7.0) 8.2 (7.0) History of hypertension (%) Previous coronary revascularization (%) All Previous MI (%) Fox K et al. Lancet. 2008;372:

Concomitant treatment  -blockers (%) Statins (%) Antithrombotic agents (%) Renin-angiotensin blockers (%) Placebo Ivabradine All Fox K et al. Lancet. 2008;372:

ResultsResults

Years P= Hazard ratio = 1.46 (1.11 – 1.91) Heart rate <70 bpm Heart rate ≥70 bpm 8 % with hospitalization for fatal and nonfatal MI Heart rate above 70 bpm increases risk of myocardial infarction by 46% risk of myocardial infarction by 46% Prospective data from the BEAUTIFUL placebo arm Fox K et al. Lancet. 2008;372:

% with coronary revascularization Years P=0.037 Hazard ratio = 1.38 (1.02 – 1.86) Heart rate <70 bpm Heart rate ≥70 bpm Heart rate above 70 bpm increases risk of coronary revascularization by 38% risk of coronary revascularization by 38% Fox K et al. Lancet. 2008;372:

Effect of ivabradine on primary endpoint (Overall population) % with primary composite end point of CV death, hospitalization for acute MI, or for new-onset or worsening heart failure Ivabradine Placebo P=0.94 Hazard ratio = 1.00 (0.91 – 1.10) Years Fox K et al. Lancet. 2008;372:

Ivabradine reduces fatal and nonfatal myocardial infarction (HR ≥70 bpm) Hospitalization for fatal or nonfatal MI (%) Placebo (HR >70 bpm) Ivabradine P=0.001 Hazard ratio = 0.64 (0.49 – 0.84) Years RRR 36% RRR: relative risk reduction Fox K et al. Lancet. 2008;372:

HR >70 bpm in placebo (mean HR = 79 bpm) *P=0.001 **P= Years Hospitalization for fatal or nonfatal MI (%) HR > 70 bpm with Procoralan (mean HR = 66 bpm after treatment) HR <70 bpm in placebo (mean HR = 64 bpm) Ivabradine shifts the patients from high risk to low risk -36%*

Years Ivabradine 8 Coronary revascularization (%) P=0.016 Hazard ratio = 0.70 (0.52 – 0.93) RRR 30% Placebo (HR >70 bpm) Ivabradine reduces the need for revascularization (HR ≥70 bpm) RRR: relative risk reduction Fox K et al. Lancet. 2008;372:

%0.69 Fatal MI %0.78 Fatal and nonfatal MI or unstable angina %0.70 Coronary revascularization %0.77 Fatal and nonfatal MI, unstable angina, or revascularization %0.64 Fatal and nonfatal MI P value Risk reduction Hazard ratio Predefined end point Ivabradine reduces all coronary events in coronary patients with HR ≥70 bpm Fox K et al. Lancet. 2008;372:

Optimal reduction in heart rate in coronary patients with HR ≥70 bpm Heart rate (bpm) Follow-up (days) Placebo Ivabradine 90 Fox K, et al. Lancet. 2008;372:

New Results In angina patients

 Rationale Angina is the most common clinical manifestation of coronary artery disease (CAD). Procoralan has established anti-ischemic and antianginal efficacy. In the large BEAUTIFUL trial, Procoralan demonstrates that it reduces coronary events in CAD patients.  Objective To explore the effects of Procoralan on cardiovascular outcomes in BEAUTIFUL patients with limiting angina at baseline. New results in angina patients

Design and methodology 1507 randomized with angina 734 to Procoralan 773 to placebo 773 analyzed 734 analyzed patients with CAD and LVD screened randomized Fox K, Ford I, et al; BEAUTIFUL Investigators. Effect of ivabradine on cardiovascular outcomes in patients with stable coronary artery diseaseand left-ventricular systolic dysfunction with limiting angina: a subgroup analysis of the randomized, controlled BEAUTIFUL trial. Data on file. New results in angina patients

Baseline treatment Patients with anginaTotal BEAUTIFUL population Ivabradine (n=734) Placebo (n=773) IvabradinePlacebo Aspirin or antithrombotic agent 92% 94% Statin 67%64%74% ACE inhibitor and/or ARB 88%86%90% β-Blocker 89%90%87% Fox K, Ford I, et al; BEAUTIFUL Investigators. Effect of ivabradine on cardiovascular outcomes in patients with stable coronary artery diseaseand left-ventricular systolic dysfunction with limiting angina: a subgroup analysis of the randomized, controlled BEAUTIFUL trial. Eur heart Jour On line. New results in angina patients

Ivabradine reduces primary end point in angina patients Primary end point(PEP) : CV death + hospitalization for HF or MI Fox K, Ford I, et al; BEAUTIFUL Investigators. Effect of ivabradine on cardiovascular outcomes in patients with stable coronary artery diseaseand left-ventricular systolic dysfunction with limiting angina: a subgroup analysis of the randomized, controlled BEAUTIFUL trial. Eur heart Jour On line. New results in angina patients

Ivabradine reduces myocardial infarction in patients with angina All patients with angina Patients with angina and heart rate >70 bpm Placebo Ivabradine Hospitalization for fatal and nonfatal MI HR (95% CI), 0.58 (0.37–0.92); P=0.021 Years Event rate (%) 42% Placebo Ivabradine Hospitalization for fatal and nonfatal MI HR (95% CI), 0.27 (0.11–0.66); P=0.002 Years Event rate (%) 73% Fox K, Ford I, et al; BEAUTIFUL Investigators. Effect of ivabradine on cardiovascular outcomes in patients with stable coronary artery diseaseand left-ventricular systolic dysfunction with limiting angina: a subgroup analysis of the randomized, controlled BEAUTIFUL trial. Eur heart Jour On line. New results in angina patients

Summary of observed cardiovascular risk reduction in angina patients 24% 0.76 Primary composite end point 12%0.88CV death 42% %0.84Hospitalization for HF 13%0.87All-cause mortality Risk reduction Hazard ratio Predefined end point 30%0.70Coronary revascularization Hospitalization for MI (n=1507) Fox K, Ford I, et al; BEAUTIFUL Investigators. Effect of ivabradine on cardiovascular outcomes in patients with stable coronary artery diseaseand left-ventricular systolic dysfunction with limiting angina: a subgroup analysis of the randomized, controlled BEAUTIFUL trial. Eur heart Jour On line. New results in angina patients

 Ivabradine, the first selective and specific I f inhibitor, has already demonstrated antianginal and anti-ischemic efficacy and improvement of cardiac performance  BEAUTIFUL, the first morbidity-mortality trial with ivabradine, includes patients with documented stable coronary artery disease and left ventricular dysfunction receiving optimal guidelines-based therapy. –In patients with coronary artery disease and left ventricular dysfunction, those with a heart rate >70 bpm have a higher risk of cardiovascular mortality, hospitalization for myocardial infarction, and heart failure. –In patients with heart rate >70 bpm, ivabradine reduces the composite of fatal and nonfatal myocardial infarction and reduces the need for revascularisation. –In angina patients, ivabradine reduces the primary end point of cardiovascular death, hospitalization for heart failure, or for myocardial infarction. In brief

Organization Executive Committee: K. Fox (Chairman), R. Ferrari, M. Tendera, P.G. Steg, I. Ford Steering Committee: R. Ferrari (Chairman), Y. Belenkov (Russia), J. Borbola (Hungary), R. Capalneanu (Romania), B. Eber (Austria), J. Eha (Estonia), N. Danchin (France), M. Dellborg (Sweden), K. Dickstein (Norway), B. Finkov and Y. Yotov (Bulgaria), B. Freedman (Australia), H. Grancelli (Argentina), A. Hall (United Kingdom), P. Hildebrandt (Denmark), J. Hradec (Czech Republic), D. Hu and C. Lau (China/Hong Kong), J. Jirgensons (Latvia), A. Laucevicius (Lithuania), T.U. Lqscher (Switzerland), C. Macaya (Spain), A. Maggioni (Italy), T. Meinertz (Germany), D. Mulcahy (Ireland), J. Murin (Slovakia), A. Oto (Turkey), A. Parkhomenko (Ukraine), K. Peuhkurinen (Finland), P. Rakovec (Slovenia), W. Ruzyllo (Poland), R. Seabra-Gomes (Portugal), J.C. Tardif (Canada), W. Van Gilst (The Netherlands), J.L. Vanoverschelde (Belgium), P. Vardas (Greece) End Point Validation Committee: K. Thygesen (Chairman); M. Frenneaux; G. Jondeau Data Monitoring Committee: A.J. Camm (Chairman); G. Murray; H. Dargie, L. Tavazzi