Lee, K L

Abstract Background Sex-specific outcomes may differ amongst patients receiving catheter ablation for atrial fibrillation (AF). Purpose Assess sex-specific outcomes in the patients randomized to catheter ablation or drug therapy in CABANA. Methods CABANA randomized 2204 pts with AF to catheter ablation or drug therapy (rate/rhythm-control). The outcomes of combined death, disabling stroke, severe bleeding, or cardiac arrest (intention to treat-ITT) or all-cause death were not different. But, ablation significantly improved combined death or CV hospitalization. This analysis compares clinical characteristics by sex and determines sex-specific hazard ratios based on a comparison of ablation vs drug therapy. Results Females were 37.3% of ablation and 37.0% of drug therapy patients. Females were older, more often white race, had less CAD, or sleep apnea, but had higher NYHA Class, higher CHA2DS2VASc, and more often had paroxysmal (v. persistent) AF, and prior AF hospitalization. (Table) HTN, CVA and diabetes were the same (Table). For the CABANA primary endpoint, an ITT comparison of ablation vs. drug therapy, showed a female hazard ratio (HR) of 1.14 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.70–1.86), and a male HR of 0.74, (95% CI 0.52–1.06). For all-cause mortality, the female HR was 0.75 (95% CI 0.41–1.40) and male HR was 0.91 (95% CI 0.59–1.40) and for all-cause mortality or CV hospitalization, the female HR was 0.90 (95% CI 0.75–1.09) and male HR was 0.79 (95% CI 0.69–0.92). All interaction p values were non-significant. Recurrent AF (post 90-day blanking) was significantly reduced for both females and males: female HR 0.64 (95% CI 0.51–0.82), male HR 0.46 95% CI 0.39–0.56), p=0.035 Clinical Characteristics and Outcomes Baseline Characteristics Female (N=818) Male (N=1385) p-value Age: Median (Q1, Q3) 69 (65, 74) 66 (60, 71) <0.001 White 766 (93.9%) 1259 (91.0%) 0.015 CAD 92 (11.2%) 332 (24.0%) <0.001 NYHA ≥II 345 (42.4%) 433 (31.5%) <0.001 Sleep apnea 136 (16.6%) 372 (26.9%) <0.001 CHA2DS2-VASc: Median (Q1, Q3) 3 (3, 4) 2 (1, 3) <0.001 Paroxysmal AF 406 (49.6%) 540 (39.0%) <0.001 Persistent AF 412 (50.4%) 845 (61.0%) AF Hospitalization 353 (43.2%) 521 (37.7%) 0.011 Conclusion Significant sex-specific outcomes differences were not observed. Sex should not be used as a determining factor in selecting patients for AF therapy. Acknowledgement/Funding NIH, St Jude Medical Foundation and Corporation, Biosense Webster Inc., Medtronic Corporation, and Boston Scientific Corporation

Abstract Background Prior studies suggest that catheter ablation (ABL) for atrial fibrillation (AF) is a treatment option for patients (pts) with paroxysmal AF (PAF). Pts with persistent (Per) or long-standing persistent (LSP) were routinely excluded from most ABL based clinical trials. The effectiveness of ABL compared to drug therapy (MED) in relation to underlying AF type has not been evaluated in a large randomized clinical trial. Objective To assess the impact of AF type on clinical outcomes of ABL vs. MED in pts with AF. Methods The CABANA trial randomized 2204 pts with AF at 126 sites worldwide to ABL vs. MED with rate or rhythm control drugs. The primary endpoint was a composite of death, disabling stroke, severe bleeding, or cardiac arrest. Key secondary endpoints included mortality and recurrence of AF. Outcomes of ABL vs. MED were compared within subgroups defined by AF type using Intention-to-Treat (ITT) analyses. Results Of the 2204 pts, 946 had PAF, 1042 had Per and 215 presented with LSP. There were baseline differences among AF types in age, gender, HTN, LVH, CHF and NYHA Class. For the primary endpoint, there were no significant differences between ABL and MED in pts with PAF (hazard ratio (HR) 0.82; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.51, 1.31), Per (HR 0.87; 95% CI 0.59, 1.28), or LSP (HR 1.01, 95% CI 0.39, 2.61). Likewise, there were no significant treatment differences in mortality; PAF (HR 0.84; 95% CI 0.46, 1.52), Per (HR 0.90; 95% CI 0.56, 1.46) and LSP (HR 0.67, 95% CI 0.23, 1.94). Post-blanking AF (time to first recurrence) was significantly reduced by ABL compared to MED across all AF types (PAF by 51%), (Per by 47%) and (LSP by 36%). Clinical Characteristics and Outcomes Clinical Outcomes Comparing ABL vs. MED (HR and 95% CI) Interaction p-value Primary Endpoint 0.82 (0.51, 1.31) 0.87 (0.59, 1.28) 1.01 (0.39, 2.61) 0.925 Mortality 0.84 (0.46, 1.52) 0.90 (0.56, 1.46) 0.67 (0.23, 1.94) 0.881 Recurrent AF 0.49 (0.38, 0.62) 0.53 (0.43, 0.65) 0.64 (0.41, 1.01) 0.564 Conclusion Pts with LSP have a lower proportion of women, and a higher proportion with manifestations of heart failure despite lower CHA2DS2VASc scores. By ITT analysis, there is no significant effect of ABL compared to MED in the primary endpoint or mortality in any AF group. However, ABL is more effective than MED for reducing recurrences of AF regardless of AF type, but with a greater effect in PAF vs Per vs LSP. Acknowledgement/Funding NIH, St Jude Medical Foundation and Corporation, Biosense Webster Inc., Medtronic Corporation, and Boston Scientific Corporation