Lewis, Basil S.

Background Rilonacept, a once‐weekly interleukin‐1 alpha and beta cytokine trap, reduced pericarditis recurrence in the phase 3 study, RHAPSODY (Rilonacept Inhibition of Interleukin‐1 Alpha and Beta for Recurrent Pericarditis: A Pivotal Symptomatology and Outcomes Study). The RHAPSODY long‐term extension further explored recurrent pericarditis natural history and treatment duration decision‐making during 24 additional months of open‐label rilonacept treatment. Methods and Results Seventy‐four patients commenced the long‐term extension, with a median (maximum) total rilonacept duration of 22 (35) months. Individually, 18 months after the most proximal pericarditis recurrence, investigators decided to continue rilonacept on study, suspend rilonacept for off‐treatment observation (rescue allowed), or discontinue the study. The annualized incidence of pericarditis recurrence on rilonacept up to the 18‐month decision milestone was 0.04 events/patient‐year versus 4.4 events/patient‐year prestudy while on oral therapies. At the 18‐month decision milestone, 64% (33/52) continued rilonacept, 15% (8/52) suspended rilonacept for observation, and 21% (11/52) discontinued the study. Among the 33 patients (1/33; 3.0%) continuing rilonacept (median time to recurrence could not be estimated due to too few events), a single recurrence occurred 4 weeks after a treatment interruption. Among patients suspending rilonacept, 75% (6/8) experienced recurrence (median time to recurrence, 11.8 weeks [95% CI, 3.7 weeks to not estimable]). There was a 98% reduction in risk of pericarditis recurrence among patients continuing rilonacept treatment after the 18‐month decision milestone versus those suspending treatment for observation (hazard ratio, 0.02; P <0.0001). Conclusions In the RHAPSODY long‐term extension, continued rilonacept treatment resulted in continued response; treatment suspension at the 18‐month decision milestone was associated with pericarditis recurrence. Registration URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov ; Unique identifier: NCT03737110.

Introduction: Rilonacept reduced pericarditis recurrence in the phase 3 trial RHAPSODY. The long-term extension (LTE) enabled further insights into efficacy, safety, and clinical decision making. Methods: The RHAPSODY run-in (RI) and randomized-withdrawal periods were followed by an LTE that enabled open-label rilonacept treatment up to 24 additional months. A decision at 18 months after the most recent recurrence was based on clinical status at investigator discretion: 1) continue rilonacept on-study, 2) suspend rilonacept for observation or 3) discontinue from the LTE without observation. Endpoints included recurrence and quality of life. Results: In May 2020, 74 of 75 eligible subjects continued to LTE; US subjects (n=45) switched to commercial therapy or discontinued in April 2021 (treatment duration from RI baseline [median; maximum] 18; 27 months). Non-US subjects (n=29) completed the LTE in June 2022 (treatment duration from RI baseline [median; maximum] 27; 33 months). Concomitant oral medications during LTE: 22% NSAIDS, 20% colchicine, 0% corticosteroids, 43% none. Inflammation signs (CRP), RP symptoms (PGIPS), and recurrences were low on-treatment. Before the 18-month decision (n=74), there were 3 investigator-assessed recurrences (0.04 per patient-year). At the 18-month decision (n=52), 64% (n=33) continued rilonacept on-study, 15% (n=8) suspended rilonacept for observation, and 21% (n=11) discontinued the study without observation, of whom 7 switched to commercial rilonacept. There was a 75% recurrence rate (n=6/8) in the off-treatment observation group (median time to event 11.8 [3.7, Not-Estimable (NE)] weeks) but only 1 recurrence in subjects on rilonacept (time to event NE [too few events]) associated with a 4-week interruption; HR 0.018, p<0.0001; Fig 1. Conclusions: Continued rilonacept treatment resulted in continued treatment response, whereas treatment suspension at 18 months may be associated with pericarditis recurrence.

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

Objective Polypharmacy management of recurrent pericarditis (RP) often involves long-term therapies, often with negative effects. Slow tapering of oral therapies is often required to avoid recurrence. A post hoc analysis of the phase III trial Rilonacept inHibition of interleukin-1 Alpha and beta for recurrent Pericarditis: a pivotal Symptomatology and Outcomes Study (RHAPSODY) evaluated investigator approaches to transitioning to IL-1 blockade monotherapy with rilonacept, which was hypothesised to allow accelerated withdrawal of common multidrug pericarditis regimens. Methods RHAPSODY was a multicentre (Australia, Israel, Italy, USA), double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomised-withdrawal trial in adults and adolescents with RP. Investigators initiated rilonacept at the labelled dose level and discontinued oral pericarditis therapies during the 12-week run-in; randomised patients received study drug as monotherapy. Time to rilonacept monotherapy was quantified in patients receiving multidrug regimens at baseline who achieved rilonacept monotherapy during run-in. Results In 86 enrolled patients, mean time to rilonacept monotherapy was 7.9 weeks, with no recurrences. Of these, 64% (n=55) entered on multidrug regimens: non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) plus colchicine (44% (24/55)), colchicine plus glucocorticoids (24% (13/55)), or NSAIDs, colchicine, plus glucocorticoids (33% (18/55)). Investigators transitioned patients receiving colchicine and glucocorticoids at baseline to rilonacept monotherapy without recurrence regardless of taper approach: sequential (n=14; median, 7.7 weeks) or concurrent (n=17; median, 8.0 weeks). Median time to rilonacept monotherapy was similar regardless of glucocorticoid dose and duration: ≤15 mg/day (n=21): 7.3 weeks; >15 mg/day (n=18): 8.0 weeks; long-term (≥28 days): 7.6 weeks. Conclusions Rapid discontinuation of oral RP therapies while transitioning to rilonacept monotherapy was feasible without triggering pericarditis recurrence. Trial registration number NCT03737110.

Background: Post-episode tapering of Standard of Care (SoC) medication in patients with recurrent pericarditis (RP) varies considerably. Gradual tapering of corticosteroids (CS) is recommended in ESC guidelines (decreasing by 1-2.5 mg/day every 2-6 weeks over 1-2 years) to prevent recurrence. We describe successful faster tapering of SoC treatment onto rilonacept monotherapy during RHAPSODY, a Phase 3, placebo-controlled, randomized-withdrawal (RW) trial in RP. Methods: Patients with acute symptomatic RP despite stable doses of NSAIDs, colchicine, and/or CS in any combination enrolled in a 12-week run-in period in which weekly rilonacept was initiated. After 1-week of stabilization, tapering of CS began at a rate dependent on baseline dose, to be completed by Week 10 for randomization at Week 12 when clinical response was confirmed by reduced pain and normalized CRP levels. Colchicine tapering/discontinuation was initiated no earlier than Week 4. This analysis evaluates time to rilonacept monotherapy in subgroups receiving different combinations of background therapies. Results: 79 of 86 patients were receiving pharmacotherapy at run-in baseline. Median (95% CI) time to monotherapy (n=79) was 7.9 (7.0-8.1) weeks. Of the patients receiving CS at baseline (41/86 [48%]), 39 (95%) tapered to rilonacept monotherapy, and median time to monotherapy was 7.9 (7.1-8.1) weeks. Of the patients receiving colchicine at baseline (65/86 [76%]), 61 (94%) patients achieved rilonacept monotherapy, and median time to monotherapy was 8.0 (7.1-8.3) weeks. Patients receiving only one SoC therapy achieved rilonacept monotherapy faster (6.1 [0.4-8.1] weeks) than those receiving 2 (8.0 [6.7-9.9] weeks) or 3 (7.7 [7.0-8.3] weeks) therapies. All patients who did not achieve monotherapy had withdrawn from the study for reasons unrelated to pericarditis. Conclusion: All patients randomized in the RHAPSODY trial discontinued SoC and transitioned to rilonacept monotherapy (median time 7.9 weeks) without a recurrent pericarditis episode during run-in. With rilonacept, time to successful discontinuation of SoC, including high dose CS, was substantially more rapid than current treatment practices. RHAPSODY data helped support FDA approval of the first therapy for RP.

Background: The package insert for apixaban recommends against its use for stroke prevention in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) with prosthetic heart valves. There are no published data on the use of apixaban in patients with AF with bioprosthetic valves. This analysis provides preliminary exploratory data on the safety and efficacy of apixaban in these patients. Methods: The ARISTOTLE trial randomized patients with AF to apixaban versus warfarin, and patients with a history of bioprosthetic valve replacement were eligible for inclusion in the trial. In this secondary analysis, baseline characteristics of patients with bioprosthetic valves were compared between apixaban and warfarin patients using Wilcoxon tests for continuous variables and chi-square tests for categorical variables. Unadjusted endpoints were compared between randomized treatments using a Cox regression model. With data collection on these valve patients ongoing, this interim report represents 82 of 260 patients with a history of valve surgery from ARISTOTLE. Results: Among 82 patients with bioprosthetic valves, 41 patients each were in the apixaban and warfarin arms. The patients had a median age of 78 years (vs. 70 years in overall trial), 18% had prior stroke (vs. 19% in overall trial), and 41% had concomitant aspirin use (vs. 31% in overall trial). Other than a higher rate of hypertension in the warfarin arm (98% vs. 81%, p=0.03), there were no statistically significant differences in baseline characteristics between the two groups. There were few events in patients with bioprosthetic valves. There were 2 stroke events, and there were no statistically significant differences between the apixaban and warfarin groups for major bleeding, stroke/systemic embolism, all-cause death, or cardiovascular death (Table). Conclusions: Among the small number of patients in ARISTOTLE with bioprosthetic valves, there were few events with similar event rates in both the apixaban and warfarin groups.

Objective To assess stroke/systemic embolism, major bleeding and other outcomes, and treatment effect of apixaban versus warfarin, in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) and different types of valvular heart disease (VHD), using data from the Apixaban for Reduction in Stroke and Other Thromboembolic Events in Atrial Fibrillation trial. Methods There were 14 793 patients with known VHD status, categorised as having moderate or severe mitral regurgitation (MR) (n=3382), aortic regurgitation (AR) (n=842) or aortic stenosis (AS) (n=324); patients with moderate or severe mitral stenosis were excluded from the trial. Baseline characteristics, efficacy and safety outcomes were compared between each type and no significant VHD. Treatment effect was assessed using an adjusted model. Results Patients with MR or AR had similar rates of stroke/systemic embolism and bleeding compared with patients without MR or AR, respectively. Patients with AS had significantly higher event rates (presented as rate per 100 patient-years of follow-up) of stroke/systemic embolism (3.47 vs 1.36; adjusted HR (adjHR) 2.21, 95% CI 1.35 to 3.63), death (8.30 vs 3.53; adjHR 1.92, 95% CI 1.41 to 2.61), major bleeding (5.31 vs 2.53; adjHR 1.80, 95% CI 1.19 to 2.75) and intracranial bleeding (1.29 vs 0.51; adjHR 2.54, 95% CI 1.08 to 5.96) than patients without AS. The superiority of apixaban over warfarin on stroke/systemic embolism was similar in patients with versus without MR (HR 0.69, 95% CI 0.46 to 1.04 vs HR 0.79, 95% CI 0.63 to 1.00; interaction P value 0.52), with versus without AR (HR 0.57, 95% CI 0.27 to 1.20 vs HR 0.78, 95% CI 0.63 to 0.96; interaction P value 0.52), and with versus without AS (HR 0.44, 95% CI 0.17 to 1.13 vs HR 0.79, 95% CI 0.64 to 0.97; interaction P value 0.19). For each of the primary and secondary efficacy and safety outcomes, there was no evidence of a different effect of apixaban over warfarin in patients with any VHD subcategory. Conclusions In anticoagulated patients with AF, AS is associated with a higher risk of stroke/systemic embolism, bleeding and death. The efficacy and safety benefits of apixaban compared with warfarin were consistent, regardless of presence of MR, AR or AS. Clinical trial registration ARISTOTLE clinical trial number NCT00412984.

Background— We examined the risk of stroke or systemic embolism (SSE) conferred by heart failure (HF) and left ventricular systolic dysfunction (LVSD) in the Apixaban for Reduction in Stroke and Other Thromboembolic Events in Atrial Fibrillation Trial (ARISTOTLE), as well as the effect of apixaban versus warfarin. Methods and Results— The risk of a number of outcomes, including the composite of SSE or death (to take account of competing risks) and composite of SSE, major bleeding, or death (net clinical benefit) were calculated in 3 patient groups: (1) no HF/no LVSD (n=8728), (2) HF/no LVSD (n=3207), and (3) LVSD with/without symptomatic HF (n=2736). The rate of both outcomes was highest in patients with LVSD (SSE or death 8.06; SSE, major bleeding, or death 10.46 per 100 patient-years), intermediate for HF but preserved LV systolic function (5.32; 7.24), and lowest in patients without HF or LVSD (1.54; 5.27); each comparison P <0.0001. Each outcome was less frequent in patients treated with apixaban: in all ARISTOTLE patients, the apixaban/warfarin hazard ratio for SSE or death was 0.89 (95% confidence interval, 0.81–0.98; P =0.02); for SSE, major bleed, or death it was 0.85 (0.78–0.92; P <0.001). There was no heterogeneity of treatment effect across the 3 groups. Conclusions— Patients with LVSD (with/without HF) had a higher risk of SSE or death (but similar rate of SSE) compared with patients with HF but preserved LV systolic function; both had a greater risk than patients without either HF or LVSD. Apixaban reduced the risk of both outcomes more than warfarin in all 3 patient groups. Clinical Trial Registration— URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov . Unique identifier: NCT00412984.

Background— We studied the benefits and risks of adding clopidogrel to different doses of aspirin in the treatment of patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS). Methods and Results— In the Clopidogrel in Unstable angina to prevent Recurrent Events (CURE) trial, 12 562 patients with ACS using aspirin, 75 to 325 mg daily, were randomized to clopidogrel or placebo for up to 1 year. In this analysis, patients were divided into the following 3 aspirin dose groups: ≤100 mg, 101 through 199 mg, and ≥200 mg. The combined incidence of cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, or stroke was reduced by clopidogrel regardless of aspirin dose, as follows: ≤100 mg, 10.5% versus 8.6% (relative risk [RR], 0.81 [95% CI, 0.68 to 0.97]); 101 to 199 mg, 9.8% versus 9.5% (RR, 0.97 [95% CI 0.77 to 1.22]); and ≥200 mg, 13.6% versus 9.8% (RR, 0.71 [95% CI, 0.59 to 0.85]). The incidence of major bleeding increased with increasing aspirin dose both in the placebo group (1.9%, 2.8%, and 3.7%, respectively; P =0.0001) and the clopidogrel group (3.0%, 3.4%, and 4.9%, respectively; P =0.0009); thus, the excess risk with clopidogrel was 1.1%, 1.2%, and 1.2%, respectively. The adjusted hazard ratio for major bleeding for the highest versus the lowest dose of aspirin was 1.9 (95% CI 1.29 to 2.72) in the placebo group, 1.6 (95% CI 1.19 to 2.23) in the clopidogrel group, and 1.7 (95% CI 1.36 to 2.20) in the combined group. Conclusions— In patients with ACS, adding clopidogrel to aspirin is beneficial regardless of aspirin dose. Bleeding risks increase with increasing aspirin dose, with or without clopidogrel, without any increase in efficacy. Our findings suggest that the optimal daily dose of aspirin may be between 75 and 100 mg, with or without clopidogrel.