BACKGROUND Inflammation is associated with adverse cardiovascular events. Data from recent trials suggest that colchicine reduces the risk of cardiovascular events. METHODS In this multicenter trial with a 2-by-2 factorial design, we randomly assigned patients who had myocardial infarction to receive either colchicine or placebo and either spironolactone or placebo. The results of the colchicine trial are reported here. The primary efficacy outcome was a composite of death from cardiovascular causes, recurrent myocardial infarction, stroke, or unplanned ischemia-driven coronary revascularization, evaluated in a time-to-event analysis. C-reactive protein was measured at 3 months in a subgroup of patients, and safety was also assessed. RESULTS A total of 7062 patients at 104 centers in 14 countries underwent randomization; at the time of analysis, the vital status was unknown for 45 patients (0.6%), and this information was most likely missing at random. A primary-outcome event occurred in 322 of 3528 patients (9.1%) in the colchicine group and 327 of 3534 patients (9.3%) in the placebo group over a median follow-up period of 3 years (hazard ratio, 0.99; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.85 to 1.16; P=0.93). The incidence of individual components of the primary outcome appeared to be similar in the two groups. The least-squares mean difference in C-reactive protein levels between the colchicine group and the placebo group at 3 months, adjusted according to the baseline values, was -1.28 mg per liter (95% CI, -1.81 to -0.75). Diarrhea occurred in a higher percentage of patients with colchicine than with placebo (10.2% vs. 6.6%; P<0.001), but the incidence of serious infections did not differ between groups. CONCLUSIONS Among patients who had myocardial infarction, treatment with colchicine, when started soon after myocardial infarction and continued for a median of 3 years, did not reduce the incidence of the composite primary outcome (death from cardiovascular causes, recurrent myocardial infarction, stroke, or unplanned ischemia-driven coronary revascularization).
BACKGROUND:Oral anticoagulation is recommended after ablation for atrial fibrillation among patients at high risk for stroke. Left atrial appendage closure is a mechanical alternative to anticoagulation, but data regarding its use after atrial fibrillation ablation are lacking. METHODS:We conducted an international randomized trial involving 1600 patients with atrial fibrillation who had an elevated score (≥2 in men and ≥3 in women) on the CHA2DS2-VASc scale (range, 0 to 9, with higher scores indicating a greater risk of stroke) and who underwent catheter ablation. Patients were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to undergo left atrial appendage closure or receive oral anticoagulation. The primary safety end point, tested for superiority, was non-procedure-related major bleeding or clinically relevant nonmajor bleeding. The primary efficacy end point, tested for noninferiority, was a composite of death from any cause, stroke, or systemic embolism at 36 months. The secondary end point, tested for noninferiority, was major bleeding, including procedure-related bleeding, through 36 months. RESULTS:A total of 803 patients were assigned to undergo left atrial appendage closure, and 797 to receive anticoagulant therapy. The mean (±SD) age of the patients was 69.6±7.7 years, 34.1% of the patients were women, and the mean CHA2DS2-VASc score was 3.5±1.3. At 36 months, a primary safety end-point event had occurred in 65 patients (8.5%) in the left atrial appendage closure group (device group) and in 137 patients (18.1%) in the anticoagulation group (P<0.001 for superiority); a primary efficacy end-point event had occurred in 41 patients (5.3%) and 44 patients (5.8%), respectively (P<0.001 for noninferiority); and a secondary end-point event had occurred in 3.9% and 5.0% (P<0.001 for noninferiority). Complications related to the appendage closure device or procedure occurred in 23 patients. CONCLUSIONS:Among patients who underwent catheter-based atrial fibrillation ablation, left atrial appendage closure was associated with a lower risk of non-procedure-related major or clinically relevant nonmajor bleeding than oral anticoagulation and was noninferior to oral anticoagulation with respect to a composite of death from any cause, stroke, or systemic embolism at 36 months. (Funded by Boston Scientific; OPTION ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03795298.).
Background IgG4-related disease is a multiorgan, relapsing, fibroinflammatory, immune-mediated disorder with no approved therapy. Inebilizumab targets and depletes CD19+ B cells and may be effective for treating patients with IgG4-related disease. Methods In this phase 3, multicenter, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trial, adults with active IgG4-related disease underwent randomization in a 1:1 ratio to receive inebilizumab (300-mg intravenous infusions on days 1 and 15 and week 26) or placebo for a 52-week treatment period. Participants in both groups received identical glucocorticoid tapers. Glucocorticoids were allowed to treat disease flares, but background immunosuppressants were not permitted. The primary end point was the first treated, adjudicated disease flare during the treatment period, assessed in a time-to-event analysis. Key secondary end points were the annualized flare rate and treatment-free and glucocorticoid-free complete remission. Results A total of 135 participants with IgG4-related disease underwent randomization: 68 participants were assigned to receive inebilizumab and 67 were assigned to receive placebo. Treatment with inebilizumab reduced flare risk; 7 participants (10%) in the inebilizumab group had at least one flare, as compared with 40 participants (60%) in the placebo group (hazard ratio, 0.13; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.06 to 0.28; P<0.001). The annualized flare rate was lower with inebilizumab than with placebo (rate ratio, 0.14; 95% CI, 0.06 to 0.31; P<0.001). More participants in the inebilizumab group than in the placebo group had flare-free, treatment-free complete remission (odds ratio, 4.68; 95% CI, 2.21 to 9.91; P<0.001) and flare-free, glucocorticoid-free complete remission (odds ratio, 4.96; 95% CI, 2.34 to 10.52; P<0.001). Serious adverse events occurred during the treatment period in 12 of the participants (18%) who received inebilizumab and 6 of the participants (9%) who received placebo. Conclusions Inebilizumab reduced the risk of flares of IgG4-related disease and increased the likelihood of flare-free complete remission at 1 year, confirming the role of CD19-targeted B-cell depletion as a potential treatment for IgG4-related disease.
BACKGROUND:Treatments for Dupuytren's contracture include limited fasciectomy and collagenase injection. Comparisons of the effectiveness of these treatments have been limited. METHODS:We performed an unblinded, multicenter, pragmatic, two-group, randomized, controlled noninferiority trial comparing collagenase injection with limited fasciectomy in persons with moderate Dupuytren's contracture. The primary outcome was the score on the Patient Evaluation Measure-Hand Health Profile (PEM), a questionnaire for assessing hand health as reported by the patient, at 1 year after treatment. Scores on the PEM range from 0 to 100, with higher scores indicating worse outcomes. The prespecified noninferiority margin was 6 points. RESULTS:A total of 672 persons (336 per group) were assigned to receive collagenase injection or to undergo limited fasciectomy. The primary analysis included 599 persons: 314 in the collagenase group and 285 in the limited-fasciectomy group. The mean score on the PEM at 1 year was 17.8 among the 284 patients with available data in the collagenase group and 11.9 among the 250 patients with available data in the limited-fasciectomy group (estimated difference, 5.9 points; 95% confidence interval [CI], 3.1 to 8.8; one-sided P = 0.49 for noninferiority). Among the patients with available data (229 patients in the collagenase group and 197 patients in the limited-fasciectomy group), the estimated difference in the mean score on the PEM at 2 years was 7.2 points (95% CI, 4.2 to 10.9). Moderate or severe complications of treatment occurred in 1.8% of the patients in the collagenase group and in 5.1% of those in the limited-fasciectomy group; recurrent contracture resulted in reintervention in 14.6% and 3.4%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS:Collagenase injection was not noninferior to limited fasciectomy with respect to the score on the PEM at 1 year after treatment. (Funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research Health Technology Assessment Programme; DISC ISRCTN Registry number ISRCTN18254597.).
Importance Blood transfusions are commonly administered to patients with acute brain injury. The optimal hemoglobin transfusion threshold is uncertain in this patient population. Objective To assess the impact on neurological outcome of 2 different hemoglobin thresholds to guide red blood cell transfusions in patients with acute brain injury. Design, Setting, and Participants Multicenter, phase 3, parallel-group, investigator-initiated, pragmatic, open-label randomized clinical trial conducted in 72 intensive care units across 22 countries. Eligible patients had traumatic brain injury, aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage, or intracerebral hemorrhage; hemoglobin values below 9 g/dL within the first 10 days after injury; and an expected intensive care unit stay of at least 72 hours. Enrollment occurred between September 1, 2017, and December 31, 2022. The last day of follow-up was June 30, 2023. Interventions Eight hundred fifty patients were randomly assigned to undergo a liberal (transfusion triggered by hemoglobin <9 g/dL; n = 408) or a restrictive (transfusion triggered by hemoglobin <7 g/dL; n = 442) transfusion strategy over a 28-day period. Main Outcomes and Measures The primary outcome was occurrence of an unfavorable neurological outcome, defined as a Glasgow Outcome Scale Extended score between 1 and 5, at 180 days following randomization. There were 14 prespecified serious adverse events, including occurrence of cerebral ischemia after randomization. Results Among 820 patients who completed the trial (mean age, 51 years; 376 [45.9%] women), 806 had available data on the primary outcome, 393 in the liberal strategy group and 413 in the restrictive strategy group. The liberal strategy group received a median of 2 (IQR, 1-3) units of blood, and the restrictive strategy group received a median of 0 (IQR, 0-1) units of blood, with an absolute mean difference of 1.0 unit (95% CI, 0.87-1.12 units). At 180 days after randomization, 246 patients (62.6%) in the liberal strategy group had an unfavorable neurological outcome compared with 300 patients (72.6%) in the restrictive strategy group (absolute difference, -10.0% [95% CI, -16.5% to -3.6%]; adjusted relative risk, 0.86 [95% CI, 0.79-0.94]; P = .002). The effect of the transfusion thresholds on neurological outcome at 180 days was consistent across prespecified subgroups. In the liberal strategy group, 35 (8.8%) of 397 patients had at least 1 cerebral ischemic event compared with 57 (13.5%) of 423 in the restrictive strategy group (relative risk, 0.65 [95% CI, 0.44-0.97]). Conclusions and Relevance Patients with acute brain injury and anemia randomized to a liberal transfusion strategy were less likely to have an unfavorable neurological outcome than those randomized to a restrictive strategy.
