Relevant gender differences in epidemiological profile, exposure to first antiretroviral regimen and survival in the Spanish AIDS Research Network Cohort.

Journal Article;BACKGROUND The possible differences in the disease spectrum and prognosis of HIV infection in women and men is a major point of concern. Women are under-represented in randomized clinical trials and in some cohorts. Discordant results have often been obtained depending on the setting. METHODS We assessed gender differences in clinical and epidemiological features, antiretroviral treatment (ART) exposure and survival in two multicentre cohorts of HIV-positive subjects in Spain: CoRIS-MD and CoRIS. Competing risk regression models were used to assess gender effect on time to start ART and time to first ART change, and a Cox regression model to estimate gender effect on time to death. RESULTS Between January 1996 and December 2008, 1,953 women and 6,072 men naive to ART at study entry were included. The trend analysis over time showed the percentage of women in the younger (50 years) strata increased significantly (P<0.001) from 0.5% and 1.8% in 1996 to 4.9% and 4.2% in 2008, respectively. By competing risk analysis women started ART earlier than men (adjusted subhazard ratio [ASHR] 1.21, 95% CI 1.11, 1.31) in CoRIS cohort, while in CoRIS-MD none of these differences were observed. In both cohorts women showed a shorter time to the first ART change (ASHR 1.10, 95% CI 1.01, 1.19). Pregnancy and patient's/physician's decisions as reasons for changing were more frequent in women than in men in CoRIS. In the Cox regression model, gender was not associated with differences in survival. CONCLUSIONS In two large cohorts in Spain, we observed relevant gender differences in epidemiological characteristics and antiretroviral exposure outcomes, while survival differences were not attributable to gender.The RIS Cohort (CoRIS) is funded by the Instituto de Salud Carlos III through Red Temática de Investigación Cooperativa (RIS C03/173). The fees of medical editing were supported by Abbott España.Ye

ESICM LIVES 2016: part two : Milan, Italy. 1-5 October 2016.

Meeting abstrac

Edoxaban versus warfarin in patients with atrial fibrillation

Contains fulltext : 125374.pdf (publisher's version ) (Open Access)BACKGROUND: Edoxaban is a direct oral factor Xa inhibitor with proven antithrombotic effects. The long-term efficacy and safety of edoxaban as compared with warfarin in patients with atrial fibrillation is not known. METHODS: We conducted a randomized, double-blind, double-dummy trial comparing two once-daily regimens of edoxaban with warfarin in 21,105 patients with moderate-to-high-risk atrial fibrillation (median follow-up, 2.8 years). The primary efficacy end point was stroke or systemic embolism. Each edoxaban regimen was tested for noninferiority to warfarin during the treatment period. The principal safety end point was major bleeding. RESULTS: The annualized rate of the primary end point during treatment was 1.50% with warfarin (median time in the therapeutic range, 68.4%), as compared with 1.18% with high-dose edoxaban (hazard ratio, 0.79; 97.5% confidence interval [CI], 0.63 to 0.99; P<0.001 for noninferiority) and 1.61% with low-dose edoxaban (hazard ratio, 1.07; 97.5% CI, 0.87 to 1.31; P=0.005 for noninferiority). In the intention-to-treat analysis, there was a trend favoring high-dose edoxaban versus warfarin (hazard ratio, 0.87; 97.5% CI, 0.73 to 1.04; P=0.08) and an unfavorable trend with low-dose edoxaban versus warfarin (hazard ratio, 1.13; 97.5% CI, 0.96 to 1.34; P=0.10). The annualized rate of major bleeding was 3.43% with warfarin versus 2.75% with high-dose edoxaban (hazard ratio, 0.80; 95% CI, 0.71 to 0.91; P<0.001) and 1.61% with low-dose edoxaban (hazard ratio, 0.47; 95% CI, 0.41 to 0.55; P<0.001). The corresponding annualized rates of death from cardiovascular causes were 3.17% versus 2.74% (hazard ratio, 0.86; 95% CI, 0.77 to 0.97; P=0.01), and 2.71% (hazard ratio, 0.85; 95% CI, 0.76 to 0.96; P=0.008), and the corresponding rates of the key secondary end point (a composite of stroke, systemic embolism, or death from cardiovascular causes) were 4.43% versus 3.85% (hazard ratio, 0.87; 95% CI, 0.78 to 0.96; P=0.005), and 4.23% (hazard ratio, 0.95; 95% CI, 0.86 to 1.05; P=0.32). CONCLUSIONS: Both once-daily regimens of edoxaban were noninferior to warfarin with respect to the prevention of stroke or systemic embolism and were associated with significantly lower rates of bleeding and death from cardiovascular causes. (Funded by Daiichi Sankyo Pharma Development; ENGAGE AF-TIMI 48 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00781391.)