Lutonix DCB in BTK Update on the BTK real world registry and RCT

Similar documents
Michael K. W. Lichtenberg, MD, FESC Westfälische Wilhelms-Universität Münster. Dierk Scheinert, M.D. Universitätsklinikum Leipzig AöR

Hiroshi Ando, MD Kasukabe Chuo General Hospital Saitama, Japan

Clinical use and safety of the Lutonix DCB for the treatment of BTK: interim data from a prospective registry

LUTONIX DCB in BTK Update on the BTK clinical program & single center experience

The Lutonix BTK Clinical Trial Programme: Status Update and Real World Clinical Experience

Latest Insights from the LEVANT II study and sub-group analysis

COMPARE-Pilot RCT: 1-year results of a randomised comparison of RANGER DCB vs. IN.PACT DCB in complex SFA lesions. Dierk Scheinert

One Year after In.Pact Deep: Lessons learned from a failed trial. Prof. Dr. Thomas Zeller

Long-term results with interwoven nitinol stents vs. BMS vs. DCB

Update from Korea on the Lutonix SFA registry 12 month data

Making BTK Interventions more Durable: Are DES and DCB the answer? Thomas Zeller, MD

Fabrizio Fanelli, MD, EBIR Director Vascular and Interventional Radiology Department "Careggi " University Hospital Florence - Italy

Outcomes Of DCB Use In Real World Registries: 2 Year Results From The INPACT Global Registry

Drug-coated balloons in BTK:

Real PTX RCT: 3 year data from a randomized comparison of DCB vs. DES in femoropopliteal lesions

Update on the Ranger clinical trial programme

Dierk Scheinert, MD. Department of Angiology University Hospital Leipzig, Germany

Alternative concepts for drug delivery in BTK arteries the LIMBO project

Drug-Coated Balloon Treatment for Patients with Intermittent Claudication: Insights from the IN.PACT Global Full Clinical Cohort

BIOLUX P-III Passeo-18 Lux All-comers Registry: 12-month Results for the All-Comers Cohort

Final Results of the Feasibility Study for the Drug-coated Chocolate Touch PTA balloon. (The ENDURE Trial)

Maximizing Outcomes in a complex population with Drug-coated balloon

Update on the Levant 2 Clinical Trial Programme. Dierk Scheinert, MD University Hospital Leipzig Leipzig, Germany

Novel concept for drug delivery in infrapopliteal arteries The LIMBO trial

The Illumina FIH study with a next generation DES 12-months results

January 23, Vascular and oncological interventional radiology Paris Descartes University

Long Lesions: Primary stenting or DCB first? John Laird MD Adventist Heart and Vascular Institute, St. Helena, CA

TOBA II 12-Month Results Tack Optimized Balloon Angioplasty

Update on Tack Optimized Balloon Angioplasty (TOBA) Below the Knee. Marianne Brodmann, MD Medical University Graz Graz, Austria

Promise and limitations of DCB in long lesions What Have we Learned from Clinical Trials? Ramon L. Varcoe, MBBS, MS, FRACS, PhD

Rotarex mechanical thrombectomythe first line option for thrombotic occlusions?

Luminor DCB in femoropopliteal lesions

Michael K. W. Lichtenberg MD, FESC on behalf of KANSHAS 1 investigators; Tepe G, Müller-Hülsbeck S, Deloose K, Verbist J, Goverde P, Zeller T

Drug delivery devices for BTK treatment

Michael K.W. Lichtenberg, MD

Rotarex mechanical debulking: The Leipzig experience in patients

Clinical Data Update for Drug Coated Balloons (DCB) Seung-Whan Lee, MD, PhD

Final Results of the Feasibility Study for the Drug-coated Chocolate Touch PTA balloon. (The ENDURE Trial)

Potential Conflicts of Interest

DCB: What Is The Evidence?

12-month Outcomes of Post Dilatation in the IN.PACT Global CTO Cohort. Gunnar Tepe, MD RodMed Clinic Rosenheim Rosenheim, Germany

Endovascular Therapy vs. Open Femoral Endarterectomy Rationale and Design of the Randomized PESTO Trial

Present & future of below the knee stenting

The Role of Lithotripsy in Solving the Challenges of Vascular Calcium. Thomas Zeller, MD

Contemporary use of DCBs, Ranger clinical trial and investigator sponsored research

The latest evidences from the DES trials in peripheral arterial disease

Efficacy of DEB in Calcification and Subintimal Angioplasty

Do we really need a stent in long SFA lesions? No: DEB is the answer

DCB use in fem-pop lesions of patients with CLI (RCC 4-5): subgroup analysis of IN.PACT Global 12-month outcomes

ISR-treatment The Leipzig experience with purely mechanical debulking. Sven Bräunlich Department for Angiology University-Hospital Leipzig, Germany

What Happened in the IN.PACT Deep Trial. Zaheed Tai, DO,FACC,FSCAI Bos4ck Heart Center Winter Haven, FL

The importance of scientific evidence. Prof. I. Baumgartner Head Clinical & Interventional Angiology University Hospital Bern

RANGER SFA REGISTRY Interim Analysis. Bernd Gehringhoff, MD On behalf the Ranger SFA Registry Investigators

Is there still any space left for DES in the BTK area??? (Angiolite BTK trial, 6 month Data)

LIFESTREAM TM First look at the BOLSTER 2-year follow up data

Are RCT always needed: Experience with objective performance criteria (OPC)

The ZILVERPASS study a randomized study comparing ZILVER PTX stenting with Bypass in femoropopliteal lesions

Christian Wissgott MD, PhD Assistant Director, Radiology Westküstenkliniken Heide

Is combination therapy with directional atherectomy followed by DCB the answer to challenges in treating SFA disease?

EffPac - Trial: Assessment of the Effectiveness of DCB versus POBA in the SFA Ulf Teichgräber, MD, MBA

6-month 0utcomes of a Novel Sirolimus Coated DCB Technology Evaluated in SFA Thomas Zeller, MD University Heart Center Freiburg-Bad Krozingen

Update on the OPTIMIZE BTK Trial. Marianne Brodmann, MD Division of Angiology Medical University Graz, Austria

BioMimics 3D in my Clinical Practice

ILLUMENATE FIH Direct DCB Cohort 12-Month Results

New approaches for drug delivery in BTK arteries

The latest generation DEB

Could a combination of DCB + stent be the answer in complex SFA lesions

Shockwave Medical Lithoplasty. Thomas Zeller MD Universitäts-Herzzentrum Freiburg & Bad Krozingen, Germany

Is a Stent or Scaffold Necessary in The SFA?

Atherectomy: Jetstream and Directional. George S. Chrysant, M.D.

The Evidence for Drug Coated Balloons Below The Knee:

Atherectomy is Still Live and Effective. John R. Laird, MD Professor of Medicine Medical Director of the Vascular Center UC Davis Health System

BIOFLEX PEACE Registry

Comparison Of Primary Long Stenting Versus Primary Short Stenting For Long Femoropopliteal Artery Disease (PARADE)

Update on the role of drug eluting balloons

DEB in Periphery: What we Know Till Now

William A. Gray MD System Chief of Cardiovascular Services, Main Line Health President, Lankenau Heart Institute Wynnewood, PA USA

Adventitial Drug Infusion to Prevent Restenosis

Disclosures. Rational Selection of Endovascular Options for the SFA and Popliteal: What Works Where and for How Long?

DCB in my practice: How the evidence influences my strategy. Yang-Jin Park

Specificities for infrapopliteal stents

Are DES and DEB worth the cost in BTK interventions?

Merits and demerits of DES, DEB or covered stent in lower extremity arterial occlusive disease 성균관의과대학삼성서울병원순환기내과최승혁

MEET M. Bosiers K. Deloose P. Peeters. SFA stenting in 2009 : The good and the ugly What factors influence patency?

Dealing with Calcification in BTK Arteries: Is Lithoplasty the Answer?

2 Year Results from the MDT SFA Japan Trial - DCB vs. standard PTA for the treatment of atherosclerotic lesions in the SFA/PPA

DISRUPT PAD. (( Data Summary )) DISRUPT PAD Data Summary SPL Rev. B 2016 Shockwave Medical Inc. All rights reserved.

First time data release: Initial experience with the temporary Spur Stent System: DEEPER Trial first-in-man results Jihad A. Mustapha, MD, FACC,

Vessel Preparation: What does it mean and what are the current tools? Lawrence Garcia, MD St. Elizabeth s Medical Center Boston, MA, USA

NCT Teichgräber et al. Trials (2016) DOI /s x

TOBA Trial 12 months Results

Drug- Coated Balloons for the SFA: Overview of Technology and Results

BTK Intervention with Drug- Coated Balloons: Past Lessons and Future Exploration

4/14/2016. Faculty Disclosure. Drug-eluting technology in the SFA and Popliteal. Typical SFA Disease Pattern. Why Peripheral Artery Disease Matters

Lessons learnt from DES in the SFA is there any ideal concept so far?

Current Status of DCB Experience with Non- Femoropopliteal Applications (Dialysis, Tibial, Venous)

Study of a Balloon-Expandable Covered Stent for Obstructive Lesions in the Iliac Artery

Olive registry: 3-years outcome of BTK intervention in Japan. Osamu Iida, MD Kansai Rosai Hospital Amagasaki, Hyogo, Japan

Six Month Results of the Global BIOLUX P-III All-Comers Registry using Drug Coated Balloon in Infra-Inguinal Artery Disease

Transcription:

Lutonix DCB in BTK Update on the BTK real world registry and RCT Prof. Dr. med. Dierk Scheinert Department of Interventional Angiology University Hospital Leipzig

Disclosures Speaker: Prof. Dr. med. Dierk Scheinert I have the following potential conflicts of interest to report: Advisory Board /Consultant: Abbott, Biotronik, Boston Scientific, Cook Medical, Cordis, CR Bard, Gardia Medical, Medtronic/Covidien, TriReme Medical, Trivascular, Upstream Peripheral Technologies

Drug-Coated Balloon BTK Trials which failed to show a benefit / superiority for DCBs BTK In.Pact DEEP multicenter, randomized, controlled trial In.Pact Amphirion PTX-eluting balloon vs. Uncoated Amphirion Deep Zeller et al. JACC 2014 Biolux-P-II multicenter, randomized, controlled trial Passeo-18 LUX PTX-eluting balloon vs. Uncoated Passeo-18 Zeller et al. JACC Intervent 2015

POBA for CLI Treatment 68 CLI patients due to BTK lesions Lesion length: 140 ± 90 mm Restenosis at 3 months: 73% Restenosis delays healing Iida O.. et al. EJVES 2012; 44:425-31. Complete ulcer healing rates

Lutonix 014 Drug Coated Balloon IDE BTK Trial

Study Synopsis OBJECTIVE STUDY DESIGN To demonstrate the superior efficacy and non-inferior safety of the Lutonix DCB by direct comparison to standard PTA catheter for treatment of stenosis or occlusion of below-the-knee arteries. Prospective, Multicenter, Single Blind, Randomized, Safety and Efficacy STUDY DEVICE Lutonix 0.014 OTW Drug Coated PTA Dilatation Catheter (Lutonix DCB Catheter) RANDOMIZATION PRIMARY ENDPOINTS NUMBER OF SUBJECTS/SITES 2:1 Lutonix DCB to standard PTA Safety at 30 days Limb salvage & primary patency at 6 months Up to 840 randomized subjects at 75 global sites FOLLOW-UP Clinical: 1, 6, 12, 24, and 36 Months Duplex Ultrasound (DUS): 1, 6,12, 24, & 36 months Telephone: 48 and 60 Months

Primary Endpoints SAFETY Freedom from Major Adverse Limb Events (MALE) & All-Cause Perioperative Death (POD) at 30 DAYS Amputation (above ankle) Major re-intervention New bypass graft Jump/Interposition graft revision Thrombectomy/Thrombolysis EFFICACY Composite of Limb Salvage and Primary Patency at 6 Months Defined as freedom from the composite of above ankle amputation, target vessel occlusion, and clinically-driven target lesion re-intervention.

Patient Eligibility Inclusion Criteria Male or non-pregnant female 18 years of age Rutherford 3-5 Life expectancy 1 year Significant stenosis ( 70%) A patent inflow artery Target vessel(s) diameter between 2 and 4 mm Target vessel(s) reconstitute(s) at or above the ankle Exclusion Criteria Pregnant or planning on becoming pregnant History of stroke within 3 months History of MI, thrombolysis or angina within 30 days of enrollment GFR 30 ml/min per 1.73m 2 Acute limb ischemia In-stent restenosis of target lesion

Study Flowchart Inflow Treatment If needed PTA Pre-Dilatation With Uncoated Balloon Successful PTA with Outflow Randomize 2:1 Suboptimal PTA Absence of above ankle reconstitution >50% residual stenosis Test Arm Control Arm Treat per standard practice 30 day follow-up for safety

Current Status of Lutonix 014 BTK IDE Study 382 Randomized Subjects 12 subjects with a Major Amputation (3.2%) The Data Monitoring Committee (DMC) has met 11 times and unanimously recommended continuation of the study with no modifications.

Preliminary Demographic Information All Randomized Subjects* (N=375) Age (Years), Mean ± SD (n) 72.9 ± 9.77 (375) Median (Min, Max) 74.0 (45.0, 96.0) Gender, % (n/n) Female 32.0% (120/375) Male 68.0% (255/375) Race, % (n/n) American Indian 0.3% (1/375) Asian 9.6% (36/375) Black or African American 10.9% (41/375) Other 1.1% (4/375) White 78.1% (293/375) Height (cm), Mean ± SD (n) 170.0 ± 10.3 (367) Median (Min, Max) 170.0 (140.0, 193.0) Weight (kg), Mean ± SD (n) 81.3 ± 20.53 (367) Median (Min, Max) 80.0 ( 38.0, 202.0) BMI (kg/m 2 ), Mean ± SD (n) 28.0 ± 6.07 (367) Median (Min, Max) 27.4 ( 14.1, 69.9) BMI >= 30, % (n/n) 33.2% (122/367) *Site reported data, enrollment ongoing may change as more subjects enroll.

Preliminary Selected Medical History All Randomized Subjects* (N=375) Current or Previous Smoker, % (n/n) 57.7% (210/364) Diabetes, % (n/n) 68.4% (249/364) Dyslipidemia, % (n/n) 75.0% (273/364) Hypertension, % (n/n) 92.0% (335/364) CAD, % (n/n) 49.2% (179/364) Heart Failure, % (n/n) 10.4% (38/364) MI, % (n/n) 20.3% (74/364) COPD, % (n/n) 12.6% (46/364) Osteomyelitis, % (n/n) 6.0% (22/364) Renal Failure, % (n/n) 20.9% (76/364) *Site reported data, enrollment ongoing may change as more subjects enroll.

Preliminary Baseline Angio Data Number of Treated Lesions, % (n/n) 1 2 3 4 Total Target Lesion (mm), Mean ± SD (n) Median (Min, Max) Maximum Stenosis (%DS), Mean ± SD (n) Median (Min, Max) All Randomized Subjects* (N=375) 74.7% (254/340) 20.6% (70/340) 4.1% (14/340) 0.6% (2/340) 136.4 ± 97.63 (336) 111.0 (6.0, 442.0) 88.3 ± 13.84 (340) 94.0 (32.0, 100.0) CTO, % (n/n) 45.0% (153/340) Average RVD (mm, Site), Mean ± SD (n) 2.52 ± 0.56 (338) Median (Min, Max) 2.41 (1.27, 5.32) Any Calcification, % (n/n) 59.1% (201/340) Severe Calcification 25.8% (51/198) Location(s) Treated, n (%)** Popliteal, % (n/n) Tibioperoneal Trunk, % (n/n) Anterior Tibial, % (n/n) Posterior Tibial, % (n/n) Peroneal, % (n/n) *Site reported data, enrollment ongoing may change as more subjects enroll. **More than one vessel may be treated 10.9% (37/340) 30.0% (102/340) 45.0% (153/340) 27.1% (92/340) 27.1% (92/340)

Preliminary Rutherford Classification All Randomized Subjects* (N=375) Baseline Rutherford Classification, % (n/n) 3 4 5 7.9% (29/368) 37.8% (139/368) 54.3% (200/368) 92.1% have CLI ** *Site reported data, enrollment ongoing may change as more subjects enroll. **Based on Rutherford Classification 4 & 5

Summary Primary Endpoints Safety at 30 days Limb salvage & primary patency at 6 months Current Study Population 92.1% CLI 54.3% RCC 5 68.4% diabetic 32.0% females Low major amputation rate - 3.2% The Data Monitoring Committee (DMC) has met 11 times and deemed the study safe to continue with no modifications to protocol. *FDA Approved IDE G130007

Initial Look at the Global Lutonix DCB BTK Registry Study 6 Month Outcomes A Prospective, Multicenter, Single-Arm Real-World Registry Investigating the Clinical Use and Safety of the Lutonix Drug Coated Balloon PTA Catheter for Treatment of Below-the-Knee (BTK) Arteries Michael K. W. Lichtenberg, MD, FESC Westfälische Wilhelms-Universitat Münster Dierk Scheinert, M.D. Universitätsklinikum Leipzig

Study Design Study Design Objective Number of patients/sites Inclusion Criteria Exclusion Criteria Study Design Prospective, Multicenter, Single Arm Registry To demonstrate safety and assess the clinical use and outcomes of the Lutonix DCB for treatment of stenosis or occlusion of native below-theknee arteries in a heterogeneous patient population in real world clinical practice Up to 500 subjects to be enrolled at up to 35 international sites Study Design Rutherford Class: 3-5, 70% stenosis lesion, target vessel(s) reconstitute(s) at or above the ankle with inline flow to at least one patent Neurotrophic ulcer or heel pressure ulcer or ulcer potentially involving calcaneus (index limb) Primary Endpoints Follow-up Safety: Freedom from BTK MALE+POD at 30-days Efficacy: Freedom from TLR at 6 months 1, 6, 12 and 24 Months

PI Name Prof. Willfort-Ehringer Dr. Loewe Prof. Brodmann Prof. Hausegger Dr. Lerut Dr. Lansink Dr. Husmann Dr. Banyai Dr. Zech Dr. Giménez-Gaibar Dr. Albuquerque e Castro Prof. Sapoval Dr. Lichtenberg Dr. Thieme Prof. Scheinert Study Centers

PI Name Prof. Eckstein Dr. Sunderdiek Prof. Tepe Dr. Perez Delgado Prof. Zeller Prof. Karnabatidis Prof. Brountzos Dr. Rossato Dr. Cioppa Dr. Tolva Dr. Fanelli Dr. Van den Heuvel Dr. Butterfield Dr. Al-Shammari Study Centers

Demographics / Baseline Characteristics Description BTK Study Registry (N=85) Age (Years), Mean ± SD (n) 73.9 ± 10.2 (85) Gender, % (n/n) Female Male 29.4% (25/85) 70.6% (60/85) BMI 30 kg/m², % (n/n) 25.0% (21/84) Hypertension, % (n/n) 87.1% (74/85) Dyslipidemia, % (n/n) 60.0% (51/85) Current/Previous Smoker, % (n/n) 47.1% (40/85) Diabetes 57.6% (49/85) Rutherford Category 3 4 5 19.0% (16/84) 16.7% (14/84) 64.3% (54/84)

Lesion Characteristics Description BTK Study Registry (N=85) Lesion Location¹ Popliteal Tibioperoneal Trunk Anterior Tibial Posterior Tibial Peroneal 9.4% (8/85) 27.1% (23/85) 34.1% (29/85) 24.7% (21/85) 25.9% (22/85) Total Target Length (mm), Mean ± SD (n) 102 ± 79.5 (85) Average RVD (mm), Mean ± SD (n) (min, max) Calcification, % (n/n) Severe Calcification, % (n/n) ¹Subjects may be in more than one category. 2.7 ± 0.57 (85) (2.0, 4.0) 63.8% (51/80) 10.5% (8/76)

Freedom from Primary Safety Events Time N¹ Survival² % [95% CI] Month 1 (30 Days) 84 100.0% [NA, NA] Month 6 (183 Days) 62 94.0% [84.6%, 97.7%] ¹Subjects ongoing without an event at the beginning of the visit window ²Primary safety response estimate based on Kaplan-Meier estimate Freedom at 30-Days from the composite of all-cause death, above-ankle amputation or major re-intervention, i.e., new bypass graft, jump/interposition graft revision, or thrombectomy/thrombolysis of the index limb involving a below-the-knee artery.

Additional Safety Profile Freedom From N¹ Survival² % [95% CI] All Cause Death Survival 63 89.2% [79.5%, 94.4%] Major Amputation 63 95.2% [85.8%, 98.5%] Re-intervention for Thrombosis/Thrombolysis 62 96.1% [84.9%, 99.0%] Re-intervention For Distal Embolization 63 100.0% [NA, NA] TVR 59 89.8% [79.8%, 95.0%] Unexpected Device or Drug Related Event 63 100.0% [NA, NA] ¹Subjects ongoing without a failure at the beginning of the visit window ²Survivor rate based on Kaplan-Meier Estimate

Freedom from TLR Time N¹ Survival² % [95% CI] Month 1 (30 Days) 84 98.8% [91.8%, 99.8%] Month 6 (183 Days) 60 89.3% [78.5%, 94.8%] ¹Subjects ongoing without a TLR failure at the beginning of the visit window ²TLR-Free response estimate based on Kaplan-Meier estimates

Male, 70 J, Diabetes, Endstage Renal Insufficency

Recanalisation with DCB Lutonix 2.5mm

Follow-up 3 weeks after

Conclusions Only BTK Registry Multi Center On-going Study Promising Treatment Effect in Below-the Knee Arteries Safety Consistent with the Strong Safety Profile of the Lutonix DCB in PAD Freedom from TLR 89.3% Less than 5% Amputation Rate ZERO Re-interventions for Distal Embolizations

Lutonix DCB in BTK Update on the BTK real world registry and RCT Prof. Dr. med. Dierk Scheinert Department of Interventional Angiology University Hospital Leipzig