Effect of P2Y12 Inhibitors on Organ Support-Free Survival in Critically Ill Patients Hospitalized for COVID-19: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Platelet activation is a potential therapeutic target in patients with COVID-19. Objective: To evaluate the effect of P2Y12 inhibition among critically ill patients hospitalized for COVID-19. Design, Setting, and Participants: This international, open-label, adaptive platform, 1:1 randomized clinical trial included critically ill (requiring intensive care-level support) patients hospitalized with COVID-19. Patients were enrolled between February 26, 2021, through June 22, 2022. Enrollment was discontinued on June 22, 2022, by the trial leadership in coordination with the study sponsor given a marked slowing of the enrollment rate of critically ill patients. Intervention: Participants were randomly assigned to receive a P2Y12 inhibitor or no P2Y12 inhibitor (usual care) for 14 days or until hospital discharge, whichever was sooner. Ticagrelor was the preferred P2Y12 inhibitor. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was organ support-free days, evaluated on an ordinal scale that combined in-hospital death and, for participants who survived to hospital discharge, the number of days free of cardiovascular or respiratory organ support up to day 21 of the index hospitalization. The primary safety outcome was major bleeding, as defined by the International Society on Thrombosis and Hemostasis. Results: At the time of trial termination, 949 participants (median [IQR] age, 56 [46-65] years; 603 male [63.5%]) had been randomly assigned, 479 to the P2Y12 inhibitor group and 470 to usual care. In the P2Y12 inhibitor group, ticagrelor was used in 372 participants (78.8%) and clopidogrel in 100 participants (21.2%). The estimated adjusted odds ratio (AOR) for the effect of P2Y12 inhibitor on organ support-free days was 1.07 (95% credible interval, 0.85-1.33). The posterior probability of superiority (defined as an OR > 1.0) was 72.9%. Overall, 354 participants (74.5%) in the P2Y12 inhibitor group and 339 participants (72.4%) in the usual care group survived to hospital discharge (median AOR, 1.15; 95% credible interval, 0.84-1.55; posterior probability of superiority, 80.8%). Major bleeding occurred in 13 participants (2.7%) in the P2Y12 inhibitor group and 13 (2.8%) in the usual care group. The estimated mortality rate at 90 days for the P2Y12 inhibitor group was 25.5% and for the usual care group was 27.0% (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.96; 95% CI, 0.76-1.23; P = .77). Conclusions and Relevance: In this randomized clinical trial of critically ill participants hospitalized for COVID-19, treatment with a P2Y12 inhibitor did not improve the number of days alive and free of cardiovascular or respiratory organ support. The use of the P2Y12 inhibitor did not increase major bleeding compared with usual care. These data do not support routine use of a P2Y12 inhibitor in critically ill patients hospitalized for COVID-19. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04505774.

Operational challenges and mitigation measures during the COVID-19 pandemic-Lessons from DELIVER.

BACKGROUND: Catastrophic disruptions in care delivery threaten the operational efficiency and potentially the validity of clinical research efforts, in particular randomized clinical trials. Most recently, the COVID-19 pandemic affected essentially all aspects of care delivery and clinical research conduct. While consensus statements and clinical guidance documents have detailed potential mitigation measures, few real-world experiences detailing clinical trial adaptations to the COVID-19 pandemic exist, particularly among, large, global registrational cardiovascular trials. METHODS: We outline the operational impact of COVID-19 and resultant mitigation measures in the Dapagliflozin Evaluation to Improve the LIVEs of Patients with Preserved Ejection Fraction Heart Failure (DELIVER) trial, one of the largest and most globally diverse experiences with COVID-19 of any cardiovascular clinical trial to date. Specifically, we address the needed coordination between academic investigators, trial leadership, clinical sites, and the supporting sponsor to ensure the safety of participants and trial staff, to maintain the fidelity of trial operations, and to prospectively adapt statistical analyses plans to evaluate the impact of COVID-19 and the pandemic at large on trial participants. These discussions included key operational issues such as ensuring delivery of study medications, adaptations to study visits, enhanced COVID-19 related endpoint adjudication, and protocol and analytical plan revisions. CONCLUSION: Our findings may have important implications for establishing consensus on prospective contingency planning in future clinical trials. CLINICALTRIAL: gov: NCT03619213. CLINICALTRIAL: GOV: NCT03619213.

Nationwide Utilization of Danish Government Electronic letter system for increasing inFLUenza vaccine uptake (NUDGE-FLU): Study protocol for a nationwide randomized implementation trial.

BACKGROUND: Annual influenza vaccination is widely recommended in older adults and other high-risk groups including patients with cardiovascular disease. The real-world effectiveness of influenza vaccination is limited by suboptimal uptake and effective strategies for increasing vaccination rates are therefore needed. The purpose of this trial is to investigate whether behavioral nudges digitally delivered via the Danish nationwide mandatory governmental electronic letter system can increase influenza vaccination uptake among older adults. METHODS: The NUDGE-FLU trial is a randomized implementation trial randomizing all Danish citizens aged 65 years and above without an exemption from the Danish mandatory governmental electronic letter system to receive no digitally delivered behavioral nudge (usual care arm) or to receive one of 9 electronic letters (intervention arms) each leveraging different behavioral science strategies. The trial has randomized 964,870 participants with randomization clustered at the household level (n = 691,820 households). Intervention letters were delivered on September 16, 2022, and follow-up is currently ongoing. All trial data are captured using the nationwide Danish administrative health registries. The primary end point is the receipt of an influenza vaccine on or before January 1, 2023. The secondary end point is time to vaccination. Exploratory end points include clinical events such as hospitalization for influenza or pneumonia, cardiovascular events, all-cause hospitalization, and all-cause mortality. DISCUSSION: The nationwide randomized NUDGE-FLU trial is one of the largest implementation trials ever conducted and will provide important insights into effective communication strategies to maximize vaccination uptake among high-risk groups. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov: NCT05542004, registered September 15, 2022, https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT05542004.

Dapagliflozin in Heart Failure with Mildly Reduced or Preserved Ejection Fraction.

BACKGROUND: Sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 (SGLT2) inhibitors reduce the risk of hospitalization for heart failure and cardiovascular death among patients with chronic heart failure and a left ventricular ejection fraction of 40% or less. Whether SGLT2 inhibitors are effective in patients with a higher left ventricular ejection fraction remains less certain. METHODS: We randomly assigned 6263 patients with heart failure and a left ventricular ejection fraction of more than 40% to receive dapagliflozin (at a dose of 10 mg once daily) or matching placebo, in addition to usual therapy. The primary outcome was a composite of worsening heart failure (which was defined as either an unplanned hospitalization for heart failure or an urgent visit for heart failure) or cardiovascular death, as assessed in a time-to-event analysis. RESULTS: Over a median of 2.3 years, the primary outcome occurred in 512 of 3131 patients (16.4%) in the dapagliflozin group and in 610 of 3132 patients (19.5%) in the placebo group (hazard ratio, 0.82; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.73 to 0.92; P<0.001). Worsening heart failure occurred in 368 patients (11.8%) in the dapagliflozin group and in 455 patients (14.5%) in the placebo group (hazard ratio, 0.79; 95% CI, 0.69 to 0.91); cardiovascular death occurred in 231 patients (7.4%) and 261 patients (8.3%), respectively (hazard ratio, 0.88; 95% CI, 0.74 to 1.05). Total events and symptom burden were lower in the dapagliflozin group than in the placebo group. Results were similar among patients with a left ventricular ejection fraction of 60% or more and those with a left ventricular ejection fraction of less than 60%, and results were similar in prespecified subgroups, including patients with or without diabetes. The incidence of adverse events was similar in the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: Dapagliflozin reduced the combined risk of worsening heart failure or cardiovascular death among patients with heart failure and a mildly reduced or preserved ejection fraction. (Funded by AstraZeneca; DELIVER ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03619213.).

Re-examining the widespread policy of stopping sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors during acute illness: A perspective based on the updated evidence.

Sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 (SGLT2) inhibitors are now seen as an integral part of therapy in type 2 diabetes to control not only blood glucose but to improve cardiovascular and kidney outcomes. Diabetic ketoacidosis (DKA) is an uncommon but serious complication of type 2 diabetes, which has a high case fatality rate. The absolute risk of DKA in large, prospective randomized clinical trials in people with type 2 diabetes using SGLT2 inhibitors has been low, although the relative risk is higher in those assigned to SGLT2 inhibitors compared with placebo. In those without diabetes but prescribed SGLT2 inhibitors for heart failure or chronic kidney disease, the risk of DKA is similar to placebo. Over the course of the COVID-19 pandemic, cases of DKA have also been reported in cases of COVID-19 hospitalizations. Consensus guidelines have recommended that SGLT2 inhibitors should be avoided in cases of serious illness and suggest they are not recommended for routine in-hospital use. However, recent data suggest potential beneficial effects of SGLT2 inhibitors in the setting of acute illness with COVID-19 with no increase in adverse events and low rates of DKA, which were non-severe. Given the low rates of DKA in cardiovascular outcome trials and in hospitalized patients with type 2 diabetes, the potential for SGLT2 inhibitors not being re-initiated following discharge and their cardiovascular and kidney benefits, we believe the practice of routine 'sick day' guidance should be re-examined based on current evidence with a call for further research in this area. Furthermore, high-quality trials of initiation of SGLT2 inhibitors in people admitted to hospital with cardiovascular disease or kidney disease, and trials of continuation of SGLT2 inhibitors in people, with careful monitoring of DKA should be conducted. These should be further supplemented with large observational studies.

Feasibility of randomizing Danish citizens aged 65-79 years to high-dose quadrivalent influenza vaccine vs. standard-dose quadrivalent influenza vaccine in a pragmatic registry-based setting: rationale and design of the DANFLU-1 Trial.

BACKGROUND: High-dose influenza vaccines provide better protection against influenza infection than standard-dose in persons aged 65 years and above; however, in most countries, high-dose vaccines are not widely implemented. Assessing the relative effectiveness of high-dose compared to standard-dose vaccines on hospitalizations and mortality would enable more robust public health and cost-effectiveness estimates. This study aims to investigate the feasibility of conducting a pragmatic randomized clinical trial in Denmark comparing high-dose to standard-dose vaccines utilizing existing vaccination infrastructure and the Danish nationwide health registries for data collection. METHODS: The DANFLU-1 trial (NCT05048589) is a pragmatic, open-label, active-controlled randomized trial randomizing Danish citizens aged 65-79 years to either high-dose quadrivalent influenza vaccine or standard-dose quadrivalent influenza vaccine. The study utilizes the infrastructure of a private vaccination provider (Danske Lægers Vaccinations Service) for recruitment, inclusion, randomization, and vaccination. All collection of baseline and follow-up data including safety monitoring is performed centrally by the Department of Cardiology at Herlev and Gentofte Hospital, Copenhagen, Denmark using the Danish nationwide health registries. The study aims to include 40,000 participants during the 2021/2022 influenza season. The primary endpoints address feasibility and include the number of participants enrolled, randomization balance, and representativeness compared to the Danish general population. Relative vaccine effectiveness will also be assessed, however, this feasibility study is not powered for clinical outcomes and may be affected by the COVID-19 pandemic. DISCUSSION: The DANFLU-1 study is investigating the feasibility of conducting a large-scale pragmatic clinical trial in Denmark utilizing existing infrastructure and the Danish nationwide registries. This will provide valuable insight, especially for potential future fully powered vaccine trials, but also for trials wishing to investigate other interventions. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov : NCT05048589 , registered September 17, 2021.

Feasibility of randomizing Danish citizens aged 65–79 years to high-dose quadrivalent influenza vaccine vs. standard-dose quadrivalent influenza vaccine in a pragmatic registry-based setting: rationale and design of the DANFLU-1 Trial

Background High-dose influenza vaccines provide better protection against influenza infection than standard-dose in persons aged 65 years and above;however, in most countries, high-dose vaccines are not widely implemented. Assessing the relative effectiveness of high-dose compared to standard-dose vaccines on hospitalizations and mortality would enable more robust public health and cost-effectiveness estimates. This study aims to investigate the feasibility of conducting a pragmatic randomized clinical trial in Denmark comparing high-dose to standard-dose vaccines utilizing existing vaccination infrastructure and the Danish nationwide health registries for data collection. Methods The DANFLU-1 trial (NCT05048589) is a pragmatic, open-label, active-controlled randomized trial randomizing Danish citizens aged 65–79 years to either high-dose quadrivalent influenza vaccine or standard-dose quadrivalent influenza vaccine. The study utilizes the infrastructure of a private vaccination provider (Danske Lægers Vaccinations Service) for recruitment, inclusion, randomization, and vaccination. All collection of baseline and follow-up data including safety monitoring is performed centrally by the Department of Cardiology at Herlev and Gentofte Hospital, Copenhagen, Denmark using the Danish nationwide health registries. The study aims to include 40,000 participants during the 2021/2022 influenza season. The primary endpoints address feasibility and include the number of participants enrolled, randomization balance, and representativeness compared to the Danish general population. Relative vaccine effectiveness will also be assessed, however, this feasibility study is not powered for clinical outcomes and may be affected by the COVID-19 pandemic. Discussion The DANFLU-1 study is investigating the feasibility of conducting a large-scale pragmatic clinical trial in Denmark utilizing existing infrastructure and the Danish nationwide registries. This will provide valuable insight, especially for potential future fully powered vaccine trials, but also for trials wishing to investigate other interventions. Trial registration Clinicaltrials.gov: NCT05048589, registered September 17, 2021.

Association of Influenza Vaccination With Cardiovascular Risk: A Meta-analysis.

Importance: Influenza infection is associated with increased cardiovascular hospitalization and mortality. Our prior systematic review and meta-analysis hypothesized that influenza vaccination was associated with a lower risk of cardiovascular events. Objective: To evaluate, via an updated meta-analysis, if seasonal influenza vaccination is associated with a lower risk of fatal and nonfatal cardiovascular events and assess whether the newest cardiovascular outcome trial results are consistent with prior findings. Data Sources: A previously published meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and a large 2021 cardiovascular outcome trial. Study Selection: Studies with RCTs published between 2000 and 2021 that randomized participants to either influenza vaccine or placebo/control. Eligible participants were inpatients and outpatients recruited for international multicenter RCTs and randomized to receive either influenza vaccine or placebo/control. Data Extraction and Synthesis: PRISMA guidelines were followed in the extraction of study details, and risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane Collaboration tool. Trial quality was evaluated using Cochrane criteria. Data were analyzed January 2020 and December 2021. Main Outcomes and Measures: Random-effects Mantel-Haenszel risk ratios (RRs) and 95% CIs were derived for a composite of major adverse cardiovascular events and cardiovascular mortality within 12 months of follow-up. Where available, analyses were stratified by patients with and without recent acute coronary syndrome (ACS) within 1 year of randomization. Results: Six published RCTs comprising a total of 9001 patients were included (mean age, 65.5 years; 42.5% women; 52.3% with a cardiac history). Overall, influenza vaccine was associated with a lower risk of composite cardiovascular events (3.6% vs 5.4%; RR, 0.66; 95% CI, 0.53-0.83; P < .001). A treatment interaction was detected between patients with recent ACS (RR, 0.55; 95% CI, 0.41-0.75) and without recent ACS (RR, 1.00; 95% CI, 0.68-1.47) (P for interaction = .02). For cardiovascular mortality, a treatment interaction was also detected between patients with recent ACS (RR, 0.44; 95% CI, 0.23-0.85) and without recent ACS (RR, 1.45; 95% CI, 0.84-2.50) (P for interaction = .006), while 1.7% of vaccine recipients died of cardiovascular causes compared with 2.5% of placebo or control recipients (RR, 0.74; 95% CI, 0.42-1.30; P = .29). Conclusions and Relevance: In this study, receipt of influenza vaccination was associated with a 34% lower risk of major adverse cardiovascular events, and individuals with recent ACS had a 45% lower risk. Given influenza poses a threat to population health during the COVID-19 pandemic, it is integral to counsel high-risk patients on the cardiovascular benefits of influenza vaccination.

Effect of Crizanlizumab, a P-Selectin Inhibitor, in COVID-19: A Placebo-Controlled, Randomized Trial.

COVID-19 is characterized by vascular inflammation and thrombosis, including elevations in P-selectin, a mediator of inflammation released by endothelial cells. We tested the effect of P-selectin inhibition on biomarkers of thrombosis and inflammation in patients with COVID-19. Hospitalized patients with moderate COVID-19 were randomly assigned to receive either placebo or crizanlizumab, a P-selectin inhibitor, in a double-blind fashion. Crizanlizumab reduced P-selectin levels by 89%. Crizanlizumab increased D-dimer levels by 77% and decreased prothrombin fragment. There were no significant differences between crizanlizumab and placebo for clinical endpoints. Crizanlizumab was well tolerated. Crizanlizumab may induce thrombolysis in the setting of COVID-19. (Crizanlizumab for Treating COVID-19 Vasculopathy [CRITICAL]; NCT04435184).

The Landscape of Cardiovascular Clinical Trials in the United States Initiated Before and During COVID-19

The Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has taken an unprecedented toll on the American healthcare system and economy. While numerous COVID-19 clinical trials have been initiated in hopes of curtailing its impact, most pre-existing clinical trials have been forced to suspend or limit activity, which itself can have significant consequences. Missed or postponed trial-related assessments may hinder data quality, and heterogeneity in data collection both across the country and over time introduces bias. In addition, COVID-19 may lower specific event rates due to patients avoiding the healthcare system that could result in underpowered outcome analyses, or conversely, some endpoints (mortality) may be inflated.

Angiotensin Receptor-Neprilysin Inhibition in Acute Myocardial Infarction.

BACKGROUND: In patients with symptomatic heart failure, sacubitril-valsartan has been found to reduce the risk of hospitalization and death from cardiovascular causes more effectively than an angiotensin-converting-enzyme inhibitor. Trials comparing the effects of these drugs in patients with acute myocardial infarction have been lacking. METHODS: We randomly assigned patients with myocardial infarction complicated by a reduced left ventricular ejection fraction, pulmonary congestion, or both to receive either sacubitril-valsartan (97 mg of sacubitril and 103 mg of valsartan twice daily) or ramipril (5 mg twice daily) in addition to recommended therapy. The primary outcome was death from cardiovascular causes or incident heart failure (outpatient symptomatic heart failure or heart failure leading to hospitalization), whichever occurred first. RESULTS: A total of 5661 patients underwent randomization; 2830 were assigned to receive sacubitril-valsartan and 2831 to receive ramipril. Over a median of 22 months, a primary-outcome event occurred in 338 patients (11.9%) in the sacubitril-valsartan group and in 373 patients (13.2%) in the ramipril group (hazard ratio, 0.90; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.78 to 1.04; P = 0.17). Death from cardiovascular causes or hospitalization for heart failure occurred in 308 patients (10.9%) in the sacubitril-valsartan group and in 335 patients (11.8%) in the ramipril group (hazard ratio, 0.91; 95% CI, 0.78 to 1.07); death from cardiovascular causes in 168 (5.9%) and 191 (6.7%), respectively (hazard ratio, 0.87; 95% CI, 0.71 to 1.08); and death from any cause in 213 (7.5%) and 242 (8.5%), respectively (hazard ratio, 0.88; 95% CI, 0.73 to 1.05). Treatment was discontinued because of an adverse event in 357 patients (12.6%) in the sacubitril-valsartan group and 379 patients (13.4%) in the ramipril group. CONCLUSIONS: Sacubitril-valsartan was not associated with a significantly lower incidence of death from cardiovascular causes or incident heart failure than ramipril among patients with acute myocardial infarction. (Funded by Novartis; PARADISE-MI ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02924727.).

Excess mortality in solid organ transplant recipients hospitalized with COVID-19: A large-scale comparison of SOT recipients hospitalized with or without COVID-19.

BACKGROUND: Solid-organ transplant (SOT) recipients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) have higher risk of adverse outcomes compared to the general population. Whether hospitalized SOT recipients with COVID-19 are at higher risk of mortality than SOT recipients hospitalized for other causes, including non-COVID-19 pneumonia, remains unclear. METHODS: We used logistic regression to compare outcomes of SOT recipients hospitalized with COVID-19 to non-COVID-19 related admissions and with non-COVID-19 pneumonia. RESULTS: Of 17,012 hospitalized SOT recipients, 1682 had COVID-19. Those with COVID-19 had higher odds of ICU admission (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 2.12 [95%CI: 1.88-2.39]) and mechanical ventilation (aOR 3.75 [95%CI: 3.24-4.33]). COVID-19 was associated with higher odds of in-hospital death, which was more pronounced earlier in the pandemic (aOR 9.74 [95%CI: 7.08-13.39] for April/May vs. aOR 7.08 [95%CI: 5.62-8.93] for June through November 2020; P-interaction = .03). Compared to SOT recipients hospitalized with non-COVID-19 pneumonia, odds of in-hospital death were higher in SOT recipients with COVID-19 (aOR 2.44 [95% CI: 1.90-3.13]), regardless of time of hospitalization (P-interaction > .40). CONCLUSIONS: In this large cohort of SOT recipients, hospitalization with COVID-19 was associated with higher odds of complications and in-hospital mortality than non-COVID-19 related admissions, and 2.5-fold higher odds of in-hospital mortality, compared to SOT recipients with non-COVID-19 pneumonia.

Recovery of cardiac function following COVID-19 - ECHOVID-19: a prospective longitudinal cohort study.

AIMS: The degree of cardiovascular sequelae following COVID-19 remains unknown. The aim of this study was to investigate whether cardiac function recovers following COVID-19. METHODS AND RESULTS: A consecutive sample of patients hospitalized with COVID-19 was prospectively included in this longitudinal study. All patients underwent an echocardiographic examination during hospitalization and 2 months later. All participants were successfully matched 1:1 with COVID-19-free controls by age and sex. A total of 91 patients were included (mean age 63 ± 12 years, 59% male). A median of 77 days (interquartile range: 72-92) passed between the two examinations. Right ventricular (RV) function improved following resolution of COVID-19: tricuspid annular plane systolic excursion (TAPSE) (2.28 ± 0.40 cm vs. 2.11 ± 0.38 cm, P < 0.001) and RV longitudinal strain (RVLS) (25.3 ± 5.5% vs. 19.9 ± 5.8%, P < 0.001). In contrast, left ventricular (LV) systolic function assessed by global longitudinal strain (GLS) did not significantly improve (17.4 ± 2.9% vs. 17.6 ± 3.3%, P = 0.6). N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide decreased between the two examinations [177.6 (80.3-408.0) ng/L vs. 11.7 (5.7-24.0) ng/L, P < 0.001]. None of the participants had elevated troponins at follow-up compared to 18 (27.7%) during hospitalization. Recovered COVID-19 patients had significantly lower GLS (17.4 ± 2.9% vs. 18.8 ± 2.9%, P < 0.001 and adjusted P = 0.004), TAPSE (2.28 ± 0.40 cm vs. 2.67 ± 0.44 cm, P < 0.001 and adjusted P < 0.001), and RVLS (25.3 ± 5.5% vs. 26.6 ± 5.8%, P = 0.50 and adjusted P < 0.001) compared to matched controls. CONCLUSION: Acute COVID-19 affected negatively RV function and cardiac biomarkers but recovered following resolution of COVID-19. In contrast, the observed reduced LV function during acute COVID-19 did not improve post-COVID-19. Compared to the matched controls, both LV and RV function remained impaired.