Key result
Measurement of AF-specific symptoms burden identified treatment group differences in cardiovascular serious adverse events and AF interventions (P < 0.001).
Why the study?
In AF clinical trials, time to first symptomatic AF event has disadvantages that could theoretically be overcome by measuring AF-specific symptoms burden throughout follow-up.
RCT
Measurement of symptoms burden throughout clinical trial follow-up is feasible in patients with atrial fibrillation and heart failure, providing a useful patient-centered outcome assessment.
AF symptom burden measurement may detect treatment differences in adverse events; leaves open routine adoption pending validation.
BACKGROUND: Safe and effective pharmacologic therapy for atrial fibrillation (AF) in heart failure (HF) is an unmet need. In AF clinical trials, the standard primary endpoint of time to first symptomatic AF event (TTFSE) has several disadvantages, which could theoretically be overcome by measurement of AF-specific symptoms burden during an entire follow-up period. OBJECTIVES: The authors sought to develop and validate a method of measuring symptom burden of AF in a HF population. METHODS: ) that was subjected to psychometric testing, anchor validation, and endpoint efficiency comparison to TTFSE. RESULTS: also identified treatment group differences in cardiovascular serious adverse events and AF interventions and in recent-onset AF provided specificity for AF- or worsening HF-associated symptoms (P < 0.001 for each). CONCLUSIONS: Measurement of symptoms burden throughout clinical trial follow-up is feasible in AF/HF and should be useful for evaluating patient-centered outcomes in AF prevention trials. (Genetically Targeted Therapy for the Prevention of Symptomatic Atrial Fibrillation in Patients With Heart Failure [GENETIC-AF]; NCT01970501).
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Carroll et al. (2024) conducted an RCT in Heart failure with atrial fibrillation. Measurement of AF-specific symptoms burden vs. Time to first symptomatic AF event (TTFSE) was evaluated on Treatment group differences in cardiovascular serious adverse events, AF interventions, and recent-onset AF (p=< 0.001). Measurement of AF-specific symptoms burden identified treatment group differences in cardiovascular serious adverse events and AF interventions (P < 0.001).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: