Dronedarone: Need to Perform a CV Outcome Safety Study

Similar documents
Update on Dronedarone and Cardiovascular Outcomes

Dronedarone For Atrial Fibrillation: Unbridled Enthusiasm Or Just Another Small Step Forward?

Polypharmacy - arrhythmic risks in patients with heart failure

Dronedarone in the Post-Pallas Era. Jorge E. Schliamser, MD Carmel Medical Center Haifa

» A new drug s trial

Debate PRO. Dronedarone is an important drug in the management of paroxysmal atrial fibrillation. John Camm

PRESCRIBING ALERT

Treatment of Atrial Fibrillation in Heart Failure

dronedarone, 400mg, film-coated tablets (Multaq ) SMC No. (636/10) Sanofi-aventis Ltd

AF#in#pa(ents#with#CAD# Is#dronedarone#a#good#choice?!

Atrial Fibrillation 2009

Dronedarone for the treatment of non-permanent atrial fibrillation

Dronedarone( What%is%the%future?!

National Horizon Scanning Centre. Dronedarone (Multaq) for atrial fibrillation and atrial flutter. December 2007

Dronedarone: Where Does it Fit in the AF Therapeutic Armamentarium?

Safety and Efficacy of Dronedarone in the Treatment of Atrial Fibrillation/Flutter

ATHENA - A placebo-controlled, double-blind, parallel arm Trial to assess the efficacy of dronedarone 400 mg bid for the prevention of cardiovascular

Saudi Heart Association February 22, 2011

Update in the Management of Atrial Fibrillation

Stuart Beldner, MD, FHRS Assistant Professor NSLIJ Hofstra School of Med

Rate or Rhythm Control? Epidemiology. Relevant Advances in Atrial Fibrillation 6/20/2011. Stroke Prophylaxis

What s New in the AF Guidelines

Dronedarone and Atrial Fibrillation: A Critical Review

Relevant Advances in Atrial Fibrillation

Dronedarone in patients with congestive heart failure: insights from ATHENA

Antiarrhythmic agents in 2014

Geriatric Grand Rounds

PALLAS. Dronedarone on Top of Standard Therapy. Stuart J. Connolly MD. on behalf of the PALLAS investigators

Out with the old, in with The 2010 Atrial Fibrillation Guidelines

Clinical Investigations

Primary Care Update in Medicine January 31 February 1, 2013 New Management Options for Patients with Atrial Fibrillation

Reviews. Benefit-Risk Assessment of Current Antiarrhythmic Drug Therapy of Atrial Fibrillation

Arrhythmias and Heart Failure Dr Chris Lang Consultant Cardiologist and Electrophysiologist Royal Infirmary of Edinburgh

ESC Stockholm Arrhythmias & pacing

Rate and Rhythm Control of Atrial Fibrillation

Using DOACs in CAD Patients in Sinus Ryhthm Results of the ATLAS ACS 2, COMPASS and COMMANDER-HF Trials

Role of Dronedarone in Atrial Fibrillation: More Questions Than Answers

Effect of Dronedarone on Cardiovascular Events in Atrial Fibrillation

Samer Nasr, M.D. Mount Lebanon Hospital.

Supplementary Online Content

Dronedarone for the treatment of atrial fibrillation and atrial flutter

A patient with decompensated HF

Subclinical AF: Implications of device based episodes

ABLATION OF CHRONIC AF

Dronedarone for the management of atrial fibrillation

Transient Atrial Fibrillation and Risk of Stroke after Acute Myocardial Infarction

The RealiseAF registry:

Amiodarone Prescribing and Monitoring: Back to the Future

Atrial fibrillation and advanced age

Antiarrhythmics for Atrial Fibrillation: Practical Implications of Latest Clinical Developments CME

How atrial fibrillation should be treated in the heart failure patient?

Who Gets Atrial Fibrilla9on..?

Atrial fibrillation and mortality: where is the missing link? Isabelle C Van Gelder University Medical Center Groningen

ATRIAL FIBRILLATION: REVISITING CONTROVERSIES IN AN ERA OF INNOVATION

Etienne Aliot. University of Nancy - France

Defining Sub-Clinical Atrial Fibrillation and its management

The implantable cardioverter defibrillator is not enough: Ventricular Tachycardia Catheter Ablation in Patients with Structural Heart Disease

Saudi Arabia February Pr Michel KOMAJDA. Université Pierre et Marie Curie Hospital Pitié Salpétrière

All in the Past? Win K. Shen, MD Mayo Clinic Arizona Controversies and Advances in CV Diseases Cedars-Sinai Heart Institute, MFMER

Rebuttal. Jerónimo Farré MD 2010

AF Today: W. For the majority of patients with atrial. are the Options? Chris Case

Half Moon Bay Treatment of Atrial Fibrillation. Dr. Roger A. Winkle MD. Silicon Valley Cardiology, PAMF, Sutter Health Sequoia Hospital

Clinical and Economic Value of Rivaroxaban in Coronary Artery Disease

5/5/2010. World incidence 720, 000 new cases / year. World prevalence 5.55 million AF prevalence increasing with aging of population

A Patient Unsuitable for VKA Treatment

Recent observations have focused attention on the PVs as a source of ectopic activity i determining i AF

The Role of ACEI and ARBs in AF prevention

Atrial Fibrillation: Guidelines through clinical cases and 2010 updates

New options in Stroke Prevention in AF Paul Dorian University of Toronto St Michael s Hospital

Novel Anticoagulants : Bleeding and Bridging

Basics of Atrial Fibrillation. By Mini Thannikal NP-BC Mount Sinai St Luke s Hospital New York, NY

Digoxin And Mortality in Patients With Atrial Fibrillation With and Without Heart Failure: Does Serum Digoxin Concentration Matter?

Mohammad Zubaid, MB, ChB, FRCPC, FACC

Post Hoc Analysis of the PARADIGM Heart Failure Trial:

Disclosures. Advances in Cardiac Electrophysiology. CVA Risk by Type of AF. Outline

Understanding Atrial Fibrillation Management. Roy Lin, MD

Mihai Gheorghiade MD

Cost and Prevalence of A fib. Atrial Fibrillation: Guideline Directed Treatment. Prevalence of A Fib. Risk Factors for A Fib. Risk Factors for A Fib

Benjamin/Circ May 2008/p948/Fig A

Mehta Hiren R et al. IRJP 2 (3) DRONEDARONE: A NEW MOLECULE FOR ATRIAL FIBRILLATION Patel Paresh B 1, Patel Kamlesh C 1, Mehta Hiren R 2 *

Modern management of atrial fibrillation, from blood pressure control to anticoagulation

MMS/Mass Coalition Program, Nov. 4, 2008 Patients with AF: Who Should be on Warfarin?

Hypertension and Atrial Fibrillation in 2017

Study design: multicenter, randomized, open-label trial following a PROBE design

ESC. Update of the ESC Guidelines on Medical Therapy. John Camm. ICM Internationales Congress Center München

קוים מנחים לפרפור פרוזדורים - עדכון משה סויסה מרכז רפואי קפלן

7 th Munich Vascular Conference

Primary prevention of SCD with the ICD in Nonischemic Cardiomyopathy

New Agents for Heart Failure: Ivabradine Jeffrey S. Borer, MD

Ablation Should Not Be Used as Primary Therapy for Treatment of Patients with Atrial Fibrillation

Are Drugs Better? Dr Mauro Lencioni. Drugs or ablation as first line treatment for AF? Consultant Cardiologist & Electrophysiologist

Do All Patients With An ICD Indication Need A BiV Pacing Device?

Atrial fibrillation workshop: rate- versus rhythm-control

Atrial Fibrillation and Heart Failure: Rate vs. Rhythm Control Time for Re-evaluation

Stroke Prevention in AF: How will it change in the next 5 years? Jeff Healey MD, MSc, FHRS Population Health Research Institute McMaster University

Resynchronization/Defibrillation

EFFECTIVE SHARED CARE AGREEMENT. Dronedarone - For the treatment and management of atrial fibrillation

ARCA biopharma. Investment Community Webcast: Top-line Data from GENETIC-AF Phase 2B Clinical Trial

From PARADIGM-HF to Clinical Practice. Waleed AlHabeeb, MD, MHA Associate Professor of Medicine President of the Saudi Heart Failure Group

Aldosterone Antagonism in Heart Failure: Now for all Patients?

Transcription:

Dronedarone: Need to Perform a CV Outcome Safety Study Gerald V. Naccarelli M.D. Consultant: Glaxo-Smith-Kline, Pfizer, Sanofi, Boehringer-Ingelheim, Daiichi-Sankyo, Bristol Myers Squibb, Otsuka, Janssen

Clinical Profiles for Amiodarone and Dronedarone Amiodarone Dronedarone Iodine moiety Yes No T ½ 53 days 14-30 hours Blocks I Kr ; I Ks ; B 1 ; I Ca ; I to ; I Na Yes Yes Dosing Daily after loading bid with meals Food effect Yes Yes CYP4503A4 metabolism Yes Yes Inhibits tubular secretion of creatinine Yes Yes Increase QT but low TDP Yes Yes Efficacy in suppressing AF 65% 50% Efficacy in suppressing ventricular tachyarrhythmias Yes Not well studied Decreases CV hospitalization No Yes Warfarin interaction Yes No Pulmonary/thyroid toxicity Yes No Safety concerns in CHF SCD-HEFT NYHA III ANDROMEDA Wolbrette DL, et al. Vasc Health Risk Manag. 2010;(6):517-523.

Dronedarone: Clinical Trials DAFNE 1 EURIDIS/ ADONIS 2 ERATO 3 ATHENA 4 DIONYSOS 5 ANDROMEDA 6 Trial objective Dose finding study Effect of dronedarone on maintenance of sinus rhythm Effect of dronedarone in the control of mean 24-hour ventricular rate Evaluate the efficacy and safety of dronedarone in the prevention of CV hospitalization or all-cause death Investigate efficacy and safety of dronedarone versus amiodarone for the maintenance of sinus rhythm Evaluate the potential benefit of dronedarone on all cause death or hospitalization for worsening heart failure Patient population Patient status at baseline Number of patients Dronedarone Versus Primary endpoint Persistent AF In AF but eligible for AAD treatment and cardioversion Paroxysmal/ persistent AF In sinus rhythm Permanent AF In permanent AF Paroxysmal/ Persistent AF In sinus rhythm or AF but eligible for cardioversion Persistent AF In AF but eligible for AAD treatment and cardioversion Unstable recently decompensated CHF patients 102 1237 174 4628 504 627 Time to first AF recurrence Both arms received standard therapy* Time to first AF/AFL recurrence Both arms received standard therapy* Change in mean ventricular rate measured by 24- hour Holter on Day 14 compared to baseline Both arms received standard therapy* CV hospitalization or all-cause mortality Amiodarone Treatment failure defined as recurrence of AF OR premature study drug discontinuation for intolerance or lack of efficacy N/A Death from any cause or hospitalization for worsening heart failure 1. Touboul P, et al. Eur Heart J. 2003;24:1481-7. 2. Singh BN, et al. N Engl J Med. 2007;357:987-99. 3. Davy et al. Am Heart J. 2008;156:527.e1-527.e9. 4. Hohnloser SH, et al. N Engl J Med 2009;360:668-78. 5. Le Heuzey JY et al. J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol. 2010 Apr 6 Epub 6. Køber L, et al. N Engl J Med. 2008;358:2678-87. 2

DAFNE Dronedarone 400 mg bid increased median days in NSR from 5.3 days on placebo to 59.9 days with AF; RR=0.45 (0.28-0.72) *(P<.05) No benefit of higher doses with increased GI toxicity at 800 mg bid 400 bid 600 bid 800 bid N 48 54 54 43 Median days/nsr 5.3 59.9* 4.3 5.2 Time to AF recur (RR) 0.45 (0.28-.72) 0.95 (0.62-1.45) 0.68 (0.42-1.11) 22.6% discontinued drug due to GI adverse effects DAFNE = Dronedarone Atrial FibrillatioN study after Electrical Cardioversion Touboul et al. Eur Heart L 2003; 24:1481-1487

Dronedarone: AF Trials ADONIS (American-Australian-African trial on DronedarONe In atrial fibrillation or flutter patients for the maintenance of Sinus rhythm) Dronedarone 400 mg BID vs. placebo Primary Endpoint: First AF/AFl recurrence (Dronedarone reduced AF; p=.0017) Prolonged time to first AF/AFL symptomatic recurrence (p=0.021) Median time to first AF 59 days for placebo vs. 158 days for dronedarone (RR=.725; CI = 0.59-0.89)(p=.0017) Rate during recurrence, 12 bpm slower (116.6 to 104.6 bpm) on dronedarone (p<.001) EURIDIS (EURopean trial In atrial fibrillation or flutter patients receiving Dronedarone for the maintenance of Sinus rhythm) Dronedarone 400 mg BID vs. placebo Primary Endpoint: First AF/AFl recurrence (Dronedarone reduced AF by 22%; p=.0017) Prolonged time to first AF/AFL symptomatic recurrence (p=0.0055) Median time to first AF 41 days for placebo vs. 96 days for dronedarone (RR=.784; CI = 0.64-.095) (p=0.0138) Rate during recurrence, 15 bpm slower (117.5 to 102.3 bpm) on dronedarone (p<.0001) Singh BN et al. NEJM 2007;357:987-999

Cumulative Incidence Singh BN, et al. N Engl J Med 2008;358:2678-2687 EURIDIS / ADONIS: Effect on Death or CV Hospitalization (Post-Hoc Analysis) 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.2 Trial Dronedarone Relative risk (95% CI) EURIDIS 35 / 201 54 / 411 0.73 (0.48-1.12) ADONIS 29 / 208 57 / 417 0.89 (0.56-1.39) Pooled 64 / 409 111 / 828 0.80 (0.59-1.09) HR= 0.80 (0.59 1.09) 400 mg BID 0.1 Number at risk: 400 mg BID 0.0 0 60 120 180 270 360 Days 409 328 285 58 224 828 687 619 83 522 200 470

ANDROMEDA: Inclusion Criteria Recently hospitalized patients Having symptomatic heart failure (current NYHA class II-IV) with the following: At least 1 episode of decompensation corresponding to NYHA class III-IV within the last month WMI 1.2 (~LVEF 35%) These patients may have been clinically improved at the time of enrollment, and it is the history of decompensation that characterized them Patients were to be enrolled whether or not they had a history of atrial fibrillation or flutter; AF (if present) may have been long-standing or recent onset. WMI = wall motion index. MULTAQ [package insert], sanofi-aventis US LLC: 2009. Køber L et al. N Engl J Med. 2008;358:2678-2687. Kober L, et al. N Engl J Med 2008:358;2678-2687

ANDROMEDA: Primary End Point Time to death or hospitalization for worsening HF (n=317) Dronedarone 400 mg BID (n=310) Patients reaching end point (n) 40 53 RR 1.38 95% CI 0.918 2.088 Log-rank s test result (p value) 0.118. Kober L, et al. N Engl J Med 2008:358;2678-2687

Cumulative Incidence ANDROMEDA: Mortality Results at Time of DSMB Recommendation 0.3 Drug # Events / # at Risk Relative Risk (95% CI) 12 / 317 Dronedarone 25 / 310 2.13 (1.07-4.25) 0.2 Mean duration of follow-up = 2 months 0.1 Dronedarone 0.0 At risk 0 30 60 90 120 150 180 210 240 Days Following Randomization PBO 317 256 181 103 50 18 6 1 DRO 310 257 174 104 59 22 5 1 Kober L, et al. N Engl J Med 2008:358;2678-2687

ANDROMEDA: Adjudicated Mode of Cardiovascular Death Dronedarone Cardiovascular death 9 24 Sudden death 6 10 Nonsudden death 3 14 Myocardial infarction 2 0 Worsening heart failure 2 10 Documented arrhythmia 2 6 Procedure related 0 1 Other cardiovascular 0 2 Presumed cardiovascular 3 5 No arrhythmia or sudden death was related to torsade de pointes

ANDROMEDA: Possible Explanations A chance finding related to the uncertainty associated with the frequent interim monitoring of small numbers of events in a trial that was terminated early. A true finding related to differences in the use of certain background medications following randomization. A true finding that can be explained by a deleterious effect of dronedarone in recently unstable patients who were hospitalized for decompensated heart failure and who did not have nonpermanent atrial fibrillation.

Cumulative Incidence (%) 50 40 30 20 10 0 ATHENA: Primary Endpoint (CV Hospitalization or Death) 4628 patients with paroxysmal or persistent AF were randomized if they met the following: 75 years of age with or without additional risk factors or 70 years of age and 1 risk factor (HTN, diabetes, prior stroke/tia, LA diameter 50 mm, LVEF 0.40) 0 Dronedarone 6 12 18 24 30 24% reduction in relative risk Exclusion Criteria Permanent AF Unstable hemodynamic condition (ie, decompensated heart failure within HR previous = 0.76 4 wk) NYHA class IV CHF P<.001 Bradycardia <50 bpm PR interval >280 msec Months ATHENA = A Trial With Dronedarone to Prevent Hospitalization or Death in Patients With Atrial Fibrillation. Hohnloser SH, et al. N Engl J Med. 2009;360(7):668-678.

ATHENA Fatal Outcomes Outcome (n=2327) Dronedarone (n=2301) Hazard Ratio 95% CI P Value All deaths 139 116 0.84 0.66-1.08.18 Non-CV deaths 49 53 1.10 0.74-1.62.65 CV deaths 90 63 0.71 0.51-0.98.03 Cardiac nonarrhythmic deaths Cardiac arrhythmic deaths 18 17 0.95 0.49-1.85.89 48 26 0.55 0.34-0.88.01 Vascular noncardiac 24 20 0.84 0.47-1.52.57.Hohnloser et al. N Engl J Med. 2009;360:668-678 (A).

Treatment Emergent Adverse Events in Randomized and Treated Patients 20 (N=2313) Dronedarone (N=2291) Patients with any TEAE 1603 (69%) 1649 (72%) Gastro-intestinal 508 (22%) 600 (26%) Respiratory 337 (15%) 332 (15%) Skin 176 (8%) 237 (10%) Creatinine increase 31 (1%) 108 (4.7%) Patients with any serious TEAE 489 (21%) 456 (20%) Gastro-intestinal 68 (3%) 81 (4%) Respiratory 45 (2%) 41 (2%) Skin 6 (0.3%) 7 (0.3%) Creatinine increase 1 (<0.1%) 5 (0.2%) Patients permanently discontinued study drug for any TEAE 187 (8%) 290 (13%)

Mortality Results of ATHENA Are Discordant With Those of ANDROMEDA ANDROMEDA Drug # Events / # at Risk Relative Risk (95% CI) 12 / 317 2.13 Dronedarone 25 / 310 (1.07-4.25) Drug ATHENA # Events / # at Risk Relative Risk (95% CI) 139 / 2327 0.84 Dronedarone 116 / 2301 (0.66-1.08)

Assessment of Risk: Subgroup Analysis of All-Cause Mortality in ATHENA LV ejection fraction NYHA Class Diuretics Betablockers ACE inhibitors Subgroup # Patients Relative risk (95% CI) Dronedarone: placebo < 0.35 179 0.55 (0.25-1.21) 0.35 4365 0.89 (0.69-1.15) III 200 0.66 (0.32-1.34) I-II 1165 0.93 (0.59-1.47) Yes 2492 0.58 (0.41-0.81) No 2136 1.36 (0.93-1.98) Yes 3269 0.74 (0.55-1.01) No 1359 1.08 (0.71-1.64) Yes 3216 0.80 (0.59-1.08) No 1412 0.95 (0.62-1.45)

Was ATHENA a CV Outcome Study That Helped the Selection of Appropriate Patient for Dronedarone? Appropriate Patient Patients with paroxysmal or persistent atrial fibrillation (AF) or atrial flutter (AFL), with a recent episode of AF/AFL and associated cardiovascular risk factors (ie, age >70, hypertension, diabetes, prior cerebrovascular accident, left atrial diameter 50 mm or left ventricular ejection fraction [LVEF] <40%), who are in sinus rhythm or who will be cardioverted Dronedarone is an antiarrhythmic drug indicated to reduce the risk of cardiovascular hospitalization If heart failure develops or worsens, consider the suspension or discontinuation of Dronedarone Advise patients to consult a physician if they develop signs and symptoms of heart failure, such as weight gain, dependent edema, or increasing shortness of breath Inappropriate Patient Patients with NYHA class IV heart failure NYHA class II III heart failure with recent decompensation requiring hospitalization or referral to a specialized heart failure clinic This unstable population above corresponds to the population of the ANDROMEDA trial, in which patients receiving Dronedarone had a greater than 2-fold increase in mortality compared to placebo NYHA = New York Heart Association. MULTAQ [package insert], sanofi-aventis US LLC: 2009.

Post-Hoc ATHENA: Cardiovascular Hospitalization or Death in Permanent AF HR=0.67 p=0.069 On Treatment 17

PALLAS Permanent Atrial fibrillation outcome Study DRONEDARONE Screen Permanent AF 6m + CV risk No NYHA unstable III or IV NYHA CHF R 2 years, recruitment; 12 m min FU common end-date 10,800 patients; 844 events 90% power for 20% RRR and 2 sided alpha of 5% PLACEBO 1 0 Outcomes 1 st Co-primary (Stroke/MI/SEE/CV Death) 2 nd Co-primary (All Death/Unplanned CV Hospitalization) Dronedarone (n = 1619) (n = 1617) Dronedarone vs Events %/yr Events %/yr HR 95% CI P value 43 8.2 19 3.6 2.29 127 25.3 67 12.9 1.95 1.34-3.94 1.45-2.62 0.002 <0.001 Connolly S. et al. N Engl J Med. 2011 Nov 14. [Epub ahead of print]

PALLAS Trial: Baseline Demographics Patients with paroxysmal or persistent AF excluded Characteristic Dronedarone (N=1619) (N=1617) CAD 40.8% 41.2% Symptomatic HF 14.4% 14.8% LVEF 40% 21.3% 20.7% Previous Stroke or TIA 26.9% 28.3% PAD 11.6% 13.2% Age 75 + HTN and DM 18.2% 17.1% Permanent AF >2 years 69.1% 69.5% HF 68.4% 66.9% Class I 14.5% 12.9% Class II 45.2% 46.3% Class III 8.7% 7.7% Connolly, SJ et al. Dronedarone in high-risk permanent atrial fibrillation. N Engl J Med. 2011; DOI: 10.1056/NEJMoa1109867. Published Nov 14, 2011. Accessed Nov 15, 2011.

Rate per 100 Patient-Years PALLAS Trial: Dronedarone in Permanent AF PALLAS enrolled 3236 patients 65 years with >6 month history of permanent AF and risk factors for major vascular events. The study was stopped for safety reasons. 30 P<.001 Dronedarone P<.001 25 25.3 23.2 20 15 P =.002 12.9 P =.02 10 8.2 P =.049 P =.02 8.3 10.7 5 0 3.6 Stroke, MI, Systemic Embolism, or CVD Death or Unplanned CV Hospitalization 4.7 4.4 2.4 1.9 4.6 Death Stroke Hospitalization for HF Connolly, SJ et al.. N Engl J Med. 2011 HF Episode or Hospitalization

ATHENA (Overall) vs PALLAS Risk Factors PALLAS Risk Factors ATHENA (Overall) Dronedarone n = 2301 % n = 2327 % Dronedarone (n = 1619) % PALLAS (n = 1617) % CAD 28.7 31.3 40.9 41.2 Prior Stroke/TIA 7.3 7.1 26.9 28.3 Symptomatic HF - - 14.4 14.8 LVEF < 40% 4.2 4.7 21.3 20.7 Peripheral Arterial Disease Age > 75 with HTN & Diabetes - - 11.6 13.2 2.1 2.7 18.2 17.1 Hohnloser SH, et al. N Engl J Med. 2009;360:668-78 Connolly S. et al. N Engl J Med 2011 Dec 15;365(24):2268-76

Baseline characteristics Events Patient Populations and Outcomes in ATHENA, ANDROMEDA and PALLAS ATHENA PALLAS ANDROMEDA Type of AF Non-Permanent AF (75% in sinus rhythm at baseline) Permanent AF Not an AF Study (patients hospitalized for moderate to severe CHF) CHF Status (dronedarone arm) No CHF = 70.8% CHF I II = 25.2% CHF III = 4.3% No CHF = 30.9% CHF I II = 60.9% CHF III = 8.2% No CHF = 0% CHF I II = 42.3% CHF III IV =57.7% All deaths (D vs P) Stroke Outcome (D vs P) CHF Hospitalizations (D vs P) 5% vs 6% 1% vs 0.44% 8.1% vs 3.8% 1.2% vs.1.8% 1.1% vs 0.44% 1.3% v. 0.9%* 4.9% vs 5.7% 7.3% vs. 3.2% 9.8% v. 12.6% * 4 in D group vs 3 in P group

Reporting rate ( Nb of cases per 1000 patient-years**) Dronedarone Post-marketing Safety: What is Role of Post-Marketing Data? 20 15 CCSI v3: liver failure added CCSI v5: ILD added PALLAS prematurate termination CCSI v6 10 5 0 1 July 2009 / 31 Jan. 2010 1 Feb. 2010 / 31 July 2010 PSUR=Periodic Safety Update Report (Number of patients exposure per PSUR period) 1 Aug. 2010 / 31 Jan. 2011 1 Feb. 2011 / 31 July 2011 1 Aug. 2011 / 31 Jan. 2012 CCSI=Company Core Safety Information ILD=Interstitial Lung Disease 1 Feb. 2012 / 31 July 2012 * SOC: System Organ Class **Exposure: patient- years calculation = (Nb tablets sold/ daily dose (2 tablets) / 365 days a year ***CSI: Company Safety Information HCP=Healthcare professional

Dronedarone AF Development Program: Lessons Learned Better dose ranging needed Patient selection important: SHD, CHF, Permanent AF Readjust further trials based on issues from early trials after discussion with FDA Clinical endpoints more important than surrogate endpoints Studies can be designed to assess CV safety as part of PI indication Some long-term safety can be assessed by keeping patients on study drug after trial is complete and there is a role for post-marketing studies

Summary Slide: Dronedarone What Was The CV Safety Issue Leading to Outcome Study Requirement Weight of Evidence Increased mortality in patients with NYHA class II III heart failure with recent decompensation Doubling of mortality in this population Presence of a Likely MOA for Risk Benefit:Risk Relationship for Drug? Is perceived risk: Generalizable to Other Drugs in Class or with Same Efficacy MOA? Lesions Learned Negative inotropy? No evidence of worsened mortality in ATHENA when above patients excluded from study Possible similar explanation to worsened mortality with amiodarone in SCD-HeFT in NYHA class III With antiarrhythmic drugs, patients populations matter for CV drug safety