Grena, Paul

Abstract Aims In this protocol-predefined substudy of the RHAPSODY trial, the primary aim was to assess whether pericardial late gadolinium enhancement (LGE) was associated with time to pericarditis recurrence. Methods and results RHAPSODY was a Phase 3 double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized-withdrawal trial that demonstrated the efficacy of rilonacept in recurrent pericarditis (RP). Patients with a history of multiple RP and an active recurrence were enrolled and had the option to participate in a cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) imaging substudy. CMRs were interpreted by a blinded independent core laboratory with prespecified criteria to define pericardial LGE. Compared to patients with trace or mild pericardial LGE (n = 9), patients with moderate or severe pericardial LGE (n = 16) generally had a higher number of recurrent episodes per year (5.3 vs. 3.9) and a higher mean CRP level (3.6 vs. 1.1 mg/dL). Overall, 10/14 (71.4%) who received a placebo had a recurrence compared to 0/11 (0%) who received rilonacept. In patients randomized to placebo who had moderate or severe pericardial LGE, the median time to recurrence was 4.2 weeks compared to 10.7 weeks in patients who had trace or mild pericardial LGE. At the conclusion of the event-driven randomized-withdrawal period, among patients receiving a placebo, 5/7 (71.4%) with trace or mild pericardial LGE and 5/7 (71.4%) with moderate or severe pericardial LGE had a recurrence. Conclusions Among patients with multiple RP, these preliminary findings support the concept of pericardial LGE as an imaging biomarker that may inform the duration of treatment and risk of recurrence with cessation of therapy and larger studies should be considered. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier NCT03737110

Background Recurrent pericarditis is characterized by painful flares and inflammation, which negatively impact health‐related quality of life. RHAPSODY (rilonacept inhibition of interleukin‐1 alpha and beta for recurrent pericarditis: a pivotal symptomatology and outcomes study) evaluated the efficacy and safety of rilonacept (IL‐1α and ‐β cytokine trap) in recurrent pericarditis. A secondary analysis of these data evaluated the patient‐reported outcome questionnaire score change during the trial. Methods and Results Participants completed 5 patient‐reported outcome (PRO) questionnaires assessing pericarditis pain, health‐related quality of life, general health status, sleep impact, and overall symptom severity. PRO score changes during the treatment run‐in period (12 weeks) and the blinded randomized withdrawal period (up to 24 weeks) were evaluated using descriptive statistics and mixed model repeated measures analyses. Participants with PRO data from the run‐in period (n=84) and the randomized withdrawal period (n=61; 30 rilonacept, 31 placebo) were included in analyses. Run‐in baseline PRO scores indicated that pericarditis symptoms during pericarditis recurrence impacted health‐related quality of life. All PRO scores significantly improved ( P <0.001) on rilonacept treatment during the run‐in period. For the randomized withdrawal period, PRO scores were maintained for participants receiving rilonacept. For those receiving placebo and who experienced a recurrence, PRO scores deteriorated at the time of recurrence and then improved following rilonacept bailout. At randomized withdrawal Week 24/End of Study, scores of participants who received bailout rilonacept were similar to those of participants who had continued rilonacept. Conclusions These results demonstrate the burden of pericarditis recurrences and the improved physical and emotional health of patients with recurrent pericarditis while on rilonacept treatment. These findings extend prior rilonacept efficacy results, demonstrating improvements in patient‐reported health‐related quality of life, sleep, pain, and global symptom severity while on treatment. Registration URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov ; Unique identifier: NCT03737110.

Background: Atrial fibrillation (AF) adversely impacts health-related quality of life (hrQoL). While some patients demonstrate improvements in hrQoL, the factors associated with large improvements in hrQoL are not well described. Methods: We assessed factors associated with a 1-year increase in the Atrial Fibrillation Effect on Quality-of-Life score of 1 SD (≥18 points; 3× clinically important difference), among outpatients in the Outcomes Registry for Better Informed Treatment of Atrial Fibrillation I registry. Results: Overall, 28% (181/636) of patients had such a hrQoL improvement. Compared with patients not showing large hrQoL improvement, they were of similar age (median 73 versus 74, P =0.3), equally likely to be female (44% versus 48%, P =0.3), but more likely to have newly diagnosed AF at baseline (18% versus 8%; P =0.0004), prior antiarrhythmic drug use (52% versus 40%, P =0.005), baseline antiarrhythmic drug use (34.8% versus 26.8%, P =0.045), and more likely to undergo AF-related procedures during follow-up (AF ablation: 6.6% versus 2.0%, P =0.003; cardioversion: 12.2% versus 5.9%, P =0.008). In multivariable analysis, a history of alcohol abuse (adjusted OR, 2.41; P =0.01) and increased baseline diastolic blood pressure (adjusted OR, 1.23 per 10-point increase and >65 mm Hg; P =0.04) were associated with large improvements in hrQoL at 1 year, whereas patients with prior stroke/transient ischemic attack, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, and peripheral arterial disease were less likely to improve ( P <0.05 for each). Conclusions: In this national registry of patients with AF, potentially treatable AF risk factors are associated with large hrQoL improvement, whereas less reversible conditions appeared negatively associated with hrQoL improvement. Understanding which patients are most likely to have large hrQoL improvement may facilitate targeting interventions for high-value care that optimizes patient-reported outcomes in AF. Registration: URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov . Unique identifier: NCT01165710.