International longitudinal registry of patients with atrial fibrillation and treated with rivaroxaban: RIVaroxaban Evaluation in Real life setting (RIVER)

Background Real-world data on non-vitamin K oral anticoagulants (NOACs) are essential in determining whether evidence from randomised controlled clinical trials translate into meaningful clinical benefits for patients in everyday practice. RIVER (RIVaroxaban Evaluation in Real life setting) is an ongoing international, prospective registry of patients with newly diagnosed non-valvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF) and at least one investigator-determined risk factor for stroke who received rivaroxaban as an initial treatment for the prevention of thromboembolic stroke. The aim of this paper is to describe the design of the RIVER registry and baseline characteristics of patients with newly diagnosed NVAF who received rivaroxaban as an initial treatment. Methods and results Between January 2014 and June 2017, RIVER investigators recruited 5072 patients at 309 centres in 17 countries. The aim was to enroll consecutive patients at sites where rivaroxaban was already routinely prescribed for stroke prevention. Each patient is being followed up prospectively for a minimum of 2-years. The registry will capture data on the rate and nature of all thromboembolic events (stroke / systemic embolism), bleeding complications, all-cause mortality and other major cardiovascular events as they occur. Data quality is assured through a combination of remote electronic monitoring and onsite monitoring (including source data verification in 10% of cases). Patients were mostly enrolled by cardiologists (n = 3776, 74.6%), by internal medicine specialists 14.2% (n = 718) and by primary care/general practice physicians 8.2% (n = 417). The mean (SD) age of the population was 69.5 (11.0) years, 44.3% were women. Mean (SD) CHADS2 score was 1.9 (1.2) and CHA2DS2-VASc scores was 3.2 (1.6). Almost all patients (98.5%) were prescribed with once daily dose of rivaroxaban, most commonly 20 mg (76.5%) and 15 mg (20.0%) as their initial treatment; 17.9% of patients received concomitant antiplatelet therapy. Most patients enrolled in RIVER met the recommended threshold for AC therapy (86.6% for 2012 ESC Guidelines, and 79.8% of patients according to 2016 ESC Guidelines). Conclusions The RIVER prospective registry will expand our knowledge of how rivaroxaban is prescribed in everyday practice and whether evidence from clinical trials can be translated to the broader cross-section of patients in the real world

Post-intervention Status in Patients With Refractory Myasthenia Gravis Treated With Eculizumab During REGAIN and Its Open-Label Extension

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate whether eculizumab helps patients with anti-acetylcholine receptor-positive (AChR+) refractory generalized myasthenia gravis (gMG) achieve the Myasthenia Gravis Foundation of America (MGFA) post-intervention status of minimal manifestations (MM), we assessed patients' status throughout REGAIN (Safety and Efficacy of Eculizumab in AChR+ Refractory Generalized Myasthenia Gravis) and its open-label extension. METHODS: Patients who completed the REGAIN randomized controlled trial and continued into the open-label extension were included in this tertiary endpoint analysis. Patients were assessed for the MGFA post-intervention status of improved, unchanged, worse, MM, and pharmacologic remission at defined time points during REGAIN and through week 130 of the open-label study. RESULTS: A total of 117 patients completed REGAIN and continued into the open-label study (eculizumab/eculizumab: 56; placebo/eculizumab: 61). At week 26 of REGAIN, more eculizumab-treated patients than placebo-treated patients achieved a status of improved (60.7% vs 41.7%) or MM (25.0% vs 13.3%; common OR: 2.3; 95% CI: 1.1-4.5). After 130 weeks of eculizumab treatment, 88.0% of patients achieved improved status and 57.3% of patients achieved MM status. The safety profile of eculizumab was consistent with its known profile and no new safety signals were detected. CONCLUSION: Eculizumab led to rapid and sustained achievement of MM in patients with AChR+ refractory gMG. These findings support the use of eculizumab in this previously difficult-to-treat patient population. CLINICALTRIALSGOV IDENTIFIER: REGAIN, NCT01997229; REGAIN open-label extension, NCT02301624. CLASSIFICATION OF EVIDENCE: This study provides Class II evidence that, after 26 weeks of eculizumab treatment, 25.0% of adults with AChR+ refractory gMG achieved MM, compared with 13.3% who received placebo

International Prospective Registry of Acute Coronary Syndromes in Patients With COVID-19

Background: Published data suggest worse outcomes in acute coronary syndrome (ACS) patients and concurrent coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) infection. Mechanisms remain unclear. Objectives: The purpose of this study was to report the demographics, angiographic findings, and in-hospital outcomes of COVID-19 ACS patients and compare these with pre�COVID-19 cohorts. Methods: From March 1, 2020 to July 31, 2020, data from 55 international centers were entered into a prospective, COVID-ACS Registry. Patients were COVID-19 positive (or had a high index of clinical suspicion) and underwent invasive coronary angiography for suspected ACS. Outcomes were in-hospital major cardiovascular events (all-cause mortality, re�myocardial infarction, heart failure, stroke, unplanned revascularization, or stent thrombosis). Results were compared with national pre�COVID-19 databases (MINAP Myocardial Ischaemia National Audit Project 2019 and BCIS British Cardiovascular Intervention Society 2018 to 2019). Results: In 144 ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) and 121 non�ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndrome (NSTE-ACS) patients, symptom-to-admission times were significantly prolonged (COVID-STEMI vs. BCIS: median 339.0 min vs. 173.0 min; p < 0.001; COVID NSTE-ACS vs. MINAP: 417.0 min vs. 295.0 min; p = 0.012). Mortality in COVID-ACS patients was significantly higher than BCIS/MINAP control subjects in both subgroups (COVID-STEMI: 22.9% vs. 5.7%; p < 0.001; COVID NSTE-ACS: 6.6% vs. 1.2%; p < 0.001), which remained following multivariate propensity analysis adjusting for comorbidities (STEMI subgroup odds ratio: 3.33 95% confidence interval: 2.04 to 5.42). Cardiogenic shock occurred in 20.1% of COVID-STEMI patients versus 8.7% of BCIS patients (p < 0.001). Conclusions: In this multicenter international registry, COVID-19�positive ACS patients presented later and had increased in-hospital mortality compared with a pre�COVID-19 ACS population. Excessive rates of and mortality from cardiogenic shock were major contributors to the worse outcomes in COVID-19 positive STEMI patients. © 2021 American College of Cardiology Foundatio

International Prospective Registry of Acute Coronary Syndromes in Patients With COVID-19

Background: Published data suggest worse outcomes in acute coronary syndrome (ACS) patients and concurrent coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) infection. Mechanisms remain unclear. Objectives: The purpose of this study was to report the demographics, angiographic findings, and in-hospital outcomes of COVID-19 ACS patients and compare these with pre–COVID-19 cohorts. Methods: From March 1, 2020 to July 31, 2020, data from 55 international centers were entered into a prospective, COVID-ACS Registry. Patients were COVID-19 positive (or had a high index of clinical suspicion) and underwent invasive coronary angiography for suspected ACS. Outcomes were in-hospital major cardiovascular events (all-cause mortality, re–myocardial infarction, heart failure, stroke, unplanned revascularization, or stent thrombosis). Results were compared with national pre–COVID-19 databases (MINAP [Myocardial Ischaemia National Audit Project] 2019 and BCIS [British Cardiovascular Intervention Society] 2018 to 2019). Results: In 144 ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) and 121 non–ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndrome (NSTE-ACS) patients, symptom-to-admission times were significantly prolonged (COVID-STEMI vs. BCIS: median 339.0 min vs. 173.0 min; p < 0.001; COVID NSTE-ACS vs. MINAP: 417.0 min vs. 295.0 min; p = 0.012). Mortality in COVID-ACS patients was significantly higher than BCIS/MINAP control subjects in both subgroups (COVID-STEMI: 22.9% vs. 5.7%; p < 0.001; COVID NSTE-ACS: 6.6% vs. 1.2%; p < 0.001), which remained following multivariate propensity analysis adjusting for comorbidities (STEMI subgroup odds ratio: 3.33 [95% confidence interval: 2.04 to 5.42]). Cardiogenic shock occurred in 20.1% of COVID-STEMI patients versus 8.7% of BCIS patients (p < 0.001). Conclusions: In this multicenter international registry, COVID-19–positive ACS patients presented later and had increased in-hospital mortality compared with a pre–COVID-19 ACS population. Excessive rates of and mortality from cardiogenic shock were major contributors to the worse outcomes in COVID-19 positive STEMI patients

International Prospective Registry of Acute Coronary Syndromes in Patients With COVID-19

Background: Published data suggest worse outcomes in acute coronary syndrome (ACS) patients and concurrent coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) infection. Mechanisms remain unclear. Objectives: The purpose of this study was to report the demographics, angiographic findings, and in-hospital outcomes of COVID-19 ACS patients and compare these with pre–COVID-19 cohorts. Methods: From March 1, 2020 to July 31, 2020, data from 55 international centers were entered into a prospective, COVID-ACS Registry. Patients were COVID-19 positive (or had a high index of clinical suspicion) and underwent invasive coronary angiography for suspected ACS. Outcomes were in-hospital major cardiovascular events (all-cause mortality, re–myocardial infarction, heart failure, stroke, unplanned revascularization, or stent thrombosis). Results were compared with national pre–COVID-19 databases (MINAP [Myocardial Ischaemia National Audit Project] 2019 and BCIS [British Cardiovascular Intervention Society] 2018 to 2019). Results: In 144 ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) and 121 non–ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndrome (NSTE-ACS) patients, symptom-to-admission times were significantly prolonged (COVID-STEMI vs. BCIS: median 339.0 min vs. 173.0 min; p < 0.001; COVID NSTE-ACS vs. MINAP: 417.0 min vs. 295.0 min; p = 0.012). Mortality in COVID-ACS patients was significantly higher than BCIS/MINAP control subjects in both subgroups (COVID-STEMI: 22.9% vs. 5.7%; p < 0.001; COVID NSTE-ACS: 6.6% vs. 1.2%; p < 0.001), which remained following multivariate propensity analysis adjusting for comorbidities (STEMI subgroup odds ratio: 3.33 [95% confidence interval: 2.04 to 5.42]). Cardiogenic shock occurred in 20.1% of COVID-STEMI patients versus 8.7% of BCIS patients (p < 0.001). Conclusions: In this multicenter international registry, COVID-19–positive ACS patients presented later and had increased in-hospital mortality compared with a pre–COVID-19 ACS population. Excessive rates of and mortality from cardiogenic shock were major contributors to the worse outcomes in COVID-19 positive STEMI patients. © 2021 American College of Cardiology Foundatio