Triple Therapy for Cystic Fibrosis Phe508del–Gating and –Residual Function Genotypes

BACKGROUND Elexacaftor–tezacaftor–ivacaftor is a small-molecule cystic fibrosis transmembrane conductance regulator (CFTR) modulator regimen shown to be efficacious in patients with at least one Phe508del allele, which indicates that this combination can modulate a single Phe508del allele. In patients whose other CFTR allele contains a gating or residual function mutation that is already effectively treated with previous CFTR modulators (ivacaftor or tezacaftor–ivacaftor), the potential for additional benefit from restoring Phe508del CFTR protein function is unclear. METHODS We conducted a phase 3, double-blind, randomized, active-controlled trial involving patients 12 years of age or older with cystic fibrosis and Phe508del–gating or Phe508del–residual function genotypes. After a 4-week run-in period with ivacaftor or tezacaftor–ivacaftor, patients were randomly assigned to receive elexacaftor–tezacaftor–ivacaftor or active control for 8 weeks. The primary end point was the absolute change in the percentage of predicted forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1) from baseline through week 8 in the elexacaftor–tezacaftor–ivacaftor group. RESULTS After the run-in period, 132 patients received elexacaftor–tezacaftor–ivacaftor and 126 received active control. Elexacaftor–tezacaftor–ivacaftor resulted in a percentage of predicted FEV1 that was higher by 3.7 percentage points (95% confidence interval [CI], 2.8 to 4.6) relative to baseline and higher by 3.5 percentage points (95% CI, 2.2 to 4.7) relative to active control and a sweat chloride concentration that was lower by 22.3 mmol per liter (95% CI, 20.2 to 24.5) relative to baseline and lower by 23.1 mmol per liter (95% CI, 20.1 to 26.1) relative to active control (P<0.001 for all comparisons). The change from baseline in the Cystic Fibrosis Questionnaire–Revised respiratory domain score (range, 0 to 100, with higher scores indicating better quality of life) with elexacaftor–tezacaftor–ivacaftor was 10.3 points (95% CI, 8.0 to 12.7) and with active control was 1.6 points (95% CI, −0.8 to 4.1). The incidence of adverse events was similar in the two groups; adverse events led to treatment discontinuation in one patient (elevated aminotransferase level) in the elexacaftor–tezacaftor–ivacaftor group and in two patients (anxiety or depression and pulmonary exacerbation) in the active control group. CONCLUSIONS Elexacaftor–tezacaftor–ivacaftor was efficacious and safe in patients with Phe508del–gating or Phe508del–residual function genotypes and conferred additional benefit relative to previous CFTR modulators. (Funded by Vertex Pharmaceuticals; VX18-445-104 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04058353.

Why Are Outcomes Different for Registry Patients Enrolled Prospectively and Retrospectively? Insights from the Global Anticoagulant Registry in the FIELD-Atrial Fibrillation (GARFIELD-AF).

Background: Retrospective and prospective observational studies are designed to reflect real-world evidence on clinical practice, but can yield conflicting results. The GARFIELD-AF Registry includes both methods of enrolment and allows analysis of differences in patient characteristics and outcomes that may result. Methods and Results: Patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) and ≥1 risk factor for stroke at diagnosis of AF were recruited either retrospectively (n = 5069) or prospectively (n = 5501) from 19 countries and then followed prospectively. The retrospectively enrolled cohort comprised patients with established AF (for a least 6, and up to 24 months before enrolment), who were identified retrospectively (and baseline and partial follow-up data were collected from the emedical records) and then followed prospectively between 0-18 months (such that the total time of follow-up was 24 months; data collection Dec-2009 and Oct-2010). In the prospectively enrolled cohort, patients with newly diagnosed AF (≤6 weeks after diagnosis) were recruited between Mar-2010 and Oct-2011 and were followed for 24 months after enrolment. Differences between the cohorts were observed in clinical characteristics, including type of AF, stroke prevention strategies, and event rates. More patients in the retrospectively identified cohort received vitamin K antagonists (62.1% vs. 53.2%) and fewer received non-vitamin K oral anticoagulants (1.8% vs . 4.2%). All-cause mortality rates per 100 person-years during the prospective follow-up (starting the first study visit up to 1 year) were significantly lower in the retrospective than prospectively identified cohort (3.04 [95% CI 2.51 to 3.67] vs . 4.05 [95% CI 3.53 to 4.63]; p = 0.016). Conclusions: Interpretations of data from registries that aim to evaluate the characteristics and outcomes of patients with AF must take account of differences in registry design and the impact of recall bias and survivorship bias that is incurred with retrospective enrolment. Clinical Trial Registration: - URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov . Unique identifier for GARFIELD-AF (NCT01090362)

Improved risk stratification of patients with atrial fibrillation: an integrated GARFIELD-AF tool for the prediction of mortality, stroke and bleed in patients with and without anticoagulation.

OBJECTIVES: To provide an accurate, web-based tool for stratifying patients with atrial fibrillation to facilitate decisions on the potential benefits/risks of anticoagulation, based on mortality, stroke and bleeding risks. DESIGN: The new tool was developed, using stepwise regression, for all and then applied to lower risk patients. C-statistics were compared with CHA2DS2-VASc using 30-fold cross-validation to control for overfitting. External validation was undertaken in an independent dataset, Outcome Registry for Better Informed Treatment of Atrial Fibrillation (ORBIT-AF). PARTICIPANTS: Data from 39 898 patients enrolled in the prospective GARFIELD-AF registry provided the basis for deriving and validating an integrated risk tool to predict stroke risk, mortality and bleeding risk. RESULTS: The discriminatory value of the GARFIELD-AF risk model was superior to CHA2DS2-VASc for patients with or without anticoagulation. C-statistics (95% CI) for all-cause mortality, ischaemic stroke/systemic embolism and haemorrhagic stroke/major bleeding (treated patients) were: 0.77 (0.76 to 0.78), 0.69 (0.67 to 0.71) and 0.66 (0.62 to 0.69), respectively, for the GARFIELD-AF risk models, and 0.66 (0.64-0.67), 0.64 (0.61-0.66) and 0.64 (0.61-0.68), respectively, for CHA2DS2-VASc (or HAS-BLED for bleeding). In very low to low risk patients (CHA2DS2-VASc 0 or 1 (men) and 1 or 2 (women)), the CHA2DS2-VASc and HAS-BLED (for bleeding) scores offered weak discriminatory value for mortality, stroke/systemic embolism and major bleeding. C-statistics for the GARFIELD-AF risk tool were 0.69 (0.64 to 0.75), 0.65 (0.56 to 0.73) and 0.60 (0.47 to 0.73) for each end point, respectively, versus 0.50 (0.45 to 0.55), 0.59 (0.50 to 0.67) and 0.55 (0.53 to 0.56) for CHA2DS2-VASc (or HAS-BLED for bleeding). Upon validation in the ORBIT-AF population, C-statistics showed that the GARFIELD-AF risk tool was effective for predicting 1-year all-cause mortality using the full and simplified model for all-cause mortality: C-statistics 0.75 (0.73 to 0.77) and 0.75 (0.73 to 0.77), respectively, and for predicting for any stroke or systemic embolism over 1 year, C-statistics 0.68 (0.62 to 0.74). CONCLUSIONS: Performance of the GARFIELD-AF risk tool was superior to CHA2DS2-VASc in predicting stroke and mortality and superior to HAS-BLED for bleeding, overall and in lower risk patients. The GARFIELD-AF tool has the potential for incorporation in routine electronic systems, and for the first time, permits simultaneous evaluation of ischaemic stroke, mortality and bleeding risks. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier for GARFIELD-AF (NCT01090362) and for ORBIT-AF (NCT01165710)

Two-year outcomes of patients with newly diagnosed atrial fibrillation: results from GARFIELD-AF.

AIMS: The relationship between outcomes and time after diagnosis for patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF) is poorly defined, especially beyond the first year. METHODS AND RESULTS: GARFIELD-AF is an ongoing, global observational study of adults with newly diagnosed NVAF. Two-year outcomes of 17 162 patients prospectively enrolled in GARFIELD-AF were analysed in light of baseline characteristics, risk profiles for stroke/systemic embolism (SE), and antithrombotic therapy. The mean (standard deviation) age was 69.8 (11.4) years, 43.8% were women, and the mean CHA2DS2-VASc score was 3.3 (1.6); 60.8% of patients were prescribed anticoagulant therapy with/without antiplatelet (AP) therapy, 27.4% AP monotherapy, and 11.8% no antithrombotic therapy. At 2-year follow-up, all-cause mortality, stroke/SE, and major bleeding had occurred at a rate (95% confidence interval) of 3.83 (3.62; 4.05), 1.25 (1.13; 1.38), and 0.70 (0.62; 0.81) per 100 person-years, respectively. Rates for all three major events were highest during the first 4 months. Congestive heart failure, acute coronary syndromes, sudden/unwitnessed death, malignancy, respiratory failure, and infection/sepsis accounted for 65% of all known causes of death and strokes for <10%. Anticoagulant treatment was associated with a 35% lower risk of death. CONCLUSION: The most frequent of the three major outcome measures was death, whose most common causes are not known to be significantly influenced by anticoagulation. This suggests that a more comprehensive approach to the management of NVAF may be needed to improve outcome. This could include, in addition to anticoagulation, interventions targeting modifiable, cause-specific risk factors for death. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT01090362

Risk profiles and one-year outcomes of patients with newly diagnosed atrial fibrillation in India: Insights from the GARFIELD-AF Registry.

BACKGROUND: The Global Anticoagulant Registry in the FIELD-Atrial Fibrillation (GARFIELD-AF) is an ongoing prospective noninterventional registry, which is providing important information on the baseline characteristics, treatment patterns, and 1-year outcomes in patients with newly diagnosed non-valvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF). This report describes data from Indian patients recruited in this registry. METHODS AND RESULTS: A total of 52,014 patients with newly diagnosed AF were enrolled globally; of these, 1388 patients were recruited from 26 sites within India (2012-2016). In India, the mean age was 65.8 years at diagnosis of NVAF. Hypertension was the most prevalent risk factor for AF, present in 68.5% of patients from India and in 76.3% of patients globally (P < 0.001). Diabetes and coronary artery disease (CAD) were prevalent in 36.2% and 28.1% of patients as compared with global prevalence of 22.2% and 21.6%, respectively (P < 0.001 for both). Antiplatelet therapy was the most common antithrombotic treatment in India. With increasing stroke risk, however, patients were more likely to receive oral anticoagulant therapy [mainly vitamin K antagonist (VKA)], but average international normalized ratio (INR) was lower among Indian patients [median INR value 1.6 (interquartile range {IQR}: 1.3-2.3) versus 2.3 (IQR 1.8-2.8) (P < 0.001)]. Compared with other countries, patients from India had markedly higher rates of all-cause mortality [7.68 per 100 person-years (95% confidence interval 6.32-9.35) vs 4.34 (4.16-4.53), P < 0.0001], while rates of stroke/systemic embolism and major bleeding were lower after 1 year of follow-up. CONCLUSION: Compared to previously published registries from India, the GARFIELD-AF registry describes clinical profiles and outcomes in Indian patients with AF of a different etiology. The registry data show that compared to the rest of the world, Indian AF patients are younger in age and have more diabetes and CAD. Patients with a higher stroke risk are more likely to receive anticoagulation therapy with VKA but are underdosed compared with the global average in the GARFIELD-AF. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION-URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT01090362

<i>In Situ</i> Characterization of Highly Dispersed, Ceria-Supported Fe Sites for NO Reduction by CO

Highly dispersed FeOx was impregnated onto CeO₂ using the unique precursor Na/Fe-ethylenediaminetetraacetate (NaFeEDTA) at varying Fe surface density (0–1.5 Fe/nm²). These catalysts were used for NO reduction by CO and were compared to a more traditional Fe­(NO₃)₃ precursor impregnated on Na-promoted CeO₂. Extensive characterization and spectroscopic measurements showed that NaFeEDTA produced a narrower distribution of smaller, noncrystalline, surface FeOx species with excellent redox cyclability (Fe³⁺ ↔ Fe²⁺). The NaFeEDTA catalysts exhibited corresponding higher steady-state activity for NO reduction by CO. <i>In situ</i> X-ray absorption spectroscopy with simultaneous gas-phase monitoring indicated that NO conversion began concurrent with reduction of Fe and Ce, suggesting that NO reduction occurred at a reduced Fe–O–Ce interface site. These results illustrate a new synthesis–structure–activity relationship for NO reduction by CO over redox-cycling FeOx sites that may support future rational design of emission control catalysts without Pt-group metals or zeolites

Long-Term Safety and Efficacy of Elexacaftor/Tezacaftor/Ivacaftor in People With Cystic Fibrosis and at Least One F508del Allele: 144-Week Interim Results From a 192-Week Open-label Extension Study

AIMS: In two pivotal Phase 3 trials, up to 24 weeks of treatment with elexacaftor/tezacaftor/ivacaftor (ELX/TEZ/IVA) was efficacious and safe in patients with cystic fibrosis ≥12 years of age who have at least one F508del allele. The aim of this study is to assess long-term safety and efficacy of ELX/TEZ/IVA in these patients. METHODS: In this Phase 3, open-label, single-arm extension study, participants with F508del-minimal function (from a 24-week parent study; n=399) or F508del-F508del (from a 4-week parent study; n=107) genotypes receive ELX/TEZ/IVA at the same dose (ELX 200 mg once daily, TEZ 100 mg once daily and IVA 150 mg every 12 h). The primary endpoint is safety and tolerability. A prespecified interim analysis was conducted when the last participant reached the Week 144 visit. RESULTS: At the Week 144 interim analysis, mean duration of exposure to ELX/TEZ/IVA in the extension study was 151.1 weeks. Exposure-adjusted rates of adverse events (586.6 events per 100 participant-years) and serious adverse events (22.4 events per 100 participant-years) were lower than in the ELX/TEZ/IVA treatment group in the 24-week parent study (1096.0 events per 100 participant-years and 36.9 events per 100 participant-years, respectively); most participants had adverse events classified as mild (16.4% of participants) or moderate (60.3% of participants) in severity. Fourteen participants (2.8%) had adverse events that led to treatment discontinuation. Following initiation of ELX/TEZ/IVA, participants had increases in per cent predicted FEV(1) (ppFEV(1)), Cystic Fibrosis Questionnaire-Revised respiratory domain score and body mass index, and had decreases in sweat chloride concentration and pulmonary exacerbations rates that were maintained over the interim analysis period. The mean annualised rate of change in ppFEV(1) was +0.07 percentage points (95% CI, -0.12 to 0.26) among the participants. CONCLUSIONS: ELX/TEZ/IVA was generally safe and well-tolerated, with a safety profile consistent with the 24-week parent study. Participants had sustained improvements in lung function, respiratory symptoms, CFTR function, pulmonary exacerbation rates and nutritional status. These results support the favourable safety profile and durable, disease-modifying clinical benefits of ELX/TEZ/IVA.Published version, accepted version (12 month embargo), submitted versionThe article is available via Open Access. Click on the 'Additional link' above to access the full-text