Effect of Shared Decision‐Making for Stroke Prevention on Treatment Adherence and Safety Outcomes in Patients With Atrial Fibrillation: A Randomized Clinical Trial

Background Guidelines promote shared decision‐making (SDM) for anticoagulation in patients with atrial fibrillation. We recently showed that adding a within‐encounter SDM tool to usual care (UC) increases patient involvement in decision‐making and clinician satisfaction, without affecting encounter length. We aimed to estimate the extent to which use of an SDM tool changed adherence to the decided care plan and clinical safety end points. Methods and Results We conducted a multicenter, encounter‐level, randomized trial assessing the efficacy of UC with versus without an SDM conversation tool for use during the clinical encounter (Anticoagulation Choice) in patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation considering starting or reviewing anticoagulation treatment. We conducted a chart and pharmacy review, blinded to randomization status, at 10 months after enrollment to assess primary adherence (proportion of patients who were prescribed an anticoagulant who filled their first prescription) and secondary adherence (estimated using the proportion of days for which treatment was supplied and filled for direct oral anticoagulant, and as time in therapeutic range for warfarin). We also noted any strokes, transient ischemic attacks, major bleeding, or deaths as safety end points. We enrolled 922 evaluable patient encounters (Anticoagulation Choice=463, and UC=459), of which 814 (88%) had pharmacy and clinical follow‐up. We found no differences between arms in either primary adherence (78% of patients in the SDM arm filled their first prescription versus 81% in UC arm) or secondary adherence to anticoagulation (percentage days covered of the direct oral anticoagulant was 74.1% in SDM versus 71.6% in UC; time in therapeutic range for warfarin was 66.6% in SDM versus 64.4% in UC). Safety outcomes, mostly bleeds, occurred in 13% of participants in the SDM arm and 14% in the UC arm. Conclusions In this large, randomized trial comparing UC with a tool to promote SDM against UC alone, we found no significant differences between arms in primary or secondary adherence to anticoagulation or in clinical safety outcomes. Registration URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov ; Unique identifier: clinicaltrials.gov. Identifier: NCT02905032.

Efficacy and safety of trifluridine/tipiracil in older and younger patients with metastatic gastric or gastroesophageal junction cancer: subgroup analysis of a randomized phase 3 study (TAGS)

Background Trifluridine and tipiracil (FTD/TPI) demonstrated survival benefit vs placebo and manageable safety in previously treated patients with metastatic gastric/gastroesophageal junction cancer (mGC/GEJC) in the randomized, placebo-controlled, phase 3 TAGS study. This subgroup analysis of TAGS examined efficacy/safety outcomes by age. Methods In TAGS, patients with mGC/GEJC and ≥ 2 prior therapies were randomized (2:1) to receive FTD/TPI 35 mg/m2 or placebo, plus best supportive care. A preplanned subgroup analysis was performed to evaluate efficacy and safety outcomes in patients aged < 65, ≥ 65, and ≥ 75 years. Results Among 507 randomized patients (n = 337 FTD/TPI; n = 170 placebo), 55%, 45%, and 14% were aged < 65, ≥ 65, and ≥ 75 years, respectively. Overall survival hazard ratios for FTD/TPI vs placebo were 0.67 (95% CI 0.51–0.89), 0.73 (95% CI 0.52–1.02), and 0.67 (95% CI 0.33–1.37) in patients aged < 65, ≥ 65, and ≥ 75 years, respectively. Regardless of age, patients receiving FTD/TPI experienced improved progression-free survival and stayed longer on treatment than those receiving placebo. Among FTD/TPI-treated patients, frequencies of any-cause grade ≥ 3 adverse events (AEs) were similar across age subgroups (80% each), although grade ≥ 3 neutropenia was more frequent in older patients [40% (≥ 65 and ≥ 75 years); 29% (< 65 years)]; AE-related discontinuation rates did not increase with age [14% (< 65 years), 12% (≥ 65 years), and 12% (≥ 75 years)]. Conclusions The results of this subgroup analysis show the efficacy and tolerability of FTD/TPI treatment regardless of age in patients with mGC/GEJC who had received 2 or more prior treatments.

Oral Antihypertensives for Nonsevere Pregnancy Hypertension: Systematic Review, Network Meta- and Trial Sequential Analyses

Background: We aimed to address which antihypertensives are superior to placebo/no therapy or another antihypertensive for controlling nonsevere pregnancy hypertension and provide future sample size estimates for definitive evidence. Methods: Randomized trials of antihypertensives for nonsevere pregnancy hypertension were identified from online electronic databases, to February 28, 2021 (registration URL: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/ ; unique identifier: CRD42020188725). Our outcomes were severe hypertension, proteinuria/preeclampsia, fetal/newborn death, small-for-gestational age infants, preterm birth, and admission to neonatal care. A Bayesian random-effects model generated estimates of direct and indirect treatment comparisons. Trial sequential analysis informed future trials needed. Results: Of 1246 publications identified, 72 trials were included; 61 (6923 women) were informative. All commonly prescribed antihypertensives (labetalol, other β-blockers, methyldopa, calcium channel blockers, and mixed/multi-drug therapy) versus placebo/no therapy reduced the risk of severe hypertension by 30% to 70%. Labetalol decreased proteinuria/preeclampsia (odds ratio, 0.73 [95% credible interval, 0.54–0.99]) and fetal/newborn death (odds ratio, 0.54 [0.30–0.98]) compared with placebo/no therapy, and proteinuria/preeclampsia compared with methyldopa (odds ratio, 0.66 [0.44–0.99]) and calcium channel blockers (odds ratio, 0.63 [0.41–0.96]). No other differences were identified, but credible intervals were wide. Trial sequential analysis indicated that 2500 to 10 000 women/arm (severe hypertension or safety outcomes) to >15 000/arm (fetal/newborn death) would be required to provide definitive evidence. Conclusions: In summary, all commonly prescribed antihypertensives in pregnancy reduce the risk of severe hypertension, but labetalol may also decrease proteinuria/preeclampsia and fetal/newborn death. Evidence is lacking for many other safety outcomes. Prohibitive sample sizes are required for definitive evidence. Real-world data are needed to individualize care.

Quantitative analysis of efficacy and safety of LABA/LAMA fixed-dose combinations in the treatment of stable COPD

Objective: This study aimed to quantitatively compare the efficacy and safety of long-acting β2-agonist (LABA)/long-acting muscarinic antagonist (LAMA) fixed-dose combinations (FDCs) for the treatment of stable chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), especially in terms of their loss of efficacy in lung function. Methods: Randomized controlled clinical trials of LABA/LAMA FDCs for the treatment of stable COPD were comprehensively searched for in public databases. Pharmacodynamic models were established to describe the time course of the primary outcome [trough forced expiratory volume in the first second (FEV1)]. Secondary outcomes [COPD exacerbations, St. George’s Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ), Transition Dyspnoea Index (TDI), and rescue medication use] and safety outcomes [mortality, serious adverse events (SAEs), and withdrawals due to adverse events (AEs)] were also compared via a meta-analysis. Results: A total of 22 studies involving 16,486 participants were included in this study. The results showed that in terms of primary outcome (change from baseline in trough FEV1), the efficacy of vilanterol/umeclidinium was the highest, while the efficacy of formoterol/aclidinium was the lowest, with a maximum effect value (Emax) of 0.185 L [95% confidence interval (CI): 0.173–0.197 L] and 0.119 L (95% CI: 0.103–0.135 L), respectively. The efficacy of other drugs, such as formoterol/glycopyrronium, indacaterol/glycopyrronium, and olodaterol/tiotropium, were comparable, and their Emax values were 0.150–0.177 L. Except for vilanterol/umeclidinium, the other four LABA/LAMA FDCs showed a certain degree of loss of efficacy. Compared with the efficacy at 2 days, the trough FEV1 (L) relative to baseline at 24 weeks decreased by 0.029–0.041 L. In terms of secondary outcomes, the efficacy of different LABA/LAMA FDCs was similar in TDI and rescue medication use. However, formoterol/aclidinium was better in preventing the COPD exacerbations, while vilanterol/umeclidinium was the best in terms of SGRQ. In addition, different LABA/LAMA FDCs and placebo had similar safety outcomes. Conclusion: The present findings may provide necessary quantitative information for COPD medication guidelines.

GRADEing the quality of evidence on safety: an adapted GRADE approach for preparing lists of potentially inappropriate medication for older adults

BackgroundSystematic reviews that synthesize safety outcomes pose challenges (e.g. rare events), which poses questions for grading the strength of the body of evidence. In this contribution, we suggest adaption of the GRADE system for grading the quality of evidence on safety outcomes for developing a potentially inappropriate medication list (PRISCUS).MethodsWe systematically assessed each of the five GRADE domains for rating-down (study limitations, imprecision, inconsistency, indirectness, publication bias) and the criteria for rating-up, considering if special considerations or revisions of the original approach were indicated. The result was gathered in a written document and discussed in a group-meeting. Subsequently, we performed a proof-of-concept application using a convenience sample of systematic reviews. Results We adapted aspects of the criteria study limitations, imprecision, publication bias and rating-up for large effect. In addition, we suggest a new criterion to account for data from subgroup-analyses. The proof-of-concept application did not reveal a need for further revision and thus we used the approach for the systematic reviews that were prepared for the PRISCUS-list. We assessed 51 outcomes for 19 clinical questions. Each of the proposed adaptions was applied. There were neither an excessive number of low and very low ratings, nor an excessive number of high ratings, but the different methodological quality of the safety outcomes appeared to be well reflected.ConclusionThe adaptions appear to have the potential to overcome some of the challenges when grading the methodological quality of harms and thus may be helpful for producers of evidence syntheses considering safety.