GSK Clinical Study Register
|
|
- Ann Cross
- 6 years ago
- Views:
Transcription
1 In February 2013, GlaxoSmithKline (GSK) announced a commitment to further clinical transparency through the public disclosure of GSK Clinical Study Reports (CSRs) on the GSK Clinical Study Register. The following guiding principles have been applied to the disclosure: Information will be excluded in order to protect the privacy of patients and all named persons associated with the study Patient data listings will be completely removed* to protect patient privacy. Anonymized data from each patient may be made available subject to an approved research proposal. For further information please see the Patient Level Data section of the GSK Clinical Study Register. Aggregate data will be included; with any direct reference to individual patients excluded *Complete removal of patient data listings may mean that page numbers are no longer consecutively numbered
2 CONFIDENTIAL The GlaxoSmithKline group group of companies of companies Division: Worldwide Development Retention Category: GRS019 Information Type: Synoptic Clinical Study Report Control: Placebo or active-control (i.e., metformin, sulfonylurea, insulin). Title: Phase: 2008 Update to Integrated Clinical Trials (ICT - also known as CV modeling) analysis for AVANDIA (rosiglitazone maleate) IV Compound Number: BRL Effective Date: 23-MAR-2009 Description: In September 2004, a statistical analysis (cardiovascular [CV] modeling) of the rosiglitazone (RSG) Integrated Clinical Trials database (ICT) was conducted to estimate the risk (and associated confidence intervals; CI) of developing / exacerbating congestive heart failure and events associated with myocardial ischemia for RSG relative to active or placebo controls. This analysis was conducted on a cohort of subjects with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) enrolled in GlaxoSmithKline (GSK)-sponsored doubleblind, controlled, studies that utilized total daily doses of 4 milligrams (mg) or 8mg of RSG and had statistical analysis completed (SAC) on or before September 30, In August 2005, the analysis was updated with 5 additional studies, making a total of 42 studies with data from 14,237 subjects. As per the analysis plan, all studies in the ICT were centrally monitored (i.e., conducted and sponsored by GSK Research and Development [R&D] or by GSK United States Pharmaceutical Development) with patient-level electronic data centrally available for integration by the August 2005 cutoff. As part of GSKs ongoing review of clinical trials conducted using RSG worldwide, a further update to the ICT analysis was performed in December 2008 in order to include additional data from 10 studies that met the study design criteria for the previous ICT analyses and; therefore, could be integrated with the studies included in the previous analysis. Two of the studies (128 and 374) were completed by the August 2005 cut-off, but patient-level electronic data for these studies was not centrally available at that time because the studies were conducted and monitored by non-us local operating companies. The 8 remaining studies were not completed by the August 2005 cut off; 4 of these studies were conducted by GSK R&D, and 4 were conducted by non-u.s. local operating companies. Copyright 2009 the GlaxoSmithKline group of companies. All rights reserved. Unauthorized copying or use of this information is prohibited. 1 1
3 CONFIDENTIAL The GlaxoSmithKline group group of companies of companies This update was performed by integrating data from the additional 10 studies, involving an additional 2,758 subjects, with data from the 42 studies in the August 2005 analysis. The scope of this update focuses on the comparison of RSG relative to controls for events associated with myocardial ischemia and MACE (major adverse cardiovascular events; a composite of cardiovascular death, non-fatal myocardial infarction, or non-fatal stroke) - an endpoint not defined in the previous ICT. Specifically for myocardial ischemia, the scope of the analysis was to update the hazard ratio (HR; and associated CI) based on comparison between the pooled RSG and the pooled non-rsg groups as previously reported. A similar analysis was also performed for MACE. Subject: AVANDIA, Cardiovascular Events, Statistical Model, MACE (Major Adverse Cardiovascular Event), Myocardial Ischemia Author(s): GSK Internal Personnel - External Reviewer Initiation Date: Completion Date: Date of Report: 10-Sep Dec Mar-2009 Sponsor Signatory: (and Medical Officer) M.D., Ph.D. Senior Director, CVM MDC, Clinical GlaxoSmithKline This study was performed in compliance with Good Clinical Practices and GlaxoSmithKline Standard Operating Procedures for all processes involved, including the archiving of essential documents. 2 2
4 Table of Contents Page Abbreviations Synopsis REFERENCES SAFETY DATA SOURCE FIGURES AND TABLES
5 CONFIDENTIAL Abbreviations ADOPT AE APPROACH CI CV GSK HR ICT INS MACE MET mg N or n PBO R&D RSG SAC SE SIM SU T2DM U.S. A Diabetes Outcome Progression Trial (GSK Study BRL049653/048) Adverse Event Assessment on the Prevention of Progression by Rosiglitazone on Atherosclerosis in Type 2 Diabetic Patients with Cardiovascular History (GSK Study AVD100521) Confidence Interval Cardiovascular GlaxoSmithKline Hazard Ratio Integrated Clinical Trials Insulin Major adverse cardiovascular event Metformin milligram Number Placebo Research and Development Rosiglitazone Statistical Analysis Complete Standard Error Simvastatin Sulfonylurea Type 2 diabetes mellitus United States Trademark Information Trademarks of the GlaxoSmithKline group of companies AVANDIA Trademarks not owned by the GlaxoSmithKline group of companies None 4 4
6 CONFIDENTIAL Synopsis Study Number: Title: 2008 Update to Integrated Clinical Trials (ICT - also known as Cardiovascular [CV] modeling) analysis for AVANDIA (rosiglitazone maleate) Investigator(s) and Study Center(s): These analyses were conducted by internal GlaxoSmithKline (GSK) personnel using data from previously completed and reported GSK-sponsored double-blind, controlled studies. Publication(s): In process Study Period: GlaxoSmithKline-sponsored double-blind, controlled studies that had statistical analysis completed (SAC) on or before November 26, Phase of Development: Phase IV Objectives: The primary objectives were: to estimate the myocardial ischemia hazard ratio (HR; and associated confidence interval, CI) for rosiglitazone (RSG) relative to active or placebo control based on a statistical analysis of updated ICT data, which includes pooled data from the 42 studies in the previous ICT analysis plus data from 10 additional studies. to estimate the major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE; a composite of cardiovascular death, non-fatal myocardial infarction, or non-fatal stroke) HR (and associated CI) for RSG relative to active or placebo control based on a statistical analysis of updated ICT data. Methodology: An initial statistical analysis was conducted on the cohort of type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) subjects enrolled in GSK-sponsored double-blind, controlled, studies that utilized total daily doses of 4 milligrams (mg) or 8mg of RSG and had statistical analysis completed (SAC) on or before September 30, Further statistical analysis was conducted on an updated integrated dataset, which contained 5 additional clinical studies that completed statistical analyses by an August 2005 cut-off, in order to assess the consistency of results with the initial analysis. The current 52-study analysis, conducted in December 2008, focuses on myocardial ischemic events and MACE (a composite of cardiovascular death, non-fatal myocardial infarction, and non-fatal stroke) and includes data from the 10 following studies (Table 1): 5 5
7 CONFIDENTIAL Table 1 Listing of 10 Studies Integrated into the Avandia ICT Analysis in December 2008 (by number of patients included in analysis) Study ID Control Number patients (RSG/Control) Location of Study BRL /376 PBO 40 (19/21) Global BRL /351 PBO 56 (27/29) Global BRL /128 1 PBO + SU 77 (39/38) Local Study -Taiwan AVD PBO + SU 149 (74/75) Local study Japan BRL /374 1 PBO + α-glucosidase inhibitor 169 (84/85) Local study Japan AVD INS+PBO 263 (132/131) Local study China AVS PBO + SIM 369 (276/93) R&D AVD PBO, pioglitazone 372 (159/213) Local study Japan AVM MET + SU 595 (294/301) Europe only AVD SU (Glipizide) 668 (331/337) Global Additional 10 Studies 2758 (1435/1323) 42 Studies 3 14,237 (8604/5633) All (52 Studies) 16,995 (10039/6956) 1. Completed prior to August 2005 cut off, but patient-level electronic data was not available for integration into the 42-study ICT. These studies were not centrally monitored. 2. Study included 4 monotherapy treatment arms: RSG 4mg + PBO, RSG 8mg + PBO, SIM 40mg + PBO, and SIM 80mg + PBO, and 4 fixed-dose combination treatment arms: RSG 4mg/SIM 40mg, RSG 4mg/SIM 80mg, RSG 8mg/SIM 40mg, and RSG 8mg/SIM 80mg. 3. See [GlaxoSmithKline Document Number ZM2005/00181/01] PBO = placebo, INS = insulin, SU = sulfonylurea, SIM = simvastatin, MET = metformin The analyses of interest using the updated ICT dataset include a re-estimate of the HR and CI for the comparison between the group of subjects who received RSG and the group of subjects who did not receive RSG; regardless of the RSG dose and/or other background medication(s). Assignment to the treatment groups represented in the comparisons was based on randomized treatment assignment. All randomized subjects were included in this analysis, except where there were alleged irregularities in data collection or a failed study audit (n=65 patients). Excluding these patients is consistent with the approach that was taken for safety summaries in reporting these studies to regulatory authorities. This analysis involved the safety endpoints of myocardial ischemia and MACE. A Cox proportional hazards model analysis was used to calculate the HR for RSG relative to non-rsg comparator (Control). Subjects who were randomized to RSG were pooled into one group and those randomized to Control (non-rsg) were pooled into another group. The model contained the term for pooled treatment but was not adjusted for other covariates. This analysis was performed by combining the patient-level data from the 10 additional studies with the pooled patient-level data from the previous 42 studies. Consistent with the overall estimate reported for the 42 study analysis, the updated analysis was not stratified by study. Although this required a stronger proportional hazards assumption than would be the case for a stratified analysis, it did permit followup time for patients in zero-event studies to be included in the event that this could affect the HR estimate. The stratified analysis would have allowed the underlying hazard function to be different between studies. 6 6
8 CONFIDENTIAL A summary of the event rate per 100 patient-years is also provided, by treatment group, and cumulative incidence plots, by treatment group, were generated. The ICT analysis combines patient-level data from short-term trials (i.e., a majority are 6 months in duration). The ICT is a hypothesis generating exercise requiring independent confirmation via long-term trials. Therefore, the long-term ADOPT (A Diabetes Outcome and Progression Trial) was not included in this update. The substantially greater follow-up in ADOPT (4 to 6 years) would have introduced clinical heterogeneity, limiting the interpretability of analyses from the integrated dataset [Thompson, 1991]. In addition, an exploratory analysis of the HRs and corresponding CIs for programmatically-derived myocardial ischemic adverse events (AEs) highlight substantial differences between ADOPT and the 42-study ICT analysis. This underscores the statistical heterogeneity that would further undermine interpretation of an ICT analysis that included ADOPT (see Adhoc 2184). Number of subjects: The data from the 42 studies from the previous ICT (14,237 subjects [8,604 RSG/5,633 Control]) and the 10 additional studies (2,758 subjects [1,435 RSG/1323 Control]) were integrated into this 52-study analysis (16,995 subjects [10,039 RSG/6,956 Control]). Diagnosis and main criteria for inclusion: Studies considered for inclusion in this statistical analysis were all GSK Research and Development (R&D) and United States (U.S.) Pharmaceuticals sponsored RSG studies in subjects, and studies included in supplemental New Drug Applications. Specific requirements for study inclusion in the statistical analysis are: The study must have included a control regimen (placebo or active) with a randomized design. The study population must have been adults who have T2DM. This is the population for which RSG is currently indicated. The study must have included data on either 4 milligrams (mg) or 8mg RSG doses. These are the total daily doses of RSG recommended for use in the treatment oft2dm. The study must have been double-blind. This minimizes potential differential reporting bias between RSG and Control groups. The study must have reached the SAC milestone prior to November 26, Safety Analysis Endpoints: Events of myocardial ischemia and MACE were the two categories of interest in these statistical analyses. The definition of an event of myocardial ischemia followed the methodology of the previous ICT analyses [GlaxoSmithKline Document Number ZM2005/00181/01]. [Cobitz, 2008] and [GlaxoSmithKline Document Number ZM2005/00181/01]. For the additional 10 studies listed in Table 1, identification of myocardial ischemia is described in Section 10.1 of the Summary Document Analysis Plan [GlaxoSmithKline Document Number ZM2008/00173/00]. 7 7
9 CONFIDENTIAL Identification of MACE for the 10 additional studies is described in Section 10.2 of the Summary Document Analysis Plan [GlaxoSmithKline Document Number ZM2008/00173/00]. In GSK study AVD (APPROACH; Assessment on the Prevention of Progression by Rosiglitazone on Atherosclerosis in Type 2 Diabetic Patients with Cardiovascular History), MACE was a pre-defined secondary endpoint and a blinded endpoint committee reviewed all MACE that occurred during the study. Summary: Myocardial Ischemia The number of patients with at least one event of myocardial ischemia (n) and number of patients (N) for each of the 10 studies added to the ICT analysis are provided in Table 2. Table 2 Number and Percent of Patients with an Event of Myocardial Ischemia for the 10 Studies Added in December 2008 (All Randomized Subjects) RSG Control n/n % n/n % BRL /376 0/19 0 0/21 0 BRL /351 2/ / BRL /128 1/ /38 0 AVD /74 0 0/75 0 BRL /374 1/ /85 0 AVD / / AVS / /93 0 AVD / /213 0 AVM / / AVD (APPROACH) 42/ / Studies 50/ / Study 222/ / Data Source: Source Table U2.1 and Source Table U2.3. The myocardial ischemia HR for the 42-study ICT analysis, the 10 additional studies, and the combined 52-study ICT analysis are provided separately in Table 3. For the 10 additional studies, the incidence of myocardial ischemic events was generally higher than in the previous 42 studies, with a slightly higher incidence for the Control group compared to RSG. This higher incidence reflects the inclusion of the APPROACH study which was conducted in subjects at higher risk of cardiovascular events (i.e., patients with T2DM and established coronary artery disease; Table 2). When combined with the 42 studies, the overall incidence of myocardial ischemic events in the pooled 52-study ICT was low and similar for the RSG group (2.21%, 4.34 events per 100 patient-years) and the Control group (2.08%, 3.98 events per 100 patient-years), with no significant difference between groups (HR [95% CI to 1.354] p=0.383). 8 8
10 CONFIDENTIAL Table 3 Myocardial Ischemia Serious and Non-serious AEs: Results from Proportional Hazards Regression Analysis (All Randomized Subjects) Hazard Ratio 1 RSG Control HR (95% CI) p-value Events/ subjects (%) PY (Rate 100 PY) Events/ subjects (%) PY (Rate 100 PY) 42- Study (1.004, 1.685) /8604 (2.00) (4.15) 86/5633 (1.53) (3.21) 10 Studies (0.564, 1.198) /1435 (3.48) (5.12) 59/1323 (4.46) (6.12) 52- Study (0.890, 1.354) /10039 (2.21) (4.34) 145/6956 (2.08) (3.98) 1. Comparison is based on pooled RSG treatment group against non-rsg treatment group without covariates. 2. Values are for the 10 studies that were added to the ICT dataset in December 2008, only. Data Source: Source Table U2.1 Figure 1 shows the cumulative incidence (+/- standard error [SE]) plot of myocardial ischemia AEs for up to 2 years (720 days) for the overall All RSG vs. All Control population. Figure Cumulative Proportion with Event Time-to-Event Analysis 1 for Myocardial Ischemia Cumulative Incidence (+/- SE) Plot of Ischaemia AEs ALL RSG vs ALL Control RSG # of Subjects: # Subjects w/ Event: Control RSG (2.21%) Control (2.08%) Time since Randomisation (Days) Subjects at Risk RSG Control Studies AVD (331 RSG patients and 337 Control patients) and BRL49653/135 (116 RSG patients and 111 Control patients), also in the 42-study analysis, exposed subjects to RSG for 18 and 24 months, respectively. Data Source: Source Figure U
11 CONFIDENTIAL MACE The number of patients with at least one MACE event (n) and number of patients (N) for each of the 10 studies added to the ICT analysis are provided in Table 4: Table 4 Number and Percentage of Patients with a MACE Event for 10 Studies Added in December 2008 (All Randomized Subjects) RSG Control n/n % n/n % BRL /376 0/19 0 0/21 0 BRL /351 0/27 0 0/29 0 BRL /128 1/ /38 0 AVD /74 0 1/ BRL /374 0/84 0 0/85 0 AVD / / AVS / /93 0 AVD / /213 0 AVM / / AVD (APPROACH) 13/ / Studies 17/ / Study 80/ / Data Source: Source Table U2.2 and Source Table U2.4 The MACE HR for the 42-study ICT analysis, the 10 additional studies, and the combined 52-study ICT analysis are provided in Table 5. For the 52-study ICT, the incidence of MACE was low and similar for the RSG group (0.80%, 1.56 events per 100 patient-years) and the Control group (0.73%, 1.40 events per 100 patient-years), with no significant difference between groups (HR [95% CI to 1.593] p=0.525). The APPROACH study, which included MACE as a pre-defined secondary endpoint event, contributed a higher incidence rate than did the other studies (Table 4). Table 5 MACE: Results from Proportional Hazards Regression Analysis (All Randomized Subjects) Hazard Ratio 1 RSG Control HR (95% CI) p-value Events/ subjects (%) PY (Rate 100 PY) Events/ Subjects (%) PY (Rate 100 PY) 42- Study (0.712, 1.593) /8604 (0.73) (1.52) 38/5633 (0.67) (1.42) 10 Studies (0.628, 2.664) /1435 (1.18) (1.74) 13/1323 (0.98) (1.35) 52- Study (0.789, 1.593) /10039 (0.80) (1.56) 51/6956 (0.73) (1.40) 1. Comparison is based on pooled RSG treatment group against non-rsg treatment group without covariates. 2. Values are for the 10 studies that were added to the ICT dataset in December 2008, only. Data Source: Source Table U2.2 Figure 2 shows the cumulative incidence (+/- SE) plot of MACE for up to 2 years (720 days) for the overall All RSG vs. All Control population
12 CONFIDENTIAL Figure Cumulative Proportion with Event Time-to-Event 1 Analysis for MACE Cumulative Incidence (+/- SE) Plot of MACE ALL RSG vs ALL Control RSG # of Subjects: # Subjects w/ Event: Control RSG (0.80%) Control (0.73%) Time since Randomisation (Days) Subjects at Risk RSG Control Studies AVD (331 RSG patients and 337 Control patients) and BRL49653/135 (116 RSG patients and 11 Control patients), also in the 42 study analysis, exposed subjects to RSG for 18 and 24 months, respectively. Data Source: Source Figure U
13 CONFIDENTIAL Conclusions: Results from the analyses of the updated integrated dataset of 52 studies were generally similar to those of the previous 42-study dataset. Across the pooled treatment regimens evaluated in this 52-study ICT analysis, which encompasses 16,995 subjects in controlled double-blind studies, the incidence of events of myocardial ischemia in the RSG and Control treatment regimens was generally low. The MACE endpoint (composite of cardiovascular death, non-fatal myocardial infarction or non-fatal stroke) provides a generally accepted composite measure of overall cardiovascular mortality and morbidity in terms of serious and irreversible events. MACE events occurred infrequently in the ICT datasets with little difference between RSG and Control. The result of the analysis of the 52-study dataset is consistent with an analysis of the 42-study dataset. Of the 10 trials added, the APPROACH trial contributed the majority of events of myocardial ischemia (95 of 109 [87.2%] events) and MACE (22 of 30 [73.3%] of events) as expected given its higher-risk study population (i.e., patients with T2DM and established coronary artery disease). Previous analysis of the 42-study ICT included 46 events of myocardial ischemia from active-controlled trials, which did not show a significant increase in the risk of events of myocardial ischemia with RSG compared to active-controls (HR [95% CI to 1.584] p=0.9751); [GlaxoSmithKline Document Number ZM2005/00181/01], Adhoc Table ). APPROACH, which contributes 95 myocardial ischemic events (42/331 [12.69%] for RSG and 53/337 [15.73%] for Control) to the 52-study ICT analysis, also did not show a significant increase in risk of myocardial ischemic events with RSG compared to active controls. Only one event of myocardial ischemia was contributed by each of the two trials (BRL /128 and BRL /374) that had completed prior to the August 2005 cut-off for the 42-study ICT but did not have patient-level electronic data available at that time. Both of these events were in the RSG arms, but are not expected to have substantively affected the HR of the previous 42-study ICT analysis. The results of the analysis of the 52-study dataset are consistent with the results of the analysis of the 42-study dataset with regard to the risk of an event of myocardial ischemia. This 52-study ICT analysis remains hypothesis generating and independent long-term, randomized, clinical trials are necessary to further evaluate the cardiovascular safety of RSG. Date of Report: 23-Mar
14 CONFIDENTIAL REFERENCES Cobitz, A., Zambanini, A., Sowell, M., Heise, M., Louridas, B., McMorn, S., Semigran, M., and Koch, G. A retrospective evaluation of congestive heart failure and myocardial ischemic events in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus enrolled in 42 short-term, double-blind, randomized clinical studies with RSG. Pharmacoepidemiology and drug safety. 2008;17: GlaxoSmithKline Document Number ZM2005/00181/01. AVANDIA Cardiovascular Event Modeling Project. Report Date 16-JUL GlaxoSmithKline Document Number ZM2008/00173/00. Summary Document Analysis Plan for AVANDIA Cardiovascular Event Modeling Update. Report Date 09-DEC Thompson, S.G. and Pocock, S.J. Can meta-analysis be trusted?. Lancet. 1991;338:
15 Safety Data Source Figures and Tables Page FIGURE U2.1 Cumulative Incidence (+/- SE) Plot of Ischaemia AEs. All RSG vs All Control. 52 Studies FIGURE U2.2 Cumulative Incidence (+/- SE) Plot of MACE. All RSG vs All Control. 52 Studies FIGURE Adhoc Normal Posterior Density Assuming Noninformative Prior. Endpoint = Ischaemia; Control= Non-RSG TABLE U2.1 Myocardial Ischaemia Serious and Non-serious AEs:. Results from Proportional Hazards Regression Analysis. All Randomized Patients TABLE U2.2 MACE (CV Mortality, Myocardial Infarction SAE, Stroke SAE):. Results from Proportional Hazards Regression Analysis. All Randomized Patients TABLE U2.3 Summary of Patient and Myocardial Ischaemia Serious and Non-serious Event Counts by Study and Treatment Group. 52 Studies. All Randomized Patients TABLE U2.4 Summary of Patient and MACE (CV Mortality, Myocardial Infarction SAE, Stroke SAE) Event Counts by Study and Treatment Group. 52 Studies. All Randomized Patients TABLE Statistical Analysis of Myocardial Ischemia AEs:. Results from Proportional Hazards Regression Analysis (by Type of Study). All Randomized Patients (42 ICT Studies)
16 15 Cumulative Proportion with Event RSG # of Subjects: # Subjects w/ Event: Figure U2.1 Cumulative Incidence (+/- SE) Plot of Ischaemia AEs Control ALL RSG vs ALL Control RSG (2.21%) Control (2.08%) Time since Randomization (Days) Subjects at Risk RSG Control CONFIDENTIAL
17 16 Cumulative Proportion with Event RSG # of Subjects: # Subjects w/ Event: Figure U2.2 Cumulative Incidence (+/- SE) Plot of MACE Control ALL RSG vs ALL Control RSG (0.80%) Control (0.73%) Time since Randomization (Days) Subjects at Risk RSG Control CONFIDENTIAL
18 Adhoc 2184 Figure 1 Normal Posterior Density Assuming Noninformative Prior Endpoint=Ischaemia; Control=Non-RSG Study ADOPT ICT Hazard Ratio CONFIDENTIAL
19 Adhoc 2184 Figure 2 Normal Posterior Density Assuming Noninformative Prior Endpoint=MACE; Control=Non-RSG Study ADOPT ICT Hazard Ratio CONFIDENTIAL
20 Adhoc 2184 Figure 3 Lognormal Posterior Density Assuming Noninformative Prior Endpoint=Ischaemia; Control=Non-RSG Study ADOPT ICT Hazard Ratio, Log scale CONFIDENTIAL
21 Adhoc 2184 Figure 4 Lognormal Posterior Density Assuming Noninformative Prior Endpoint=MACE; Control=Non-RSG Study ADOPT ICT Hazard Ratio, Log scale CONFIDENTIAL
22 1 Table U2.1 Myocardial Ischaemia Serious and Non-serious AEs: Results from Proportional Hazards Regression Analysis All Randomized Patients Hazard Ratio RSG Control Treatment Comparison Rate/ Rate/ All RSG vs Non-RSG HR 95% CI p_value events/pats PY (%) 100PY events/pats PY (%) 100PY Studies (1.004, 1.685) / (2.00%) / (1.53%) Additional Studies (0.564, 1.198) / (3.48%) / (4.46%) 6.12 All 52 Studies (0.890, 1.354) / (2.21%) / (2.08%) Note: Comparison is based on pooled RSG treatment group against non-rsg treatment group without covariate. All Randomized Patients = Randomized patients with at least one dose of study medication. CONFIDENTIAL
23 1 Table U2.2 MACE (CV Mortality, Myocardial Infarction SAE, Stroke SAE): Results from Proportional Hazards Regression Analysis All Randomized Patients Hazard Ratio RSG Control Treatment Comparison Rate/ Rate/ All RSG vs Non-RSG HR 95% CI p_value events/pats PY (%) 100PY events/pats PY (%) 100PY Studies (0.712, 1.593) / (0.73%) / (0.67%) Additional Studies (0.628, 2.664) / (1.18%) / (0.98%) 1.35 All 52 Studies (0.789, 1.593) / (0.80%) / (0.73%) Note: Comparison is based on pooled RSG treatment group against non-rsg treatment group without covariate. All Randomized Patients = Randomized patients with at least one dose of study medication. CONFIDENTIAL
24 1 23 Table U2.3 Summary of Patient and Myocardial Ischaemia Serious and Non-serious Event Counts by Study and Treatment Group 52 Studies All Randomized Patients Non-RSG RSG Rate/ Rate/ Data Status Study events/pats % PY 100PY events/pats % PY 100PY Studies All 86/ 5633 (1.53%) / 8604 (2.00%) / 69 (0.00%) / 74 (2.70%) / 176 (2.27%) / 357 (2.80%) / 198 (3.03%) / 190 (2.63%) / 207 (2.42%) / 391 (3.58%) / 185 (1.62%) / 774 (1.68%) / 63 (3.17%) / 30 (0.00%) / 51 (0.00%) / 101 (0.99%) / 106 (1.89%) / 203 (0.99%) / 107 (0.00%) / 212 (2.36%) / 17 (5.88%) / 16 (0.00%) / 139 (0.72%) / 138 (4.35%) / 75 (0.00%) / 149 (0.67%) / 109 (0.92%) / 213 (2.35%) / 116 (0.86%) / 232 (1.29%) / 96 (3.13%) / 196 (3.06%) / 115 (0.87%) / 116 (5.17%) / 96 (1.04%) / 191 (1.57%) / 58 (3.45%) / 56 (3.57%) / 110 (0.91%) / 437 (0.69%) / 276 (1.45%) / 561 (1.60%) / 111 (8.11%) / 116 (9.48%) / 142 (1.41%) / 148 (2.70%) / 185 (3.24%) / 204 (1.96%) / 71 (0.00%) / 65 (0.00%) / 124 (0.81%) / 121 (0.83%) / 242 (0.83%) / 231 (2.60%) / 88 (2.27%) / 89 (5.62%) / 172 (0.00%) / 168 (1.79%) / 114 (5.26%) / 110 (8.18%) / 58 (0.00%) / 116 (0.00%) / 75 (1.33%) / 70 (0.00%) / 384 (0.52%) / 382 (1.31%) / 14 (0.00%) / 58 (0.00%) / 195 (1.54%) / 196 (1.53%) / 95 (2.11%) / 99 (1.01%) / 212 (1.89%) / 209 (1.91%) / 30 (13.33%) / 31 (16.13%) / 24 (0.00%) / 25 (4.00%) /002 0/ 280 (0.00%) / 289 (1.73%) /003 0/ 272 (0.00%) / 254 (1.57%) All Randomized Patients = Randomized patients with at least one dose of study medication. CONFIDENTIAL
25 2 24 Table U2.3 Summary of Patient and Myocardial Ischaemia Serious and Non-serious Event Counts by Study and Treatment Group 52 Studies All Randomized Patients Non-RSG RSG Rate/ Rate/ Data Status Study events/pats % PY 100PY events/pats % PY 100PY Studies /007 2/ 154 (1.30%) / 314 (0.96%) /004 2/ 222 (0.90%) / 672 (0.30%) New All 59/ 1323 (4.46%) / 1435 (3.48%) / 38 (0.00%) / 39 (2.56%) / 131 (2.29%) / 132 (0.00%) / 29 (3.45%) / 27 (7.41%) / 85 (0.00%) / 84 (1.19%) /376 0/ 21 (0.00%) / 19 (0.00%) AVD / 337 (15.73%) / 331 (12.69%) AVD / 213 (0.00%) / 159 (0.00%) AVD / 75 (0.00%) / 74 (0.00%) AVM / 301 (0.66%) / 294 (0.68%) AVS / 93 (0.00%) / 276 (0.72%) Total 145/ 6956 (2.08%) /10039 (2.21%) All Randomized Patients = Randomized patients with at least one dose of study medication. CONFIDENTIAL
26 1 25 Table U2.4 Summary of Patient and MACE (CV Mortality, Myocardial Infarction SAE, Stroke SAE) Event Counts by Study and Treatment Group 52 Studies All Randomized Patients Non-RSG RSG Rate/ Rate/ Data Status Study events/pats % PY 100PY events/pats % PY 100PY Studies All 38/ 5633 (0.67%) / 8604 (0.73%) / 69 (0.00%) / 74 (1.35%) / 176 (1.70%) / 357 (0.84%) / 198 (1.01%) / 190 (0.53%) / 207 (0.48%) / 391 (0.51%) / 185 (1.08%) / 774 (0.52%) / 63 (0.00%) / 30 (0.00%) / 51 (0.00%) / 101 (0.00%) / 106 (0.94%) / 203 (0.49%) / 107 (0.00%) / 212 (1.89%) / 17 (0.00%) / 16 (0.00%) / 139 (2.88%) / 138 (3.62%) / 75 (0.00%) / 149 (0.67%) / 109 (0.92%) / 213 (0.47%) / 116 (0.00%) / 232 (0.86%) / 96 (1.04%) / 196 (1.02%) / 115 (0.00%) / 116 (0.86%) / 96 (0.00%) / 191 (0.52%) / 58 (0.00%) / 56 (1.79%) / 110 (0.00%) / 437 (0.23%) / 276 (0.72%) / 561 (0.18%) / 111 (4.50%) / 116 (1.72%) / 142 (0.70%) / 148 (3.38%) / 185 (3.24%) / 204 (0.49%) / 71 (0.00%) / 65 (0.00%) / 124 (0.00%) / 121 (0.83%) / 242 (0.00%) / 231 (0.87%) / 88 (1.14%) / 89 (1.12%) / 172 (0.58%) / 168 (1.19%) / 114 (5.26%) / 110 (7.27%) / 58 (0.00%) / 116 (0.00%) / 75 (0.00%) / 70 (0.00%) / 384 (0.00%) / 382 (0.79%) / 14 (7.14%) / 58 (0.00%) / 195 (0.00%) / 196 (0.51%) / 95 (0.00%) / 99 (0.00%) / 212 (0.00%) / 209 (0.00%) / 30 (0.00%) / 31 (3.23%) / 24 (0.00%) / 25 (0.00%) /002 0/ 280 (0.00%) / 289 (0.69%) /003 0/ 272 (0.00%) / 254 (0.39%) All Randomized Patients = Randomized patients with at least one dose of study medication. CONFIDENTIAL
27 2 26 Table U2.4 Summary of Patient and MACE (CV Mortality, Myocardial Infarction SAE, Stroke SAE) Event Counts by Study and Treatment Group 52 Studies All Randomized Patients Non-RSG RSG Rate/ Rate/ Data Status Study events/pats % PY 100PY events/pats % PY 100PY Studies /007 0/ 154 (0.00%) / 314 (0.32%) /004 0/ 222 (0.00%) / 672 (0.00%) New All 13/ 1323 (0.98%) / 1435 (1.18%) / 38 (0.00%) / 39 (2.56%) / 131 (0.76%) / 132 (0.00%) / 29 (0.00%) / 27 (0.00%) / 85 (0.00%) / 84 (0.00%) /376 0/ 21 (0.00%) / 19 (0.00%) AVD / 337 (2.67%) / 331 (3.93%) AVD / 213 (0.00%) / 159 (0.00%) AVD / 75 (1.33%) / 74 (0.00%) AVM / 301 (0.66%) / 294 (0.68%) AVS / 93 (0.00%) / 276 (0.36%) Total 51/ 6956 (0.73%) /10039 (0.80%) All Randomized Patients = Randomized patients with at least one dose of study medication. CONFIDENTIAL
28 1 Adhoc Table Statistical Analysis of Myocardial Ischemia AEs: Results from Proportional Hazards Regression Analysis (by Type of Study) All Randomized Patients (42 ICT Studies) Hazard Ratio RSG Control Rate/ Rate/ Treatment Comparison HR 95% CI p_value events/pats PY (%) 100PY events/pats PY (%) 100PY Placebo Control Only#: (1.217, 2.317) / (2.02%) / (1.25%) 2.87 RSG vs. Control Active and Comb.*: (0.641, 1.584) / (1.90%) / (2.29%) 3.86 RSG vs. Control 27 Note: The treatment comparison is based on a proportional hazards regression model adjusting for number of major cardiovascular risk factors as a covariate. See Table a for supporting SAS statistical output. # Include studies 006, 011, 015, 024, 044, 082, 083, 085, 090, 094, 095, 096, 098, 127, 132, 134, 135, 136, 140, 143, 145, 147, 162, 234, 284, 325, 347, /002 and /003. * Include studies 020, 137, 282, 369, 025, 079, 093, 211, 311, 334, 352, /007 and /004. CONFIDENTIAL
29 CONFIDENTIAL ZM2008/00173/00 The GlaxoSmithKline group of companies Division: Worldwide Development Retention Category: GRS019 Information Type: Summary Document Analysis Plan Title: Summary Document Analysis Plan for Avandia Cardiovascular Event Modeling Update Compound Number: BRL Effective Date: 09-DEC-2008 Description: The hazard ratio estimate and corresponding confidence interval for myocardial ischaemia as well as major adverse cardiovascular event (MACE) from the pooled Integrated Clinical Trial (ICT) database will be updated with additional data from 10 studies. Subject: Avandia, Cardiovascular Events, Statistical Model, Myocardial Ischaemia, MACE Author: Copyright 2008 the GlaxoSmithKline group of companies. All rights reserved. Unauthorised copying or use of this information is prohibited 1
30 CONFIDENTIAL ZM2008/00173/00 TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE ABBREVIATIONS INTRODUCTION OBJECTIVE(S) STUDIES TO BE INCORPORATED INTO THE ICT PLANNED STATISTICAL ANALYSES ANALYSIS POPULATIONS TREATMENT COMPARISONS GENERAL CONSIDERATIONS FOR DATA ANALYSES DATA HANDLING CONVENTIONS SUMMARY POPULATION SAFETY ANALYSES ENDPOINTS Myocardial Ischaemia Myocardial Ischaemia Determination Based on Serious AEs Myocardial Ischaemia Determination Based on Non- Serious AEs Major Adverse Cardiovascular Event (MACE) Determination of MACE for All Studies Except APPROACH Determination of MACE for APPROACH REFERENCES
31 CONFIDENTIAL ZM2008/00173/00 ABBREVIATIONS ADOPT AE APPROACH CHF CRF CV CTR ECG FDC GSK HR ICT LLT MACE MedDRA NDA RSG R&D SAE SU USP WHO A Diabetes Outcome Progression Trial Adverse Event Assessment on the Prevention of Progression by Rosiglitazone on Atherosclerosis in Diabetes Patients with Cardiovascular History Congestive Heart Failure Case Report Form Cardiovascular Clinical Trial Registry Electrocardiogram Fixed Dose Combination GlaxoSmithKline Hazard Ratio Integrated Clinical Trial Lower Level Term Major Adverse Cardiovascular Events Medical Dictionary for Regulatory Activities New Drug Application Rosiglitazone Research & Development Serious Adverse Event Sulfonylurea United States Pharmaceuticals World Health Organization Trademark Information Trademarks of the GlaxoSmithKline group of companies AVANDIA AVANDAMET Trademarks not owned by the GlaxoSmithKline group of companies None 3
32 CONFIDENTIAL ZM2008/00173/00 1. INTRODUCTION In 2005, a statistical analysis (CV modelling) of the Avandia Integrated Clinical Trial database (ICT), consisting of data from 42 GSK clinical trials, was conducted to estimate the risk (and associated confidence interval) of developing / exacerbating congestive heart failure (CHF) and events associated with myocardial ischaemia for rosiglitazone relative to active or placebo control. The 42 trials were determined based on fully documented criteria established in advance of their integration, based on a data cut-off date of August 2005 and the studies were centrally monitored (either R&D or USPsponsored) with patient level electronic data centrally available for integration. During a review of clinical trials conducted with rosiglitazone worldwide (undertaken to support a remedial review for NDA , July 2008), it was noted that 2 studies (128 and 374) completed prior to August 2005, described in Table 1, met the design criteria for inclusion into the ICT. Although patient level electronic data had not been centrally available for integration at the time of the ICT analysis, both of these studies were conducted by non-us local operating companies, but were not centrally monitored. In addition, 8 other studies, described in Table 1, met the ICT inclusion criteria but had data available after the Aug 2005 cut off; 4 of these studies were conducted by GSK Research & Development (R&D), and 4 were conducted by non-us local operating companies. Since these 10 studies met the design criteria for the ICT analysis, it was determined that the data from these studies should be integrated with the previous studies. An update to the CV modelling analysis will be performed using the additional data from these 10 studies. The scope of the updated analysis will focus on the effect of rosiglitazone relative to control on events associated with myocardial ischaemia and MACE (major adverse cardiovascular events; composite of cardiovascular death, nonfatal myocardial infarction, or non-fatal stroke; defined in Section 10.2), which is an endpoint not defined in the previous ICT. Specifically for myocardial ischaemia, the scope of the analysis will be to update the hazard ratio estimate (and confidence interval) based on comparison between the pooled RSG and the pooled non-rsg groups as reported in the GSK Clinical Trial Registry (CTR). A similar analysis will be performed for MACE. 2. OBJECTIVE(S) The primary objectives are: to estimate the myocardial ischaemia hazard ratio (and associated confidence interval) for rosiglitazone relative to active or placebo control based on a statistical analysis of an updated integrated clinical trial data. The HR based on the previous ICT was reported in the CTR and an updated estimate will be calculated using the pooled data from the previous ICT as well as data from 10 additional studies. to estimate the MACE hazard ratio (and associated confidence interval) for rosiglitazone relative to active or placebo control based on a statistical analysis of an updated integrated clinical trial data. 4
33 CONFIDENTIAL ZM2008/00173/00 3. STUDIES TO BE INCORPORATED INTO THE ICT The requirements for inclusion in the original ICT are described in the ICT Statistical Analysis Plan [Cobitz, 2005] and in particular required that they be double-blind. This analysis will incorporate the following double-blind studies listed in Table 1 into the previous ICT. Table 1 Studies to be Included Study RSG Regimen Control RSG Notes TDD* 128 RSG+SU Placebo+SU 4 mg Local study in Taiwan 374 RSG+αglucosidase Placebo+αglucosidase 4 mg Local study in Japan inhibitor inhibitor AVM Avandamet Metformin+SU 4 8 mg EU study with Central R&D monitoring 376 RSG Placebo 4 mg Central R&D funded AVS RSG; Simvastatin 4 8 mg Central R&D funded RSG+Simvastatin FDC AVD RSG+Insulin Insulin 4 mg Local study in China AVD RSG Placebo; Pioglitazone 4 8 mg Local study in Japan AVD RSG+SU Placebo+SU 4 mg Local study in Japan 351 RSG Placebo 4 8 mg Central R&D funded AVD RSG Glipizide(SU) 4 8 mg APPROACH; Central R&D funded *TDD=Total daily dose Since the ICT is comprised of predominantly short-term studies used to generate hypotheses, which can be independently tested in long-term trials; the long-term ADOPT study will not be included in this update. The substantially greater follow-up in the ADOPT study (4 to 6 years) would introduce clinical heterogeneity, limiting the interpretability of analyses from the integrated dataset [Thompson, 1991]. In addition, an exploratory data analysis of the hazard ratios and corresponding confidence intervals for programmatically-derived myocardial ischaemia AEs highlight substantial difference between ADOPT and the previous ICT, underscoring statistical heterogeneity that would further undermine interpretation should ADOPT be included. 4. PLANNED STATISTICAL ANALYSES Analysis of the event myocardial ischaemia AEs and SAEs and MACE (cardiovascular death, non-fatal myocardial infarction, and non-fatal stroke) will be performed with additional data from 10 studies. Derivation of these endpoints is described in Section 10. The analysis of interest using the updated ICT database will include re-estimating the HR estimate for the comparison between the group taking rosiglitazone (RSG) and the group not taking RSG regardless of the RSG dose and other background medication. 5
34 CONFIDENTIAL ZM2008/00173/00 Assignment to the treatment groups represented in the comparisons above will be based on randomized treatment assignment. This analysis is identical to the one performed to generate the myocardial ischaemia hazard ratio and confidence interval for comparing RSG and non-rsg groups as reported in the CTR. The planned analyses involve the safety endpoints myocardial ischaemia and MACE, which are defined in Section 10.1 and Section 10.2, respectively. A Cox proportional hazards model analysis will be used to calculate the hazard ratio for RSG relative to non- RSG comparator. Subjects who were randomized to RSG will be pooled into one group and those randomized to control will be pooled into another group. The model will contain the term for pooled treatment but will not be adjusted for other covariates. This analysis will be performed by combining the raw data from the 10 additional studies and the previous ICT data. Consistent with the overall estimate reported in the CTR, the updated analysis will not be stratified by study. Although this requires a stronger proportional hazards assumption than would be the case for a stratified analysis, it does permit follow-up time for patients in zero-event studies to be included in the event that this could affect the hazard ratio estimate. A summary of the event rate per 100 patient-year will also be provided by treatment group. Cumulative incidence plots by treatment group will be generated. 5. ANALYSIS POPULATIONS All randomized patients will be included in the planned analysis. The exception to this is that data will be excluded from centers where there were alleged irregularities in data collection or which failed a study audit (n=65 patients). Excluding these patients is consistent with the approach that was taken for safety summaries in reporting of these studies to regulatory authorities. 6. TREATMENT COMPARISONS Treatment comparisons using the updated ICT data will be between the pooled RSG group and the pooled non-rsg group. 7. GENERAL CONSIDERATIONS FOR DATA ANALYSES The analysis will be limited in scope compared to the previous CV modelling exercise as the intent is to update the myocardial ischaemia hazard ratio point estimate and corresponding confidence interval reported in the CTR. As the objective is to update a previously-reported estimate, the planned statistical analysis will be identical to the one performed to obtain the previous estimate. 6
35 8. DATA HANDLING CONVENTIONS CONFIDENTIAL ZM2008/00173/00 Data handling conventions used for the analysis of the previous ICT will be followed as applicable. These include handling of premature withdrawal and missing data, derivation and transformations of data, as well as definition calculation of assessment windows. See ICT Analysis Plan for details [Cobitz, 2005]. 9. SUMMARY POPULATION The data from the 42 studies from the previous ICT and the 10 additional studies will be pooled together. A summary of the number of randomized patients by study and treatment will be reported. The number of events in the previous ICT data and the number of events in the additional data will be summarized by treatment group and by study. 10. SAFETY ANALYSES ENDPOINTS Myocardial ischaemia and major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) are the two primary events of interest in these statistical analyses. Details of the analysis are described in Section 4. For studies included in the previous ICT, assignment to myocardial ischaemia will follow what has been defined in the previous ICT [Cobitz, 2005]. For the additional 10 studies listed in Table 1, assignment to myocardial ischaemia is described in Section Assignment to MACE for the 10 additional studies will follow what has been done in a previous analysis and is described in Section Myocardial Ischaemia The review process for identification of myocardial ischaemia will be based on information entered in the AE as well as SAE CRF pages Myocardial Ischaemia Determination Based on Serious AEs Since more information is available for SAEs, event determination for SAEs will be based on a review of the complete narrative for each event, but the reviewer will be blinded to the randomised treatment information. SAE cases for blinded review will be identified as follows: All SAEs coding to a cardiovascular or respiratory body system or organ class Body System of Cardiovascular General, Heart Rate and Rhythm, Myocardial Endocardial Perdicardial Valve or Respiratory System (WHO Dictionary); or System Organ Class of Cardiac Disorders or General Disorders and Administration Site Conditions (MedDRA Dictionary); or 7
Assessing Cardiovascular risk in different populations
A-1 Assessing Cardiovascular risk in different populations Murray Stewart (GSK) A-2 Studies with RSG across different risk population Short term studies low risk ADOPT newly diagnosed low risk DREAM IGT
More informationRegulatory Experience in Reviewing CV Safety for Diabetes
Regulatory Experience in Reviewing CV Safety for Diabetes Drugs Kristina Dunder MD, PhD, Alternate CHMP member MPA, Sweden Disclaimer The views and opinions expressed in the following PowerPoint slides
More informationGSK Medicine: Study Number: Title: Rationale: Phase: Study Period: Study Design: Centres: Indication: Treatment: Objectives:
The study listed may include approved and non-approved uses, formulations or treatment regimens. The results reported in any single study may not reflect the overall results obtained on studies of a product.
More informationLATE BREAKING STUDIES IN DM AND CAD. Will this change the guidelines?
LATE BREAKING STUDIES IN DM AND CAD Will this change the guidelines? Objectives 1. Discuss current guidelines for prevention of CHD in diabetes. 2. Discuss the FDA Guidance for Industry regarding evaluating
More informationClinical Trial Synopsis TL-OPI-516, NCT#
Clinical Trial Synopsis, NCT#00225277 Title of Study: A Double-Blind, Randomized, Comparator-Controlled Study in Subjects With Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus Comparing the Effects of Pioglitazone HCl Versus
More informationGSK Medicine: Study No.: Title: Rationale: Objectives: Indication: Study Investigators/Centers: Research Methods:
The study listed may include approved and non-approved uses, formulations or treatment regimens. The results reported in any single study may not reflect the overall results obtained on studies of a product.
More informationGlaxoSmithKline has reviewed the editorial by Dr. Steven Nissen published online on February 12. 1
21 February 2010 Thomas F. Lüscher, Editor-in-Chief Sam Rogers, Managing Editor Susanne B. Dedecke, Managing Editor European Heart Journal TheZurichHeartHouse Moussonstrasse 4 CH-8091 Zurich Switzerland
More informationDIABETES AND METABOLIC SYNDROME
TRIALS NUMBER OF PARTICIPANTS NUMBER OF WOMEN PERCENTAGE OF WOMEN MEAN AGE MEAN - (YEARS) TRIALS WITH ANALYSIS BY GENDER N, (%) 48,508 20,091 41.4% 61.1 4.3 4/7 (57.1%) HR PROactive (Dormandy et al 61
More informationThis clinical study synopsis is provided in line with Boehringer Ingelheim s Policy on Transparency and Publication of Clinical Study Data.
abcd Clinical Study Synopsis for Public Disclosure This clinical study synopsis is provided in line with s Policy on Transparency and Publication of Clinical Study Data. The synopsis which is part of the
More informationClinical Trial Synopsis TL-OPI-518, NCT#
Clinical Trial Synopsis, NCT# 00225264 Title of Study: A Double-Blind, Randomized, Comparator-Controlled Study in Subjects With Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus Comparing the Effects of Pioglitazone HCl vs Glimepiride
More informationEfficacy of beta-blockers in heart failure patients with atrial fibrillation: An individual patient data meta-analysis
Efficacy of beta-blockers in heart failure patients with atrial fibrillation: An individual patient data meta-analysis Dipak Kotecha, MD PhD on behalf of the Selection of slides presented at the European
More informationMetformin. Sulfonylurea. Thiazolidinedione. Insulin
동아의대내분비내과박미경 Metformin Sulfonylurea Thiazolidinedione Insulin 요약 markers of inflammation (hs-crp, TNF-a) markers of impaired endothelial function (VFW, scams, tpa, PAI-1) LDL-C, fasting and postprandial
More informationReflection paper on assessment of cardiovascular safety profile of medicinal products
25 February 2016 EMA/CHMP/50549/2015 Committee for Medicinal Products for Human Use (CHMP) Reflection paper on assessment of cardiovascular safety profile of medicinal products Draft agreed by Cardiovascular
More informationThis clinical study synopsis is provided in line with Boehringer Ingelheim s Policy on Transparency and Publication of Clinical Study Data.
abcd Clinical Study Synopsis for Public Disclosure This clinical study synopsis is provided in line with s Policy on Transparency and Publication of Clinical Study Data. The synopsis which is part of the
More informationStatistical challenges of meta-analyses of randomised clinical trials in a regulatory setting
Statistical challenges of meta-analyses of randomised clinical trials in a regulatory setting Frank Pétavy ISCTM 14th Annual Scientific Meeting, Washington D.C. Presented by Frank Pétavy on 21 February
More informationClinialTrials.gov Identifier: HOE901_4020 Insulin Glargine Date: Study Code: This was a multicenter study that was conducted at 59 US sites
These results are supplied for informational purposes only. Prescribing decisions should be made based on the approved package insert in the country of prescription Sponsor/company: Generic drug name:
More informationStudy No.: Title: Rationale: Phase: Study Period: Study Design: Centres: Indication: Treatment: Objectives: Primary Outcome/Efficacy Variable:
The study listed may include approved and non-approved uses, formulations or treatment regimens. The results reported in any single study may not reflect the overall results obtained on studies of a product.
More informationUsing DOACs in CAD Patients in Sinus Ryhthm Results of the ATLAS ACS 2, COMPASS and COMMANDER-HF Trials
Using DOACs in CAD Patients in Sinus Ryhthm Results of the ATLAS ACS 2, COMPASS and COMMANDER-HF Trials 19 th Annual San Diego Heart Failure Symposium for Primary Care Physicians January 11-12, 2019 La
More informationCritical Appraisal of a Meta-Analysis: Rosiglitazone and CV Death. Debra Moy Faculty of Pharmacy University of Toronto
Critical Appraisal of a Meta-Analysis: Rosiglitazone and CV Death Debra Moy Faculty of Pharmacy University of Toronto Goal To provide practitioners with a systematic approach to evaluating a meta analysis
More informationVarenicline and cardiovascular and neuropsychiatric events: Do Benefits outweigh risks?
Varenicline and cardiovascular and neuropsychiatric events: Do Benefits outweigh risks? Sonal Singh M.D., M.P.H, Johns Hopkins University Presented by: Sonal Singh, MD MPH September 19, 2012 1 CONFLICTS
More informationHanyang University Guri Hospital Chang Beom Lee
Hanyang University Guri Hospital Chang Beom Lee Meal prayer, Van Brekelenkam 17 th C Introduction 2012 ADA/EASD Position Statement Proper Patients for Pioglitazone β-cell Preservation by Pioglitazone Benefit
More informationClinical Trial Study Synopsis
Clinical Trial Study Synopsis This file is posted on the Bayer HealthCare Clinical Trials Registry and Results website and is provided for patients and healthcare professionals to increase the transparency
More informationAntihypertensive Trial Design ALLHAT
1 U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Major Outcomes in High Risk Hypertensive Patients Randomized to Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitor or Calcium Channel Blocker vs Diuretic National Institutes
More informationReflection paper on assessment of cardiovascular risk of medicinal products for the treatment of cardiovascular and metabolic diseases Draft
1 2 3 21 May 2015 EMA/CHMP/50549/2015 Committee for Medicinal Products for Human Use (CHMP) 4 5 6 7 Reflection paper on assessment of cardiovascular risk of medicinal products for the treatment of cardiovascular
More information23-Aug-2011 Lixisenatide (AVE0010) - EFC6014 Version number: 1 (electronic 1.0)
SYNOPSIS Title of the study: A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group, multicenter 24-week study followed by an extension assessing the efficacy and safety of AVE0010 on top of metformin
More information2.0 Synopsis. Adalimumab M Clinical Study Report R&D/04/900. (For National Authority Use Only) Referring to Part of Dossier: Volume:
2. Synopsis Abbott Laboratories Name of Study Drug: Name of Active Ingredient: Title of Study: Individual Study Table Referring to Part of Dossier: Volume: Page: (For National Authority Use Only) Phase
More informationStudy 2 ( ) Pivotal Phase 3 Study Top-Line Results. October 29, 2018
Study 2 (1002-047) Pivotal Phase 3 Study Top-Line Results October 29, 2018 Safe Harbor Forward-Looking Statements These slides and the accompanying oral presentation contain forward-looking statements
More informationSystematic reviews and meta-analyses of observational studies (MOOSE): Checklist.
Systematic reviews and meta-analyses of observational studies (MOOSE): Checklist. MOOSE Checklist Infliximab reduces hospitalizations and surgery interventions in patients with inflammatory bowel disease:
More informationOral Hypoglycemics and Risk of Adverse Cardiac Events: A Summary of the Controversy
Oral Hypoglycemics and Risk of Adverse Cardiac Events: A Summary of the Controversy Jeffrey Boord, MD, MPH Advances in Cardiovascular Medicine Kingston, Jamaica December 7, 2012 VanderbiltHeart.com Outline
More informationSYNOPSIS. Administration: subcutaneous injection Batch number(s):
SYNOPSIS Title of the study: A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, 2-arm parallel-group, multicenter 24-week study followed by an extension assessing the efficacy and safety of AVE0010 on top
More informationDu gusts is megl che one. Edoardo Mannucci
Du gusts is megl che one Edoardo Mannucci Conflitti di interessi Negli ultimi due anni, E. Mannucci ha ricevuto compensi per relazioni e/o consulenze da: Abbott, AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Eli
More informationEmpagliflozin (Jardiance ) for the treatment of type 2 diabetes mellitus, the EMPA REG OUTCOME study
Empagliflozin (Jardiance ) for the treatment of type 2 diabetes mellitus, the EMPA REG OUTCOME study POSITION STATEMENT: Clinicians should continue to follow MHRA advice and NICE technology appraisal guidance
More informationThis clinical study synopsis is provided in line with Boehringer Ingelheim s Policy on Transparency and Publication of Clinical Study Data.
abcd Clinical Study for Public Disclosure This clinical study synopsis is provided in line with s Policy on Transparency and Publication of Clinical Study Data. The synopsis which is part of the clinical
More informationCardiovascular Risk of Celecoxib in 6 Randomized Placebo-controlled Trials: The Cross Trial Safety Analysis
Cardiovascular Risk of Celecoxib in 6 Randomized Placebo-controlled Trials: The Cross Trial Safety Analysis Scott D. Solomon, MD, Janet Wittes, PhD, Ernest Hawk, MD, MPH for the Celecoxib Cross Trials
More informationClinical Trial Study Synopsis
Clinical Trial Study Synopsis This file is posted on the Bayer HealthCare Clinical Trials Registry and Results website and is provided for patients and healthcare professionals to increase the transparency
More informationThe clinical trial information provided in this public disclosure synopsis is supplied for informational purposes only.
The clinical trial information provided in this public disclosure synopsis is supplied for informational purposes only. Please note that the results reported in any single trial may not reflect the overall
More informationSupplementary Online Content
1 Supplementary Online Content Friedman DJ, Piccini JP, Wang T, et al. Association between left atrial appendage occlusion and readmission for thromboembolism among patients with atrial fibrillation undergoing
More informationUsing Statistical Principles to Implement FDA Guidance on Cardiovascular Risk Assessment for Diabetes Drugs
Using Statistical Principles to Implement FDA Guidance on Cardiovascular Risk Assessment for Diabetes Drugs David Manner, Brenda Crowe and Linda Shurzinske BASS XVI November 9-13, 2009 Acknowledgements
More informationClinical Study Synopsis
Clinical Study Synopsis This Clinical Study Synopsis is provided for patients and healthcare professionals to increase the transparency of Bayer's clinical research. This document is not intended to replace
More informationDisclosures (2013 to the present)
What level and types of CV safety data acquisition should be considered to sufficiently characterize a drug s benefit/risk assessment by the end of Phase 3 development? Cardiac Safety Research Consortium
More informationClinical Trial Report Synopsis
This document has been do\vnloaded from \v ww.leo-pharma.com subject to the terms of use state on the website. It contains data and results regarding approved and non-approved uses, formulations or treatment
More informationThe promise of the thiazolidinediones in the management of type 2 diabetes-associated cardiovascular disease
The promise of the thiazolidinediones in the management of type 2 diabetes-associated cardiovascular disease Steve Smith, Group Director Scientific Affairs, Diabetes & Metabolism GlaxoSmithKline R & D
More informationUpdate on Diabetes Cardiovascular Outcome Trials
Update on Diabetes Cardiovascular Outcome Trials Jay S. Skyler, MD, MACP Division of Endocrinology, Diabetes, and Metabolism and Diabetes Research Institute University of Miami Miller School of Medicine
More informationClinical Study Synopsis
Clinical Study Synopsis This Clinical Study Synopsis is provided for patients and healthcare professionals to increase the transparency of Bayer's clinical research. This document is not intended to replace
More informationClinical Study Synopsis
Clinical Study Synopsis This Clinical Study Synopsis is provided for patients and healthcare professionals to increase the transparency of Bayer's clinical research. This document is not intended to replace
More informationLEADER Liraglutide and cardiovascular outcomes in type 2 diabetes
LEADER Liraglutide and cardiovascular outcomes in type 2 diabetes Presented at DSBS seminar on mediation analysis August 18 th Søren Rasmussen, Novo Nordisk. LEADER CV outcome study To determine the effect
More informationCARDIOVASCULAR SAFETY OF FEBUXOSTAT OR ALLOPURINOL IN PATIENTS WITH GOUT AND CARDIOVASCULAR DISEASE (The CARES Trial)
CARDIOVASCULAR SAFETY OF FEBUXOSTAT OR ALLOPURINOL IN PATIENTS WITH GOUT AND CARDIOVASCULAR DISEASE (The CARES Trial) William B. White, MD, for the CARES Investigators Calhoun Cardiology Center University
More informationInvestor Conference Call
Investor Conference Call Data from the Phase III COMPASS trial, A Randomized Controlled Trial of Rivaroxaban for the Prevention of Major Cardiovascular Events in Patients With Coronary or Peripheral Artery
More informationMedicinal product no longer authorised
Procedural steps taken and scientific information after the authorisation Changes made after 1 September 2003 For procedures finalised before 1 September 2003, please refer to Procedural steps taken until
More informationGLP 1 agonists Winning the Losing Battle. Dr Bernard SAMIA. KCS Congress: Impact through collaboration
GLP 1 agonists Winning the Losing Battle Dr Bernard SAMIA KCS Congress: Impact through collaboration CONTACT: Tel. +254 735 833 803 Email: kcardiacs@gmail.com Web: www.kenyacardiacs.org Disclosures I have
More informationFinland and Sweden and UK GP-HOSP datasets
Web appendix: Supplementary material Table 1 Specific diagnosis codes used to identify bladder cancer cases in each dataset Finland and Sweden and UK GP-HOSP datasets Netherlands hospital and cancer registry
More informationThe clinical trial information provided in this public disclosure synopsis is supplied for informational purposes only.
The clinical trial information provided in this public disclosure synopsis is supplied for informational purposes only. Please note that the results reported in any single trial may not reflect the overall
More informationJAMA. 2011;305(24): Nora A. Kalagi, MSc
JAMA. 2011;305(24):2556-2564 By Nora A. Kalagi, MSc Cardiovascular disease (CVD) is the number one cause of mortality and morbidity world wide Reducing high blood cholesterol which is a risk factor for
More informationStudy Center(s): The study was conducted at 39 study sites in Japan.
SYNOPSIS Issue Date: 20 NOVEMBER 2012 Name of Sponsor/Company Janssen Pharmaceutical K. K. Name of Finished Product CONCERTA Name of Active Ingredient(s) Methylphenidate HCl Protocol No.: JNS001-JPN-A01
More informationStudy No.: Title: Rationale: Phase: Study Period: Study Design: Centres: Indication: Treatment: Objectives: Primary Outcome/Efficacy Variable:
The study listed may include approved and non-approved uses, formulations or treatment regimens. The results reported in any single study may not reflect the overall results obtained on studies of a product.
More information2.0 Synopsis. Adalimumab R&D/04/118. (For National Authority Use Only) Referring to Part of Dossier: Volume:
2.0 Synopsis Abbott Laboratories Name of Study Drug: Adalimumab Name of Active Ingredient: Adalimumab Title of Study: Individual Study Table Referring to Part of Dossier: Volume: Page: (For National Authority
More informationThis was a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, fixed-dose, parallel-group study.
The study listed may include approved and non-approved uses, formulations or treatment regimens. The results reported in any single study may not reflect the overall results obtained on studies of a product.
More informationRegulatory Hurdles for Drug Approvals
Regulatory Hurdles for Drug Approvals William R. Hiatt, MD Professor of Medicine/Cardiology University of Colorado School of Medicine President, CPC Clinical Research 25 min Conflicts CPC Clinical Research
More informationNo Increased Cardiovascular Risk for Lixisenatide in ELIXA
ON ISSUES IN THE MANAGEMENT OF TYPE 2 DIABETES JUNE 2015 Coverage of data from ADA 2015, June 5 9 in Boston, Massachusetts No Increased Cardiovascular Risk for Lixisenatide in ELIXA First Cardiovascular
More informationGlycemic control a matter of life and death
Glycemic control a matter of life and death Linda Garcia Mellbin MD PhD Specialist in Cardiology & Internal medicine Dep of Cardiology Karolinska University Hospital /Karolinska Institutet Mortality (%)
More informationGlucose Control and Prevention of Cardiovascular Disease
Glucose Control and Prevention of Cardiovascular Disease Dr Peter A Senior BMedSci MBBS PhD FRCP(E) Associate Professor, Director Division of Endocrinology, University of Alberta Diabetes Update+, March
More informationApproach to Multi Vessel disease with STEMI
Approach to Multi Vessel disease with STEMI MANAGEMENT OF ST-ELEVATION MYOCARDIAL INFARCTION Dr. Thomas Alexander, M.D; D.M; F.A.C.C. Senior Consultant and Interventional Cardiologist Kovai Medical Centre
More informationClinical Study Synopsis
Clinical Study Synopsis This Clinical Study Synopsis is provided for patients and healthcare professionals to increase the transparency of Bayer's clinical research. This document is not intended to replace
More informationThe CARI Guidelines Caring for Australians with Renal Impairment. Cardiovascular Risk Factors
Cardiovascular Risk Factors ROB WALKER (Dunedin, New Zealand) Lipid-lowering therapy in patients with chronic kidney disease Date written: January 2005 Final submission: August 2005 Author: Rob Walker
More informationSCIENTIFIC STUDY REPORT
PAGE 1 18-NOV-2016 SCIENTIFIC STUDY REPORT Study Title: Real-Life Effectiveness and Care Patterns of Diabetes Management The RECAP-DM Study 1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Introduction: Despite the well-established
More informationPatient characteristics Intervention Comparison Length of followup
ISCHAEMIA TESTING CHAPTER TESTING FOR MYCOCARDIAL ISCHAEMIA VERSUS NOT TESTING FOR MYOCARDIAL ISCHAEMIA Ref ID: 4154 Reference Wienbergen H, Kai GA, Schiele R et al. Actual clinical practice exercise ing
More informationGSK Medicine: Study Number: Title: Rationale: Phase: Study Period: Study Design: Centers: Indication: Treatment: Objective:
GSK Medicine: abacavir (ABC)/dolutegravir (DTG)/lamivudine (3TC) Study Number: 201147 Title: A IIIb, randomized, open-label study of the safety, efficacy, and tolerability of switching to a fixed-dose
More informationSponsor / Company: Sanofi Drug substance(s): HOE901-U300 (insulin glargine) According to template: QSD VERSION N 4.0 (07-JUN-2012) Page 1
These results are supplied for informational purposes only. Prescribing decisions should be made based on the approved package insert in the country of prescription. Sponsor / Company: Sanofi Drug substance(s):
More informationClinical Study Synopsis
Clinical Study Synopsis This Clinical Study Synopsis is provided for patients and healthcare professionals to increase the transparency of Bayer's clinical research. This document is not intended to replace
More informationThiazolidinediones and the risk of bladder cancer: A cohort study. R Mamtani, K Haynes, WB Bilker, DJ Vaughn, BL Strom, K Glanz, JD Lewis
Thiazolidinediones and the risk of bladder cancer: A cohort study R Mamtani, K Haynes, WB Bilker, DJ Vaughn, BL Strom, K Glanz, JD Lewis Study objective To investigate the risk of bladder cancer associated
More informationStudy Investigators/Centers: GSK sponsored studies MEA112997, MEA115588, and MEA and a proof of concept investigator sponsored study CRT110184
The study listed may include approved and non-approved uses, formulations or treatment regimens. The results reported in any single study may not reflect the overall results obtained on studies of a product.
More informationSponsor / Company: Sanofi Drug substance(s): AMARYL M (1/250 mg) / HOE490
These results are supplied for informational purposes only. Prescribing decisions should be made based on the approved package insert in the country of prescription. Sponsor / Company: Sanofi Drug substance(s):
More informationDapagliflozin and Outcomes in Patients with Peripheral Artery Disease: Insights from DECLARE-TIMI 58
Dapagliflozin and Outcomes in Patients with Peripheral Artery Disease: Insights from DECLARE-TIMI 58 Marc P. Bonaca MD MPH for the DECLARE TIMI 58 Investigators American College of Cardiology March 2019
More informationSynopsis (C0524T12 GO LIVE)
Protocol: EudraCT No.: 2005-003232-21 Title of the study: A Multicenter, Randomized, Double-blind, Placebo-controlled Trial of Golimumab, a Fully Human Anti-TNFα Monoclonal Antibody, Administered Intravenously,
More informationGSK Medicine Study Number: Title: Rationale Phase: Study Period: Study Design: Centres: Indication: Treatment: Objectives:
The study listed may include approved and nonapproved uses, formulations or treatment regimens. The results reported in any single study may not reflect the overall results obtained on studies of a product.
More informationIntervention empagliflozin + metformin N = 765 patients with events n (%)
Resolution by the Federal Joint Committee on an amendment to the Pharmaceutical Directive (AM-RL): Appendix XII Resolutions on the benefit assessment of pharmaceuticals with new active ingredients, in
More informationGSK Medicine: Study Number:
The study listed may include approved and non-approved uses, formulations or treatment regimens. The results reported in any single study may not reflect the overall results obtained on studies of a product.
More informationClinical Trial Synopsis TL-OPI-525, NCT#
Clinical Trial Synopsis, NCT#00762736 Title of Study: A Phase II, Double-Blind, Randomized, Placebo-Controlled, Proof-of-Concept Study of the Efficacy, Safety, and Tolerability of Pioglitazone HCl (ACTOS
More informationDPP-4 inhibitor use and risk of diabetic retinopathy: a new safety issue of a safe drug Nam Hoon Kim
DPP-4 inhibitor use and risk of diabetic retinopathy: a new safety issue of a safe drug Nam Hoon Kim Endocrinology of Metabolism, Korea University College of Medicine Conflict of interest disclosure None
More information10/27/2011. Challenges in Anti-diabetic Global Drug Development A Shift from Surrogate to Outcome Trials. Disclaimer
Challenges in Anti-diabetic Global Drug Development A Shift from Surrogate to Outcome Trials Eckhard Leifke, MD PhD Senior Medical Director Takeda Global Research Development Center, Inc. Presentation
More informationImpaired Chronotropic Response to Exercise Stress Testing in Patients with Diabetes Predicts Future Cardiovascular Events
Diabetes Care Publish Ahead of Print, published online May 28, 2008 Chronotropic response in patients with diabetes Impaired Chronotropic Response to Exercise Stress Testing in Patients with Diabetes Predicts
More informationA nationwide population-based study. Pai-Feng Hsu M.D. Shao-Yuan Chuang PhD
The Association of Clinical Symptomatic Hypoglycemia with Cardiovascular Events and Total Death in Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus A nationwide population-based study Pai-Feng Hsu M.D. Shao-Yuan Chuang PhD Taipei
More informationThis clinical study synopsis is provided in line with Boehringer Ingelheim s Policy on Transparency and Publication of Clinical Study Data.
abcd Clinical Study Synopsis for Public Disclosure This clinical study synopsis is provided in line with Boehringer Ingelheim s Policy on Transparency and Publication of Clinical Study Data. The synopsis
More informationGSK Medicine: Study Number: Title: Rationale: Phase: Study Period: Study Design: Centres: Indication: Treatment: Objectives:
The study listed may include approved and non-approved uses, formulations or treatment regimens. The results reported in any single study may not reflect the overall results obtained on studies of a product.
More informationegfr > 50 (n = 13,916)
Saxagliptin and Cardiovascular Risk in Patients with Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus and Moderate or Severe Renal Impairment: Observations from the SAVOR-TIMI 53 Trial Supplementary Table 1. Characteristics according
More informationSynopsis Style Clinical Study Report SR EFC10139 Version number: 1 (electronic 2.0)
SYNOPSIS Title of the study: A randomized, double-blind, parallel-group, multicenter, multinational study to assess the long-term effect, over 1 year, of rimonabant 10 mg in comparison with rimonabant
More informationClinical Trial Report Synopsis. Efficacy and Safety of LEO in Field Treatment of Actinic Keratosis on Face or Chest including 12-month follow-up
Clinical Trial Report Synopsis Efficacy and Safety of LEO 43204 in Field Treatment of Actinic Keratosis on Face or Chest including 12-month follow-up Design of trial: A phase 3, multi-centre, randomised,
More informationSafety profile of Liraglutide: Recent Updates. Mohammadreza Rostamzadeh,M.D.
Safety profile of Liraglutide: Recent Updates Mohammadreza Rostamzadeh,M.D. Pancreatitis: Victoza post-marketing experience: spontaneous reports of pancreatitis For the majority of the cases, there is
More informationMedication Adherence and Outcomes in High Risk Cardiovascular Patients in the ONTARGET Trial
Medication Adherence and Outcomes in High Risk Cardiovascular Patients in the ONTARGET Trial M. Böhm, H. Schumacher, U. Laufs, P. Sleight, R. Schmieder, T. Unger, K. Koon, S. Yusuf on behalf of the ONTARGET-Investigators
More informationMedication Adherence and Outcomes in High Risk Cardiovascular Patients in the ONTARGET Trial
Medication Adherence and Outcomes in High Risk Cardiovascular Patients in the ONTARGET Trial M. Böhm, H. Schumacher, U. Laufs, P. Sleight, R. Schmieder, T. Unger, K. Koon, S. Yusuf on behalf of the ONTARGET-Investigators
More informationStudy No.: Title: Rationale: Phase: Study Period: Study Design: Centres: Indication: Treatment: Objectives: Primary Outcome/Efficacy Variable:
The study listed may include approved and non-approved uses, formulations or treatment regimens. The results reported in any single study may not reflect the overall results obtained on studies of a product.
More informationSYNOPSIS. Clinical Study Report AI Addendum #1. Open-label Dosing Phase
Name of Sponsor/Company: Bristol-Myers Squibb Name of Finished Product: Individual Study Table Referring to the Dossier (For National Authority Use Only) Name of Active Ingredient: Entecavir SYNOPSIS Clinical
More informationBRL /RSD-101C0F/1/CPMS-716. Report Synopsis
Report Synopsis Study Title: A Multicenter, Open-label, Six-Month Extension Study to Assess the Long-Term Safety of Paroxetine in Children and Adolescents with Major Depressive Disorder (MDD) or Obsessive-Compulsive
More informationStudy No.: Title: Rationale: Phase: Study Period: Study Design: Centres: Indication: Treatment: Objectives:
The study listed may include approved and non-approved uses, formulations or treatment regimens. The results reported in any single study may not reflect the overall results obtained on studies of a product.
More informationADA Analyst Presentation Saturday 9 th June
ADA Analyst Presentation Saturday 9 th June Carlo Russo Senior Vice-President & Albiglutide Team Leader, GSK Property of GlaxoSmithKline Agenda Welcome & introduction to the Harmony Clinical Programme
More informationCARDIOVASCULAR SAFETY OF FEBUXOSTAT OR ALLOPURINOL IN PATIENTS WITH GOUT AND CARDIOVASCULAR DISEASE (The CARES Trial)
CARDIOVASCULAR SAFETY OF FEBUXOSTAT OR ALLOPURINOL IN PATIENTS WITH GOUT AND CARDIOVASCULAR DISEASE (The CARES Trial) William B. White, MD for the CARES Investigators Calhoun Cardiology Center University
More informationCVD risk assessment using risk scores in primary and secondary prevention
CVD risk assessment using risk scores in primary and secondary prevention Raul D. Santos MD, PhD Heart Institute-InCor University of Sao Paulo Brazil Disclosure Honoraria for consulting and speaker activities
More information2. SYNOPSIS Name of Sponsor/Company:
in patients with refractory partial seizures 14 Jun 2007 2. SYNOPSIS TITLE OF STUDY: Efficacy and safety of BIA 2-093 as adjunctive therapy for refractory partial seizures in a double-blind, randomized,
More informationADVANCE post trial ObservatioNal Study
Hot Topics in Diabetes 50 th EASD, Vienna 2014 ADVANCE post trial ObservatioNal Study Sophia Zoungas The George Institute The University of Sydney Rationale and Study Design Sophia Zoungas The George Institute
More informationDual Antiplatelet duration in ACS: too long or too short?
Dual Antiplatelet duration in ACS: too long or too short? Leonardo Bolognese, MD, FESC, FACC Cardiovascular Department, Arezzo, Italy Paradigm Shift the ideal duration of DAPT: a moving target Early (stent-related)
More information