Cardiovascular Risk of Celecoxib in 6 Randomized Placebo-controlled Trials: The Cross Trial Safety Analysis

Similar documents
Disclosure. Learning Objectives 1/17/2018. Pumping the Breaks in Pain Management: An Update on Cardiovascular Risk with NSAID Use

CARDIOVASCULAR RISK and NSAIDs

NSAID Use in Post- Myocardial Infarction Patients. Leah Jackson, BScPhm Pharmacy Resident Cardiology Rotation February 28, 2007

Characteristics of selective and non-selective NSAID use in Scotland

NON STEROIDEAL ANTI-INFLAMMATORY DRUGS AND CARDIOVASCULAR RISK. Advances in Cardiac Arrhythmias and Great Innovations in Cardiology

NSAID Use in Post- Myocardial Infarction Patients

Investor Conference Call

GSK Medicine: Study Number: Title: Rationale: Phase: Study Period: Study Design: Centres: Indication: Treatment: Objectives:

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

British Medical Journal. June 3, 2006;332: Patricia M Kearney, Colin Baigent, Jon Godwin, Heather Halls, Jonathan R Emberson, Carlo Patrono

Personalized Aspirin Therapy

Meier Hsu, Ann Zauber, Mithat Gönen, Monica Bertagnolli. Memorial-Sloan Kettering Cancer Center. May 18, 2011

Statement from the Steering Committee of the Alzheimer s Disease Anti inflammatory Prevention Trial (ADAPT)

The confirmation of prior concerns of increased cardiovascular. Hypertension

Disclosures. Dr. Scirica has also served as a consultant for Lexicon, Arena, Gilead, and Eisai.

A Randomized Trial of a Multivitamin (MVM) in the Prevention of Cardiovascular Disease in Men: The Physicians Health Study (PHS) II

Chemoprevention of Colorectal Cancer: Where We Stand

N Engl J Med 2018;378: DOI: /NEJMoa Lin, Wan-Ting 2018/06/27

Clinical and Economic Value of Rivaroxaban in Coronary Artery Disease

SESSION 5 2:20 3:35 PM

Gastrointestinal Safety of Coxibs and Outcomes Studies: What s the Verdict?

SPECIAL CARDIAC SAFETY CONCERNS

Clinical Efficacy and Safety of Achieving Very Low LDL-C Levels With the PCSK9 Inhibitor Evolocumab in the FOURIER Outcomes Trial

Varenicline and cardiovascular and neuropsychiatric events: Do Benefits outweigh risks?

Antihypertensive Trial Design ALLHAT

Flaws, Bias, Misinterpretation and Fraud in Randomized Clinical Trials

Presentation Outline. Introduction to Biomedical Research Designs. EBM: A Practical Definition. Grade the Evidence (Example McMaster Grading System)

Assessing Cardiovascular risk in different populations

Top HF Trials to Impact Your Practice

Hypertension. Does it Matter What Medications We Use? Nishant K. Sekaran, M.D. M.Sc. Intermountain Heart Institute

Hypertension in 2015: SPRINT-ing ahead of JNC-8. MAJ Charles Magee, MD MPH FACP Director, WRNMMC Hypertension Clinic

John J.P. Kastelein MD PhD Professor of Medicine Dept. of Vascular Medicine Academic Medial Center / University of Amsterdam

Cardiovascular Effects of COX-2 Inhibitors: A Review of the Literature

SESSION 3 11 AM 12:30 PM

NSAIDs: The Truth About Cardiovascular Risk

9/29/2015. Primary Prevention of Heart Disease: Objectives. Objectives. What works? What doesn t?

Treatment Of Preserved Cardiac Function Heart Failure with an Aldosterone antagonist (TOPCAT) AHA Nov 18, 2014 Update on Randomized Trials

A Randomized Trial Evaluating Clinically Significant Bleeding with Low-Dose Rivaroxaban vs Aspirin, in Addition to P2Y12 inhibition, in ACS

FOURIER: Enough Evidence to Justify Widespread Use? Did It fulfill Its Expectations?

Coxibs and Heart Disease

See Important Reminder at the end of this policy for important regulatory and legal information.

COX-2 inhibitors: A cautionary tale. October 2, 2006

PAR-1 Antagonist: What Do Clinical Trials Teach Us?

(i) Is there a registered protocol for this IPD meta-analysis? Please clarify.

Effect of the PCSK9 Inhibitor Evolocumab on Cardiovascular Outcomes

Is there enough evidence for DAPT after endovascular intervention for PAOD?

Surveying the Landscape of Oral Antiplatelet Therapy in Acute Coronary Syndrome Management

Chemoprevention in Cervix and Colon Cancer

Antithrombotic therapy in the ACS patient with atrial fibrillation

JAMA. 2011;305(24): Nora A. Kalagi, MSc

CARDIOVASCULAR SAFETY OF FEBUXOSTAT OR ALLOPURINOL IN PATIENTS WITH GOUT AND CARDIOVASCULAR DISEASE (The CARES Trial)

Drug Class Review on Cyclo-oxygenase (COX)-2 Inhibitors and Non-steroidal Anti-inflammatory Drugs (NSAIDs)

Impact of Resting Heart Rate on Mortality, Disability and Cognitive Decline in Patients after Ischemic Stroke

INDIVIDUALIZED MEDICINE

Drug Use Criteria: Cyclooxygenase-2 Inhibitors

Precision Cancer Prevention: Hereditary Polyposis Syndromes

Hypertension Update Clinical Controversies Regarding Age and Race

Placebo-Controlled Statin Trials MANAGEMENT OF HIGH BLOOD CHOLESTEROL MANAGEMENT OF HIGH BLOOD CHOLESTEROL: IMPLICATIONS OF THE NEW GUIDELINES

This clinical study synopsis is provided in line with Boehringer Ingelheim s Policy on Transparency and Publication of Clinical Study Data.

Defining Sub-Clinical Atrial Fibrillation and its management

Prevenzione secondaria dell ischemia cerebrale di origine arteriosa. Marco Cattaneo. Ospedale San Paolo Università degli Studi di Milano

Placebo-Controlled Statin Trials Prevention Of CVD in Women"

Drug Class Review on Cyclo-oxygenase (COX)-2 Inhibitors and Non-steroidal Anti-inflammatory Drugs (NSAIDs)

Vest Prevention of Early Sudden Death Trial (VEST)

Blood pressure treatment target in diabetes. Should it be <130 mmhg?

Regulatory Hurdles for Drug Approvals

Sponsor. Generic Drug Name. Trial Indication(s) Protocol Number. Protocol Title. Clinical Trial Phases. Study Start/End Dates

Abwägung zwischen Schaden und Nutzen medizinischer Interventionen

Blood Pressure Measurement in SPRINT

CARDIOVASCULAR SAFETY OF FEBUXOSTAT OR ALLOPURINOL IN PATIENTS WITH GOUT AND CARDIOVASCULAR DISEASE (The CARES Trial)

Drug Class Review on Cyclo-oxygenase (COX)-2 Inhibitors and Non-steroidal Anti-inflammatory Drugs (NSAIDs)

Prevention of Cardiovascular Events in Patients With Prior Heart Attack Using Ticagrelor Compared to Placebo on a Background of Aspirin

NSAIDs: Side Effects and Guidelines

HYPERTENSION: UPDATE 2018

Treating Hypertension in 2018: What Makes the Most Sense Today?

1. How does the response to therapy compare in elderly versus middle age adults with diabetes in a randomized trial?

Optimal lenght of DAPT in different clinical scenarios

Role of Clopidogrel in Acute Coronary Syndromes. Hossam Kandil,, MD. Professor of Cardiology Cairo University

Experiences with interim trial monitoring, particularly with early stopped trials

Primary Endpoint The primary endpoint is overall survival, measured as the time in weeks from randomization to date of death due to any cause.

The Changing Landscape of Managing Patients with PAD- Update on the Evidence and Practice of Care in Patients with Peripheral Artery Disease

Belinda Green, Cardiologist, SDHB, 2016

cyclooxygenase-2 (COX-2)-selective

Branko N Huisa M.D. Assistant Professor of Neurology UNM Stroke Center

COMPENDIA TRANSPARENCY TRACKING FORM. Prevention of sporadic colorectal adenomas, in high-risk patients

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

Effective Health Care Program

Downloaded on T05:18:43Z. Title

Trial to Reduce. Aranesp* Therapy. Cardiovascular Events with

CHL 5225 H Advanced Statistical Methods for Clinical Trials. CHL 5225 H The Language of Clinical Trials

5/2/2016. Outpatient Stroke Management Sheila Smith MD May 5, 2016

T. Suithichaiyakul Cardiomed Chula

Optimal Duration and Dose of Antiplatelet Therapy after PCI

The earlier BP control the better cardiovascular outcome. Jin Oh Na Cardiovascular center Korea University Medical College

JNC 8 -Controversies. Sagren Naidoo Nephrologist CMJAH

The Role of ICD Therapy in Cardiac Resynchronization

Patient with high risk for bleeding

Using Statistical Principles to Implement FDA Guidance on Cardiovascular Risk Assessment for Diabetes Drugs

egfr > 50 (n = 13,916)

Atrial Fibrillaiton and Heart Failure: Anticoagulation therapy in all cases?

Transcription:

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 Safety Analysis Investigators Manuscript available simultaneously online in Circulation http://circ.ahajournals.org

DISCLOSURES No Disclosures This research was funded entirely by the National Cancer Institute

Background Observational studies and randomized controlled trials have reported increased cardiovascular risk associated with cyclooxygenase-2 (cox-2) inhibitors (coxibs) 1,2,3,4 Strong biologic basis for this risk supported by abundant basic research 5,6,7 Most clinical studies compared coxibs with active comparators in short-term arthritis trials 1 McGettigan JAMA 2006; 2 Graham et al. Lancet 2005; 3 Bresalier et al. NEJM 2005; 4 Solomon et al. NEJM 2005 5 McAddam et al. PNAS 1999; 6 Fitzgerald NEJM 2001; 7 Fitgerald et al. NEJM 2004

Background In December 2004, interim results from the Adenoma Prevention with Celecoxib (APC) trial results led to stopping drug in that trial and in 5 other long-term trials comparing celecoxib to placebo: The Prevention of Sporadic Adenomatous Polyps (PreSAP) trial 1 The Alzheimer s Disease Anti-inflammatory Prevention Trial (ADAPT) 2 The MA-27 Breast Cancer Trial, The Celecoxib Diabetic Macular Edema (CDME) trial The Celecoxib/Selenium Trial. FDA hearing resulted in Black Box Warning. Celecoxib is the only available cox-2 inhibitor in US. 1 Arber et al. NEJM 2006; 2 ADAPT Invest. PLOS 2006

Low Event Rates Lead to Challenges in Risk Assessment with Coxibs Low precision of the estimates Inability to test observational and RCT data suggesting coxib-associated CV risk may be dose related dose and interval may be important in CV risk. 1 Inability to assess whether CV risk associated with celecoxib varies by baseline CV risk 1 Solomon et al Circulation 2006

Objective To understand more fully the cardiovascular risk profile associated with long-term use of celecoxib NCI commissioned and funded analysis of long-term placebo controlled trials

Selection of Studies Randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials Planned follow-up of at least 3 years Source documentation available for adjudication 4 trials + APC and PreSAP fulfilled these criteria: ADAPT MA-27 CDME Celecoxib/Selenium Trial

Methodology Each study submitted patient-level data: Baseline data Outcomes Adverse events A blinded adjudication team identified all potential cardiovascular events from broad list of SAEs and AEs Requested source documentation for all relevant events All potential cardiovascular events were adjudicated by two reviewers masked to treatment allocation Categorized all deaths Adjudicated all non-fatal events Endpoint Definitions: Solomon et al. NEJM 2005

Endpoints The following endpoints were adjudicated: Death (cardiovascular or non-cardiovascular) Myocardial Infarction Stroke Hospitalization for heart Failure Thromboembolic event Other cardiovascular Primary endpoint: CV death, MI, stroke, heart failure or thromboembolic event

Statistical Analysis Intention-to-treat Time-to-event analyses for each study Calculated incidence of each outcome, rate (per 1000 pt-yrs) by Rx group Cox models and KM curves Pooled (meta) analysis: Estimated hazard ratios calculated from the average of the log-hazard ratio for each individual trial weighted by the inverse of its variance Sensitivity of method assessed by standard Mantel-Haenszel pooled odds ratios and Cox models stratified by study. Analyses adjusted for baseline cardiovascular risk Pooled analyses assessed overall risk and dosing regimen-related risk

Dose and Baseline Risk Studies were grouped according to dose regimen: 400mg once daily (2 studies) 200mg twice daily (3 studies) 400mg twice daily (2 studies) We tested for interaction between dose regimen and celecoxib risk We created a 3-category risk score using a modified Framingham Risk model conforming to the availability of data from these studies: Low: No known risk factor Moderate: One of following, age > 75, hypertension, hyperlipidemia, current smoker, low-dose ASA High: Diabetes, prior CV disease, or 2 risk factors in moderate category We tested for interaction between baseline risk and celecoxib-related risk.

Placebo-Controlled Trials Study N Sponsor Disease being Studied Celecoxib Dose Planned followup time APC 2035 NCI and Pfizer Colorectal polyps Celecoxib 200mg BID, celecoxib 400mg BID, or placebo 3+ Years PreSAP 1561 Pfizer Colorectal Polyps Celecoxib 400mg QD or placebo 3+ Years MA27 1635 NCI, NCI Canada, & Pfizer Breast Cancer Recurrence celecoxib 400 mg BID or placebo 3+ Years ADAPT 1809 NIA Alzheimer s disease and cognitive decline Celecoxib 200mg BID or Naproxen sodium 220 mg BID, or placebo Up to 7 years CDME 86 NEI Diabetic Retinopathy Celecoxib 200mg BID or placebo 3+ Years Cel/Sel 824 NCI Colorectal polyps Celecoxib 400mgQD or placebo 3-5 Years

Baseline Characteristics (%) ADAPT APC CDME MA27 PreSAP Cel/Sel Total # enrolled 1809 2035 86 1635 1561 824 7950 Pt-Years 3530 6234 101 695 4141 1369 16070 Age, mean (SD) 75 ± 4 59 ± 10 59 ± 9 64 ± 9 60 ± 10 63 ± 9 64 ± 10 Male 54 68 62 0 66 68 50 White race 97 92 67 94 89 96 93 Diabetes 7.4 9.5 100 6.1 10 7.5 9.2 HTN or med 40 41 62 34 37 36 38 Hyperlipidemia or med 33 38 55 17 17 33 28 Current smoker 3 17?? 24 16 14 Low-dose ASA use 50 31 62 14 17 45 31 Prior CV event 13 14 1.2 7 13 14 12 Low CV risk 14 24 0 50 32 19 28 Moderate CV risk 26 29 0 23 31 31 27 High CV risk 59 47 100 27 37 51 45

Event Numbers, Rates and Hazard Ratios 400mg QD PreSAP Cel/Sel 400mg QD Pooled Events (Event Rate per 1000/pt-yrs) placebo celecoxib 12/628 (7.2) 23/933 (9.4) 8/410 (11.8) 7/414 (10.3) 20/1038 (8.6) 30/1347 (9.6) Hazard Ratio 1.3 (0.6, 2.5) 0.9 (0.3, 2.4) 1.1 (0.6, 2.0) 200mg BID ADAPT 18/1083 (8.6) 18/725 (12.8) 1.5 (0.8, 2.9) APC 8/679 (3.9) 20/685 (9.7) 2.5 (1.1, 5.7) 200mg BID Pooled 29/1809 (6.9) 38/1450 (10.8) 1.8 (1.1, 3.1) 400mg BID APC 8/679 (3.9) 27/671 (13.4) MA-27 3/817 (8.7) 6/818 (17.2) 400mg BID pooled 11/1496 (4.6) 33/1489 (13.9) 3.6 (1.6, 8.0) 1.8 (0.4, 7.3) 3.1 (1.5, 6.1) *CDME Not included in this table because of extremely low event rates Solomon et al. Circulation 2008

Hazard Associated with Celecoxib at Various Doses Stratified by Study and low-dose ASA use and Adjusted for Baseline CV Risk 400 mg bid 3.1 (1.5, 6.1) Celecoxib Regimen 200 mg bid 400 mg qd Dose-regimen effect effect P = 0.0005 0.0005 1.1 (0.6, 2.0) 1.8 (1.1, 3.1) Overall 1.6 (1.1, 2.3) 0.5 0.7 0.91 2 3 4 5 6 Hazard Ratio CV Death, MI, Stroke, HF or thrombo-embolic event Solomon et al. Circulation 2008

Composite Outcomes (Hazard ratio and 95% CI) 400mg QD 200mg BID 400mg BID CV Death 0.5 (0.2, 1.7) 1.8 (0.5, 6.2) 6.5 (0.8, 54) + MI 1.0 (0.5, 2.1) 2.1 (1.0, 4.1) 3.4 (1.2, 9.6) +Stroke 1.0 (0.5, 1.9) 1.6 (0.9, 3.0) 2.9 (1.3, 6.6) + HF 1.1 (0.6, 2.1) 1.7 (1.0, 3.1) 2.7 (1.3, 5.6) + Embolic event 1.1 (0.6, 2.0) 1.8 (1.1, 3.1) 3.1 (1.5, 6.1) Any CV Event 1.3 (0.9, 1.9) 1.4 (1.0, 1.8) 1.6 (1.1, 2.3) Stratified by study and baseline aspirin use and adjusted for baseline risk Solomon et al. Circulation 2008

Celecoxib Regimen and Baseline Cardiovascular Risk Celecoxib Regimen and pre-treatment Cardiovascular Risk High Risk 400 bid 200 bid 400 qd Moderate Risk 400 bid 200 bid 400 qd Low Risk 400 bid 200 bid 400qd Baseline Risk Dose Regimen Interaction p = 0.034 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.8 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Hazard Ratio CV Death, MI, Stroke, HF or Thromboembolic Event HR (95% CI) 3.5 (1.9,6.4) 2.3 (1.5, 3.4) 1.5 (1.2, 1.9) 1.7 (0.9,3.2) 1.4 (1.0, 2.2) 1.2 (1.0,1.5) 0.9 (0.3, 2.6) 0.9 (0.4, 1.9) 1.0 (0.7, 1.4) Solomon et al. Circulation 2008

Prespecified Subgroups P-Interaction Non-Smoker Current Smoker No Diabetes Diabetes No Hyperlipidemia Hyperlipidemia No Hypertension Hypertension No CV Event CV Event History No Low Dose ASA Low Dose ASA Non-White White Female Male p = 0.37 p = 0.64 p = 0.54 p = 0.89 p = 0.17 p = 0.09 p = 0.40 p = 0.57 0.3 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 2 3 4 5 6 Hazard Ratio Solomon et al. Circulation 2008

Limitations and Caveats None of the trials included in this analysis was designed or powered with the intent of assessing cardiovascular risk. Doses tested higher than those typically used in osteoarthritis patients. recommended doses in rheumatoid arthritis, acute pain and dysmenorrhea, FAP. These data provide the strongest evidence of a dose-related risk While our data support differential risk based on dosing interval, wide confidence intervals suggest we cannot rigorously exclude hazard at the 400mg once daily dose. These data do not address the cardiovascular risk of doses lower than those tested or of other non-selective NSAIDs.

Conclusions (1) A pooled analysis of six randomized trials comparing celecoxib to placebo, with over 16,000 patient-years of follow-up, shows an overall increase in cardiovascular risk, with evidence for differences in risk based on the dose and dose-regimen of celecoxib. The data showed evidence of an interaction between baseline cardiovascular risk and the effect of celecoxib, suggesting that patients at highest baseline risk had an increased relative risk for celecoxib-related adverse cardiovascular events.

Conclusions (2) Our observation that baseline risk influences the cardiovascular risk associated with celecoxib may provide a measure of comfort in prescribing the drug in patients with very low baseline risk, and would argue for more caution in prescribing the drug in patients with higher baseline risk. Since celecoxib remains the only coxib available in the United States, and is the most commonly used coxib worldwide, these data should help guide rational clinical decisions regarding celecoxib use.

0.050 0.045 0.040 Composite KM Curves Combined studies (excluding CDME) Log-rank p-value (3 df) = 0.026 Probability of event 0.035 0.030 0.025 0.020 0.015 0.010 0.005 Sample size C 400 bid C 200 bid C 400 QD Placebo 0.000 0 6 12 18 24 30 36 Months of follow-up 1489 990 714 654 648 645 641 1411 1342 1258 1157 1033 894 768 1347 1231 1134 1042 939 841 514 3617 2943 2453 2168 1894 1598 1196