0
selected
-
1.
Use of Novel Antithrombotic Agents for COVID-19: Systemic Summary of Ongoing Randomized Controlled Trials
Talasaz AH, Sadeghipour P, Aghakouchakzadeh M, Kakavand H, Ariannejad H, Connors JM, Hunt BJ, Berger JS, Van Tassell BW, Middeldorp S, et al
Journal of thrombosis and haemostasis : JTH. 2021
-
-
-
Free full text
-
Full text
-
Editor's Choice
Abstract
BACKGROUND Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is associated with macro and micro thrombosis, which are triggered by endothelial cell activation, coagulopathy, and uncontrolled inflammatory response. Conventional antithrombotic agents are under assessment in dozens of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in patients with COVID-19, with preliminary results not demonstrating benefit in several studies. OBJECTIVES Given the possibility that more novel agents with antithrombotic effects may have a potential utility for management of patients with COVID-19, we assessed ongoing RCTs including these agents with their potential mechanism of action in this population. METHODS We searched clinicaltrials.gov and the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, to identify RCTs of novel antithrombotic agents in patients with COVID-19. RESULTS Based on a systematic literature search, 27 RCTs with 10 novel antithrombotic agents (including nafamostat, dociparstat, rNAPc2, and defibrotide) were identified. The results from these trials have not been disseminated, yet. The studied drugs in the ongoing or completed RCTs include agents affecting the coagulation cascade, drugs affecting endothelial activation, and mixed acting agents. Their postulated antithrombotic mechanisms of action and their potential impact on patient management are summarized. CONCLUSION Some novel antithrombotic agents have pleiotropic anti-inflammatory and antiviral effects, which may help reduce the viral load or fibrosis, and improve oxygenation. Results from ongoing RCTs will elucidate their actual role in the management of patients with COVID-19.
PICO Summary
Population
Patients with COVID-19 (27 studies).
Intervention
Ten novel antithrombotic agents (including nafamostat, dociparstat, rNAPc2, and defibrotide).
Comparison
Heparin or placebo.
Outcome
The results from these trials have not been disseminated, yet. The studied drugs in the ongoing or completed randomised controlled trials include agents affecting the coagulation cascade, drugs affecting endothelial activation, and mixed acting agents.
-
2.
Regular bleeding risk assessment associated with reduction in bleeding outcomes: The mAFA II randomised trial
Guo Y, Lane DA, Chen Y, Lip GYH
Am J Med. 2020
-
-
-
Full text
-
Editor's Choice
Abstract
BACKGROUND The mobile Atrial fibrillation application (mAFA-II) randomised trial reported that a holistic management strategy supported by mobile Health reduced atrial fibrillation-related adverse outcomes. The present study aimed to assess whether regular reassessment of bleeding risk using the HAS-BLED score would improve bleeding outcomes and anticoagulant (OAC) uptake. METHODS Bleeding risk (HAS-BLED score) was monitored prospectively using mAFA, and calculated as 30 days, Days 31-60, Days 61-180, and Days 181-365. Clinical events and OAC changes in relation to the dynamic monitoring were analysed. RESULTS We studied 1793 patients with atrial fibrillation (mean, standard deviation, age 64, 24 years, 32.5% female). Comparing baseline and 12 months, the proportion of atrial fibrillation patients with HAS-BLED ≥3 decreased (11.8% vs. 8.5%, p=0.008), with changes in use of concomitant NSAIDs/antiplatelets, renal dysfunction, and labile international normalized ratio contributing to the decreased proportions of patients with HAS-BLED ≥3 (p<0.05). Among 1077 (60%) patients who had four bleeding risk assessments, incident bleeding events decreased significantly from Days 1-30, to Days 181-365 (1.2% to 0.2%, respectively, p<0.001). Total OAC usage increased from 63.4% to 70.2% (ptrend<0.001). Compared to atrial fibrillation patients receiving usual care (n=1136), bleeding events were significantly lower in atrial fibrillaiton patients with dynamic monitoring of their bleeding risk (mAFA vs usual care, 2.1%, 4.3%, p=0.004). (p<0.001). CONCLUSION Dynamic risk monitoring using the HAS-BLED score, together with holistic App-based management using mAFA II reduced bleeding events, addressed modifiable bleeding risks and increased uptake of OACs.
PICO Summary
Population
Patients with atrial fibrillation enrolled in the mAFA-II trial (n=1793).
Intervention
Dynamic risk monitoring on anticoagulant and bleeding events using the HAS-BLED score at four timepoints (n=1077).
Comparison
Usual care (n=1136).
Outcome
Comparing baseline and 12 months, the proportion of atrial fibrillation patients with HAS-BLED >/=3 decreased (11.8% vs. 8.5%), with changes in use of concomitant NSAIDs/antiplatelets, renal dysfunction, and labile international normalized ratio contributing to the decreased proportions of patients with HAS-BLED >/=3. Among 1077 (60%) patients who had four bleeding risk assessments, incident bleeding events decreased significantly from Days 1-30, to Days 181-365 (1.2% to 0.2%, respectively). Total OAC usage increased from 63.4% to 70.2%. Compared to atrial fibrillation patients receiving usual care (n=1136), bleeding events were significantly lower in atrial fibrillation patients with dynamic monitoring of their bleeding risk (mAFA vs usual care, 2.1%, 4.3%).
-
3.
Management of Nonvariceal Upper Gastrointestinal Bleeding: Guideline Recommendations From the International Consensus Group
Barkun AN, Almadi M, Kuipers EJ, Laine L, Sung J, Tse F, Leontiadis GI, Abraham NS, Calvet X, Chan FKL, et al
Annals of internal medicine. 2019
-
-
-
Free full text
-
Full text
-
Editor's Choice
Abstract
Description: This update of the 2010 International Consensus Recommendations on the Management of Patients With Nonvariceal Upper Gastrointestinal Bleeding (UGIB) refines previous important statements and presents new clinically relevant recommendations. Methods: An international multidisciplinary group of experts developed the recommendations. Data sources included evidence summarized in previous recommendations, as well as systematic reviews and trials identified from a series of literature searches of several electronic bibliographic databases from inception to April 2018. Using an iterative process, group members formulated key questions. Two methodologists prepared evidence profiles and assessed quality (certainty) of evidence relevant to the key questions according to the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation) approach. Group members reviewed the evidence profiles and, using a consensus process, voted on recommendations and determined the strength of recommendations as strong or conditional. Recommendations: Preendoscopic management: The group suggests using a Glasgow Blatchford score of 1 or less to identify patients at very low risk for rebleeding, who may not require hospitalization. In patients without cardiovascular disease, the suggested hemoglobin threshold for blood transfusion is less than 80 g/L, with a higher threshold for those with cardiovascular disease. Endoscopic management: The group suggests that patients with acute UGIB undergo endoscopy within 24 hours of presentation. Thermocoagulation and sclerosant injection are recommended, and clips are suggested, for endoscopic therapy in patients with high-risk stigmata. Use of TC-325 (hemostatic powder) was suggested as temporizing therapy, but not as sole treatment, in patients with actively bleeding ulcers. Pharmacologic management: The group recommends that patients with bleeding ulcers with high-risk stigmata who have had successful endoscopic therapy receive high-dose proton-pump inhibitor (PPI) therapy (intravenous loading dose followed by continuous infusion) for 3 days. For these high-risk patients, continued oral PPI therapy is suggested twice daily through 14 days, then once daily for a total duration that depends on the nature of the bleeding lesion. Secondary prophylaxis: The group suggests PPI therapy for patients with previous ulcer bleeding who require antiplatelet or anticoagulant therapy for cardiovascular prophylaxis.
PICO Summary
Population
Patients with Nonvariceal Upper Gastrointestinal Bleeding (UGIB).
Intervention
Recommendations developed by an international multidisciplinary group of experts
Comparison
None
Outcome
Preendoscopic management: The group suggests using a Glasgow Blatchford score of 1 or less to identify patients at very low risk for rebleeding, who may not require hospitalization. In patients without cardiovascular disease, the suggested hemoglobin threshold for blood transfusion is less than 80 g/L, with a higher threshold for those with cardiovascular disease. Endoscopic management: The group suggests that patients with acute UGIB undergo endoscopy within 24 hours of presentation. Thermocoagulation and sclerosant injection are recommended, and clips are suggested, for endoscopic therapy in patients with high-risk stigmata. Use of TC-325 (hemostatic powder) was suggested as temporizing therapy, but not as sole treatment, in patients with actively bleeding ulcers. Pharmacologic management: The group recommends that patients with bleeding ulcers with high-risk stigmata who have had successful endoscopic therapy receive high-dose proton-pump inhibitor (PPI) therapy (intravenous loading dose followed by continuous infusion) for 3 days. For these high-risk patients, continued oral PPI therapy is suggested twice daily through 14 days, then once daily for a total duration that depends on the nature of the bleeding lesion. Secondary prophylaxis: The group suggests PPI therapy for patients with previous ulcer bleeding who require antiplatelet or anticoagulant therapy for cardiovascular prophylaxis.
-
4.
Association of International Normalized Ratio Stability and Bleeding Outcomes Among Atrial Fibrillation Patients Undergoing Percutaneous Coronary Intervention
Kerneis M, Yee MK, Mehran R, Nafee T, Bode C, Halperin JL, Peterson ED, Verheugt FWA, Wildgoose P, van Eickels M, et al
Circulation. Cardiovascular interventions. 2019;12(2):e007124
Abstract
BACKGROUND Among atrial fibrillation patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention enrolled in PIONEER AF-PCI (An Open-Label, Randomized, Controlled, Multicenter Study Exploring Two Treatment Strategies of Rivaroxaban and a Dose-Adjusted Oral Vitamin K Antagonist Treatment Strategy in Subjects With Atrial Fibrillation Who Undergo Percutaneous Coronary Intervention), it is unclear if the observed reduction in bleeding events with rivaroxaban regimens is consistent across a range of the international normalized ratio (INR) among subjects administrated Vitamin K antagonist (VKA)-triple therapy. This analysis compares the occurrence of clinically significant bleeding between rivaroxaban and VKA strategies, according to INR stability of subjects administrated VKA. METHODS AND RESULTS A total of 2124 atrial fibrillation patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention were randomized to 3 groups: rivaroxaban 15 mg od plus a P2Y12 inhibitor (group 1, n=709); rivaroxaban 2.5 mg bid plus dual antiplatelet therapy (group 2, n=709); and warfarin plus dual antiplatelet therapy (group 3, n=706). Subjects assigned to the VKA group were stratified according to time in therapeutic range and time spent with an INR >3. Kaplan-Meier estimates were calculated for clinically significant bleeding through 1 year and hazard ratios were derived using Cox Proportional Hazards models. Among group 3, 93.4% of the participants had a time in therapeutic range available (mean time in therapeutic range=65.0+/-24.8%). Both groups 1 and 2 were associated with a reduction in clinically significant bleeding compared with subjects in group 3, regardless of the time in therapeutic range (hazard ratio ranges=0.53-0.71 and 0.57-0.76; respectively, P<0.05 for all). Rivaroxaban strategies were associated with a reduction in clinically significant bleeding compared with VKA regardless of the proportion of time spent with an INR >3 (hazard ratio ranges=0.59-0.67 and 0.42-0.69; P<0.05 for all). CONCLUSIONS Among atrial fibrillation patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention, rivaroxaban-based therapy was superior to warfarin plus dual antiplatelet therapy in lowering bleeding outcomes regardless of the INR stability. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov . Unique identifier: NCT01830543.