Key result
Icosapent ethyl nearly doubles AF hospitalizations in patients with prior AF while preserving CV benefits.
RCT (n=8,179)
Randomized
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Background In REDUCE‐IT (Reduction of Cardiovascular Events With Icosapent Ethyl–Intervention Trial), icosapent ethyl (IPE) versus placebo) reduced cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, stroke, coronary revascularization, or unstable angina requiring hospitalization, but was associated with increased atrial fibrillation/atrial flutter (AF) hospitalization (3.1% IPE versus 2.1% placebo; P =0.004). Methods and Results We performed post hoc efficacy and safety analyses of patients with or without prior AF (before randomization) and with or without in‐study time‐varying AF hospitalization to assess relationships of IPE (versus placebo) and outcomes. In‐study AF hospitalization event rates were higher in patients with prior AF (12.5% versus 6.3%, IPE versus placebo; P =0.007) versus without prior AF (2.2% versus 1.6%, IPE versus placebo; P =0.09). Serious bleeding rates trended higher in patients with (7.3% versus 6.0%, IPE versus placebo; P =0.59) versus without prior AF (2.3% versus 1.7%, IPE versus placebo; P =0.08). With IPE, serious bleeding trended higher regardless of prior AF (interaction P value [ P int ]=0.61) or postrandomization AF hospitalization ( P int =0.66). Patients with prior AF (n=751, 9.2%) versus without prior AF (n=7428, 90.8%) had similar relative risk reductions of the primary composite and key secondary composite end points with IPE versus placebo ( P int =0.37 and P int =0.55, respectively). Conclusions In REDUCE‐IT, in‐study AF hospitalization rates were higher in patients with prior AF especially in those randomized to IPE. Although serious bleeding trended higher in those randomized to IPE versus placebo over the course of the study, serious bleeding was not different regardless of prior AF or in‐study AF hospitalization. Patients with prior AF or in‐study AF hospitalization had consistent relative risk reductions across primary, key secondary, and stroke end points with IPE. Registration URL: https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT01492361 ; Unique Identifier: NCT01492361
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Olshansky et al. (2023) conducted an RCT in Cardiovascular risk with or without atrial fibrillation/atrial flutter (n=8,179). Icosapent ethyl (IPE) vs. Placebo was evaluated on Cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, stroke, coronary revascularization, or unstable angina requiring hospitalization (and in-study AF hospitalization) (p=0.004 (overall AF hospitalization); P_int=0.37 (primary composite by prior AF)). Icosapent ethyl increased AF hospitalization vs placebo in patients with prior AF but provided consistent primary CV risk reductions regardless of prior AF.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: