Vignarajah, Aravinthan

Abstract Background Recurrence of symptomatic atrial fibrillation (AF) after catheter ablation (CA) is not uncommon. However, real-world long-term data on clinical outcomes of rhythm control strategies in patients with recurrent AF after CA remain limited. Methods Using the TriNetX database, we identified adult patients (≥18 years) with recurrent AF after index CA. A 3-month blanking period was applied, during which no rhythm-control therapy was received. Patients were classified into two groups: repeat CA or initiation of antiarrhythmic drug (AAD) therapy. Propensity score matching (PSM) was performed to balance baseline characteristics. Hazard ratios (HR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated. Outcomes included all-cause mortality, all-cause hospitalization, heart failure (HF) exacerbation, ischemic stroke, and major bleeding over 5 years. Results Among 4,056 patients with recurrent AF post-CA, 17.2% underwent repeat CA. After PSM, 697 patients in the repeat CA group (mean age 68.9 ± 9.6 years; 35.7% female) and 697 in the AAD group (mean age 68.4 ± 10.0 years; 37.6% female) were analyzed. Repeat CA was associated with lower all-cause mortality (3.3% vs 8.2%; HR 0.44; 95% CI, 0.27–0.72; P < 0.01), all-cause hospitalization (42.8% vs 56.4%; HR 0.71; 95% CI, 0.61–0.82; P < 0.01) and HF exacerbation (12.5% vs 24.8%; HR 0.50; 95% CI, 0.39–0.64; P < 0.01). No differences were observed in ischemic stroke (5.3% vs 4.7%; HR 1.22; 95% CI, 0.77–1.96; P = 0.40) or major bleeding (4.6% vs 6.2%; HR 0.82; 95% CI, 0.52–1.29; P = 0.39). Conclusions Repeat CA was associated with lower mortality, hospitalization, and HF exacerbation over 5 years.

Abstract Background Emerging evidence suggests that premature ventricular contractions (PVCs) may influence atrial electrophysiology and remodeling, potentially leading to higher rates of atrial fibrillation (AF) recurrence. However, existing data is limited to small-scale studies. Therefore, we conducted a retrospective study to evaluate the potential association between PVCs and AF ablation outcomes, which may suggest the need for more aggressive management of ventricular ectopy in this population. Objective This study aims to assess the 5-year outcomes of catheter ablation for AF in patients with and without a diagnosis of PVCs. Methods Using the TriNetX Analytics Research Network, we included patients aged ≥ 18 years who underwent AF catheter between January 1, 2014, and January 1, 2020. Patients were further categorized into two groups based on the presence of a diagnosis of PVCs. Propensity score matching (PSM) was performed using patient demographics, left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF), cardiac comorbidities, and medications. Study outcomes included all-cause mortality & hospitalization, acute heart failure (HF), and rhythm control interventions during a 5-year follow-up. Results A total of 15,987 patients with PVCs and 40,605 patients without PVCs were identified. After PSM, 15,152 patients from each group were included for further analysis. Compared to control group, patients with PVCs had significantly higher odds of all-cause mortality (odds ratio [OR], 1.138; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.034–1.253), all-cause hospitalization (OR, 1.300; 95% CI, 1.243–1.360), acute heart failure (HF) (OR, 1.223; 95% CI, 1.162–1.287), and cardiogenic shock (OR, 2.059; 95% CI, 1.751–2.420) following catheter ablation for AF at 5-year follow-up. Additionally, higher odds of AF requiring cardioversion (OR, 1.135; 95% CI, 1.074–1.199) or repeated ablation (OR, 1.164; 95% CI, 1.085–1.249) were observed in the PVCs group. Conclusion Premature ventricular contractions were associated with poorer clinical outcomes and a higher odds of requiring additional rhythm control intervention following catheter ablation for AF. These findings suggest that PVCs may be a marker for worse outcomes after AF ablation.

Abstract Introduction Chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T-cell therapies have revolutionized the treatment of relapsed or refractory (R/R) diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL), with axicabtagene ciloleucel (axi-cel) and tisagenlecleucel (tisa-cel) both being approved for use. Axi-cel was approved for second-line setting based on studies showing improved outcomes compared to high-dose salvage chemoimmunotherapy followed by autologous hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT). In contrast, tisa-cel did not demonstrate superiority over traditional salvage therapies in the second-line setting. Although both therapies are currently used in clinical practice, real-world comparative data on the safety of axi-cel versus tisa-cel remain limited. This retrospective study aims to compare the one-year outcomes of axi-cel and tisa-cel in patients with R/R DLBCL, offering practical insights into their outcomes outside of clinical trial settings. Methods A retrospective cohort study was conducted using TriNetX, a global federated health research network that provides access to electronic medical records from approximately 132 million patients, primarily in the United States. Adult patients (≥18 years) diagnosed with R/R DLBCL between January 1, 2022, and January 1, 2024, were identified using ICD-10-CM codes. Patients were categorized into two cohorts: those who received axi-cel and those who received tisa-cel. Propensity score matching (1:1) using nearest neighbor matching with a 0.1 pooled standard deviation caliper was performed for demographics, comorbidities, prior stem cell transplantation, and medications. Study outcomes included 1-year rates of all-cause mortality, all-cause hospitalization, cytokine release syndrome (CRS), immune effector cell-associated neurotoxicity syndrome (ICANS), anemia, neutropenia, thrombocytopenia, heart failure exacerbation, and acute myocardial infarction. Statistical analyses were conducted on the TriNetX platform, with significance set at P<0.05 (two-sided). TriNetX calculates hazard ratios (HRs) and cumulative incidences (CIs) using R survival package version 3.2-3 with the proportional hazard assumption tested using Schoenfeld residuals. This study does not require Institutional Review Board review or informed consent due to the use of de-identified data. Results Our study identified 1,250 patients with R/R DLBCL, including 1,083 patients who received axi-cel and 167 who received tisa-cel. After propensity score matching (PSM), 160 patients were in the axi-cel group (mean age 61.7 ± 11.8 years; 38.8% female; 73.1% White, 8.1% African American) and 160 patients were in the tisa-cel group (mean age 62.3 ± 16.0 years of age; 39.4% female; 75.0% White, 7.5% African American). Axi-cel group had 45% lower risk of all-cause mortality compared to tisa-cel group (HR: 0.55; 95% CI: 0.34–0.87). However, axi-cel group was associated with higher risks of all-cause hospitalization (HR: 1.33; 95% CI: 1.04–1.70), CRS (HR: 2.19; 95% CI: 1.43–3.36), and ICANS (HR: 2.69; 95% CI: 1.42–5.11) compared to tisa-cell group. No significant differences were observed in anemia (HR: 1.18; 95% CI: 0.82–1.72), neutropenia (HR: 1.30; 95% CI: 0.96–1.77), and thrombocytopenia (HR: 0.96; 95% CI: 0.65–1.43) between these two treatment groups. Additionally, there were no significant differences in terms of septic shock (HR: 0.79; 95% CI: 0.42–1.47), pneumonia (HR: 0.64; 95% CI: 0.34–1.21), and heart failure exacerbation (HR: 1.16; 95% CI: 0.76–1.76) between axi-cel group and tisa-cell group. Conclusion This large and multicenter cohort study provides real-world valuable insights into the one-year comparative outcomes of axi-cel and tisa-cel in patients with R/R DLBCL. Our study suggested axi-cel was associated with lower mortality rate, despites its higher rates of all-cause hospitalization, CRS, and ICANS compared to tisa-cell. These findings highlight the importance of close monitoring and supportive care during the first year following CAR-T therapy to optimize patient outcomes. An important limitation of our study is the lack of data on the number of prior lines of therapy, which may have differed between treatment groups and could have influenced clinical outcomes. Future prospective studies with comprehensive clinical data and inclusion of lisocabtagene maraleucel (liso-cel) would be valuable to provide a more complete comparison across currently available CAR T-cell therapies.

Abstract Introduction Chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T-cell therapy and bispecific antibodies have emerged as transformative options for patients with relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma (MM). Both modalities commonly target B-cell maturation antigen (BCMA) and have demonstrated high overall response rates in pretreated populations ranging from 65-83%. However, the optimal sequencing and comparative effectiveness of these two novel therapies remain unclear. Understanding their treatment outcomes is critical to inform treatment decisions in this rapidly evolving therapeutic landscape. Method A retrospective cohort study was conducted using TriNetX, a global federated health research network that provides access to electronic medical records from approximately 132 million patients, primarily in the United States. Adult patients (≥18 years) diagnosed with relapsed or refractory MM between January 1, 2022, and January 1, 2024, were identified using ICD-10-CM codes. Patients were categorized into two cohorts: those who received CAR T-cell therapy including idecabtagene vicleucel and ciltacabtagene autoleucel and those who received bispecific antibodies including teclistamab and elranatamab. Propensity score matching (1:1) using nearest neighbor matching with a 0.1 pooled standard deviation caliper was performed for demographics, comorbidities, prior stem cell transplantation, medications, and performance status. Study outcomes included 1-year rates of all-cause mortality, all-cause hospitalization, cytokine release syndrome (CRS), immune effector cell-associated neurotoxicity syndrome (ICANS), anemia, neutropenia, thrombocytopenia, sepsis, and pneumonia. Statistical analyses were conducted on the TriNetX platform, with significance set at P<0.05 (two-sided). TriNetX calculates hazard ratios (HRs) and cumulative incidences (CIs) using R survival package version 3.2-3 with the proportional hazard assumption tested using Schoenfeld residuals. This study does not require Institutional Review Board review or informed consent due to the use of de-identified data. Results Our study identified 2,023 patients, including 911 patients who received CAR T-cell therapy and 1,112 who received bispecific antibiotics. After propensity score matching (PSM), each cohort included 649 patients. The CAR T-cell therapy group had a mean age of 66.8 ± 8.4 years, with 41.4% female, 68.0% White, 20.6% African American, and 2.3% Asian. The bispecific antibody group had a mean age of 66.3 ± 9.3 years, with 41.1% female, 67.3% White, 21.1% African American, and 2.2% Asian. CAR T-cell therapy group experienced a 64% lower risk of all-cause mortality (HR 0.36; 95% CI, 0.26–0.48) and a 44% lower risk of all-cause ICU admission (HR 0.56; 95% CI, 0.42–0.75) compared with bispecific antibodies group. However, CAR T-cell therapy group was associated with higher risk of CRS (HR: 1.91; 95% CI: 1.57–2.31), ICANS (HR: 1.50; 95% CI: 1.12–2.01), neutropenia (HR: 2.32; 95% CI: 1.96–2.76), and thrombocytopenia (HR: 1.80; 95% CI: 1.43–2.28) compared to bispecific antibodies group. There was no significant difference observed in anemia (HR: 0.96; 95% CI: 0.82–1.13) between these two treatment groups. Additionally, CAR T-cell therapy group was associated with 46% lower risk of sepsis (HR: 0.54; 95% CI: 0.39–0.75) and 68% lower risk of pneumonia (HR: 0.32; 95% CI: 0.17–0.61) compared to bispecific antibodies group. ConclusionIn this real-world analysis, CAR T-cell therapy demonstrated a substantial lower mortality and reduced ICU utilization compared with bispecific antibodies in patients with relapsed or refractory MM, despite its higher risks of CRS, ICANS, and hematologic toxicities. An important limitation of our study is the lack of data on the number of prior lines of therapy, which likely differed between groups, as bispecific antibodies are typically used in the fourth line or beyond, while CAR T-cell therapies are approved to be used as the second line. This discrepancy may have influenced both mortality and infection rates. Despite the limitation, our findings underscore the need for prospective clinical trials directly comparing CAR T-cell therapy and bispecific antibodies to validate these observations and define the optimal sequencing of these modalities. Furthermore, research into predictive biomarkers and personalized selection algorithms will be crucial to optimize treatment decisions in this rapidly evolving therapeutic landscape.

ABSTRACT Introduction Cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) improves clinical outcomes in patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). However, data on its efficacy in patients with sarcoidosis and HFrEF are limited. Methods Using the TriNetX network, we identified patients with sarcoidosis, heart failure with a left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) below 35%, and either left bundle branch block (LBBB) or prolonged QRS duration ( > 150 ms) between 2014 and 2019. Patients were categorized into two cohorts: (1) those who received CRT and (2) those who received an ICD‐only implant. Five‐year outcomes included all‐cause mortality, all‐cause hospitalization, heart failure exacerbation, and the proportion of patients with improvement in LVEF to greater than 40% and greater than 50%. Results Out of 245 eligible patients, we identified a cohort of 87 patients (mean age 62.6 ± 9.5 years) who received CRT and 87 patients (mean age 62.1 ± 11.1 years) who received ICD‐only implant, with similar propensity scores, and included them in a comparative analysis. At 5‐year follow‐up, the CRT group demonstrated outcomes comparable to the ICD‐only implant group for all‐cause mortality (14.9% vs. 20.7%; HR 0.63; 95% CI 0.31–1.28; p = 0.19), all‐cause hospitalization (83.9% vs. 77.0%; HR 1.24; 95% CI 0.89–1.73; p = 0.19), and heart failure exacerbation (28.7% vs. 28.7%; HR 0.90; 95% CI 0.52–1.57; p = 0.72). The proportion of patients with improvement in LVEF to greater than 40% and greater than 50% was also similar in both groups (LVEF > 40%, 43.7% vs. 33.3%; HR 1.30; 95% CI 0.80–2.10; p = 0.29; LVEF > 50%, 31.0% vs. 17.2%; HR 1.72; 95% CI 0.92–3.24; p = 0.09). Conclusion CRT implantation had similar long‐term outcomes compared to ICD‐only implantation in patients with sarcoidosis and HFrEF, particularly all‐cause mortality, all‐cause hospitalization, heart failure exacerbation, and the proportion of patients with improvement in LVEF to greater than 40% and greater than 50%.

Background: Effective risk factor modification, including management of obesity and diabetes mellitus (DM), is essential to mitigating cardiovascular complications after hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT). Given the growing use of GLP-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1 RAs), large-scale studies are needed to assess their cardiovascular impact in patients undergoing HSCT. Methods: Using the TriNetX network, we identified patients who underwent HSCT and had DM or obesity. Patients were categorized into two cohorts: those who received GLP-1 RAs and those who did not. Outcomes, including all-cause mortality, all-cause hospitalization, acute myocardial infarction (AMI), atrial fibrillation (AF), cerebrovascular accident (CVA), and heart failure (HF) exacerbation, were assessed at 1 year, 3 years, and 5 years follow-up. Cohorts were propensity score-matched based on medical comorbidities, transplant diagnoses, and conditioning regimens. Results: Of the initial 17,475 patients with HSCT and DM/obesity, 876 (5.0%, 46.0% females, mean age 58.4 +/- 11.3 years old) received GLP-1 RA and 16,599 (95.0%, 40.8% females, mean age 55.6 +/- 14.3 years old) did not. After propensity score matching, 873 patients were divided equally into each cohort (Table). GLP-1 RA was associated with lower odds of all-cause mortality (1-year: odds ratio [OR]: 0.53; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.38–0.76; p<0.01; 3-year: OR: 0.52; CI: 0.40–0.69; p<0.01; 5-year: OR: 0.44; CI: 0.33–0.58; p<0.01), all-cause hospitalization (1-year: OR: 0.74; CI: 0.61–0.89; p<0.01; 3-year: OR: 0.66; CI: 0.55–0.79; p<0.01; 5-year: OR: 0.72; CI: 0.59–0.87; p<0.01), and HF exacerbation (1-year: OR: 0.65; CI: 0.44–0.96; p=0.03; 3-year: OR: 0.59; CI: 0.43–0.81; p<0.01; 5-year: OR: 0.53; CI: 0.38–0.74; p<0.01), compared to the non–GLP-1 RA group. At 5-year follow-up, GLP-1 RA use was also associated with lower odds of AF (OR: 0.71; CI: 0.53–0.94; p=0.02). No significant differences were noted in AMI or CVA at 1-, 3-, and 5-years of follow-up. Conclusion: After propensity score-matching in this retrospective cohort study, GLP-1 RA use was associated with significantly lower odds of all-cause mortality, all-cause hospitalization, and heart failure exacerbation at 1-, 3-, and 5-year of follow-up in patients with DM/obesity who underwent HSCT. At 5 years, use of GLP-1 RA was associated with lower odds of AF.

Background: Glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) agonists have been shown to improve outcomes across various cardiovascular diseases. However, data regarding the effects of GLP-1 agonists in obstructive hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (HCM) is limited. Objective: This study aimed to evaluate the 5-year outcomes of GLP-1 agonists in patients with HCM. Methods: Using TriNetX Analytics Network, we identified patients aged ≥18 years with a diagnosis of obstructive hypertrophic cardiomyopathy between 1/1/2014 and 1/1/2019. Patients were divided into two groups: those treated with GLP-1 agonists for ≥ 1 year and those who were not. Propensity score matching (PSM) was performed using demographics, cardiac medications, and comorbidities. The study outcomes were 5-year all-cause mortality and cardiac adverse events. Results: A total of 52,978 patients with HCM were identified, including 2,654 (5.0%) patients treated with GLP-1 agonists. After PSM, 2,588 patients in each group were analyzed. Patients on GLP-1 agonists were associated with lower odds of all-cause mortality (5.0% vs. 15.6%, p<0.01), all-cause hospitalization (46.3% vs. 67.8%, p<0.01), acute decompensated heart failure ((9.4% vs. 21.4%, p<0.01), cardiac arrest (3.6% vs. 5.4%, p<0.01), cerebrovascular accidents (9.5% vs. 14.1%, p<0.01), and cardiogenic shock (1.4% vs. 3.6%, p<0.01). Additionally, reduced rates of new ICD implantation (3.5% vs. 7.9%, p<0.01) and septal reduction therapy (1.7% vs. 3.5%, p<0.01) were observed in the GLP-1 agonists group. Conclusion: The use of GLP-1 agonists in HCM was associated with improved cardiovascular outcomes. Future clinical trials are needed to validate these potential benefits.

Background: Leadless pacemaker has emerged as a promising alternative to traditional transvenous pacemaker (PM) among elderly patients who are at high risk of complications. Objective: This study aims to assess and compare 5-year clinical outcomes of leadless PM versus transvenous single-chamber PM in elderly patients using a multi-national dataset. Methods: Using the TriNetX Analytics Research Network, we included patients aged ≥65 years who underwent leadless versus transvenous single-chamber PM implantation between 1/1/2014 and 1/1/2020. Propensity score matching (PSM) was performed by using patient’s demographic, LVEF, cardiac comorbidities, and medications. The study outcomes included all-cause mortality and adverse cardiovascular events over a 5-year follow-up period. Results: After PSM, 7,501 patients in each group were analyzed. Leadless PM was associated with a significantly lower odds of 5-year all-cause mortality (odds ratio [OR]: 0.534; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.497-0.575), heart failure exacerbation (OR: 0.779, 95% CI: 0.721-0.841), major bleeding (OR: 0.666, 95% CI: 0.604-0.734), cardiac arrest (OR: 0.747, 95% CI: 0.646-0.864) and stroke (OR: 0.825, 95% CI: 0.750-0.908) compared to transvenous single-chamber PM. No significant difference was observed between the two groups in all-cause hospitalization (OR: 1.006, 95%CI: 0.938-1.079), cardiac thrombus (OR: 1.077, 95%CI: 0.791-1.465) or venous thromboembolism (OR: 1.028, 95%CI: 0.916-1.153). Conclusion: Leadless PM was associated with significantly improved mortality and cardiovascular outcomes compared to transvenous single-chamber PM in elderly patients. These findings support the strong consideration of leadless pacing as a strategy to reduce mortality and improve clinical outcomes in this high-risk population.