Update on the role of drug eluting balloons

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

The Evidence for Drug Coated Balloons Below The Knee:

Efficacy of DEB in Calcification and Subintimal Angioplasty

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

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

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

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

Drug-Coated Balloons: Clinical Role in Coronary and Peripheral Interventional Therapy

Drug delivery devices for BTK treatment

Drug-coated balloons in BTK:

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

ESVB State of the art: DES, DCB and the role of debulking. Gunnar Tepe, Rosenheim

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

Specificities for infrapopliteal stents

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

Vessel Preparation Prior to DCB and Stenting: How to Do It.

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

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

Are DES and DEB worth the cost in BTK interventions?

DEB in Periphery: What we Know Till Now

Klinikum Rosenheim Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology

DCB: What Is The Evidence?

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

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

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

Michael K.W. Lichtenberg, MD

Why and where do I use mechanical debulking for the treatment of arterial occlusions?

Neuestes aus der Therapie der pavk. beschichtete Stents + Ballons. Karls-University. Eberhard-Karls. of Tubingen Department of Diagnostic Radiology

SFA In-stent Restenosis

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

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

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

Drug eluting stents and balloons in peripheral arterial disease A.T.O. ABDOOL-CARRIM UNIVERSITY OF WITWATERSRAND

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

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

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

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

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

Is a Stent or Scaffold Necessary in The SFA?

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

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

DCB From a Pre-Clinical Perspective: The Relevance of Paclitaxel Dose and Coating Integrity

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

DCB + BMS is not a DES

Christian Wissgott MD, PhD Assistant Director, Radiology Westküstenkliniken Heide

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

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

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

THE SCIENCE BEHIND DRUG COATED BALLOONS OUTCOMES

Konstantinos Katsanos, MSc, MD, PhD, EBIR. Consultant Interventional Radiologist Guy's and St.Thomas' Hospitals, NHS Foundation Trust

Maximizing Outcomes in a complex population with Drug-coated balloon

Disclosures. In the DCB Era, How Do I Choose To Use a Stent? When to Stent and What Devices to Use in the SFA

PHARMACOLOGICAL TREATMENT OF ARTERIAL RESTENOSIS

Alternative concepts for drug delivery in BTK arteries the LIMBO project

Non stent based intracoronary drug delivery

Update from Korea on the Lutonix SFA registry 12 month data

DCB level 1 evidence review

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

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

DCB + stent in the SFA

The essentials for BTK procedures: wires, balloons, what else

Importance of Thorough Vessel Preparation Followed By Anti- Restenotic Therapy: An Update from the DEFINITIVE AR Study

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

Evolving Role of Drug-Eluting Stents In Complex SFA - Majestic Trial Data

Future Algorithm for Lower Extremity Revascularization: Where Does Vessel Prep Fit?

Clinical benefits on DES Patient s perspectives

Patterns of Vessel Calcification and Clinical Relevance

Drug eluting balloons in CAD

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

RELINE-trial : 24 months results with the Viabahn vs PTA for in-stent restenosis

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

Clearing a Path for the Effective Treatment of Complex Arterial and Venous Disease

Which Stent Is Best for Various Femoropopliteal Anatomy? 2018 Pacific Northwest Endovascular Conference June 15-26, 2018 Seattle, WA

Interventional Cardiology

The latest generation DEB

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

Preliminary 12 Months results of the RAPID trial

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

Are Drug-coated balloons Durable? Level 1 evidence review. Koen Keirse, MD Vascular Surgery, RZ Tienen Tienen, Belgium

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

REACT Treatment Rationale and Clinical Evidence. ICI Meeting 5th of December 2017

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

Update on the Ranger clinical trial programme

Present & future of below the knee stenting

Endovascular treatment of infrapopliteal arteries: angioplasty vs stent in the drug-eluting era

January 23, Vascular and oncological interventional radiology Paris Descartes University

Cutting/scoring balloon Cryoplasty Drug-eluting balloon Brachytherapy Debulking Restent (BMS or DES) John R. Laird, MD

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

Experience With Atherectomy and DCBs

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

Combination therapy : treatment rationale and clinical evidence

Getting to answers with clinical trials: Being bold

Novel concept for drug delivery in infrapopliteal arteries The LIMBO trial

Session: DEB their Utility. Innovation in Drug Coated Balloons

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

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

Nicolas W Shammas, MD, MS

ILLUMENATE FIH Direct DCB Cohort 12-Month Results

Device Evolution. Atherectomy: Where Do We Stand After 12 Years Since FDA Clearance. Where Do We Stand? 4/18/2015

Adventitial Drug Infusion to Prevent Restenosis

Transcription:

Update on the role of drug eluting balloons William A. Gray MD Director of Endovascular Services Associate Professor of Clinical Medicine Columbia University Medical Center The Cardiovascular Research Foundation

Update SFA De novo ISR BTK De novo Combination lesions Opportunities

TRIAL THUNDER FEM-PAC Levant 1 PACIFIER DCB Medrad/Cotavance Medrad/Cotavance Lutonix/Moxy Medtronic/InPact Number of 154 87 101 91 patients Rutherford category 1-5 1-4 2-5 Primary endpoint 6/12 LLL 6/12 LLL 6/12 LLL 6/12 LLL Primary outcomes 0.4+/- 1.2mm vs. 1.7+/- 1.8mm (p<0.001) 0.5+/- 1.1 vs. 1.0 +/-1.1mm (p= 0.031) 0.46mm vs. 1.09mm (p=0.016) -0.05mm vs. 0.61mm (p=0.003) Mean lesion length 7.5cm 6cm 8.1cm 7cm Diabetics 50% 47% 47% 43% Ca++ (mod/severe) 46% 52% n/a 64% Occlusions 50% 13% 41% 23% Restenosis 22% vs. 14% ISR* 27% vs. 7% ISR 11% 10% vs.31% (p=0.03) 12 month patency 75% 81% (6 mo) 72% (6 mo) Pending

PCB Trials in the SFA Territory Angiographic Late Loss at 6 Months RCT of PCB for the Treatment of De Novo SFA Disease (ITT= PTA Only) PACIFIER (Medtronic) LEVANT I (Lutonix) Fem-PAC (Medrad) N=45-0.05 N=35 N=39 N=34 N=31 Thunder N=48 (Medrad) N=41 0.3 0.46 0.4 0.61 0.8 1.09 POBA PCB 1.7-0.5 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 Angiographic Late Loss (mm) Still less than several hundred patients having 6 month angiographic data and long term follow up

Thunder 5 Year Sub-Study Analysis Uncoated Balloon (Mean ± SD) Pac Balloon (Mean ± SD) P-value Intermediate TLR Diameter Stenosis [%] 44% 9% 008 0.08 55 ± 34 39 ± 23 04 0.45 MLD [mm] 2.1 ± 1.7 3.0 ± 1.7 0.25 LLL [mm] 1.5 ± 1.3 0.7 ± 1.9 0.54 Slide courtesy (modified) of Gunnar Tepe

Effectiveness of Paclitaxel Coated Balloons for Treating In Stent Restenosis (The PACUBA Trial)* (EuroCor) PTA in-stent restenosis: 70% restenosis at 6/12 1: 1 RCT In-stent restenosis SFA/popliteal (P1) Rutherford 2-5 Freeway 0.035 (EuroCor) Schillinger M JEVT 2003; 10:288-297 *Lammer J

Preliminary Results: PACUBA (Eurocor) PTA DCB Patients 15 21 Age (years) 70 68 Lesion length (cm) 8.1 8.5 Total occlusions 5 5 6 months PP rate 37% 78%

IN.PACT in SFA In Stent Restenosis E.Stabile LINC 2012 Singe center registry of IN.PACT Admiral for SFA ISR (Eugenio Stabile MD Mercogliano, Italy) Primary Endpoint: 1y Prim. Patency 39 patients LLC / CLI = 79.5% / 20.5% Diabetics = 48.7% Mean Stent length = 181.2 mm 12-month Results 12m TLR = 7.8% 12m Rest Rate = 7.8% 69% diffuse ISR 8 MDT Confidential

DEFINITIVE AR study (Zeller, Tepe): RCT infrapopliteal p atherectomy &DCB vs. DCB (Cotavance) The Rock Trial (Zeller, Tepe): RCT DCB & rotational atherectomy vs. DCB & BMS vs. PTA in calcified & long occlusions The SPORTS study (Tepe): Mechanically re-canalize RCT Cook Zilver PTX vs. artery without overstretch Medtronic InPact DCB Remove diffusion barrier better & more effective, homogenous drug uptake Reduce likelihood of bailout stenting & preserve

Thunder Five Year Outcomes: Presented by G Tepe, TCT 2011

IN.PACT + Atherectomy in High Calcium A.Cioppa LINC 2012 Singe center registry of IN.PACT Admiral + Atherectomy for highly calcified de-novo SFA lesions (Angelo Cioppa MD - Mercogliano, Italy) Primary Endpoint: 1y Prim. Patency 30 patients LLC / CLI = 6% / 94% Diabetics = 60% Mean lesion length = 115 ± 35 mm 12-month FU Primary Patency = 90% TLR = 10% Second. S d Patency = 100% Tot Occlusions = 13% Calcium Score* 3 = 100% dist. Filter + TurboHawk + IN.PAC bail-out Stenting = 7% * 0= absence of calcium; 1= calcium on one side of lumen <1cm length; 2= calcium on both side <1cm length; 3=calcium on both side >1 cm length 11 MDT Confidential

Patency and Limb Salvage Poor correlation between patency and limb salvage due to a variety of concomitant / factors concurring to wound healing Kudo T et al. JVS 2005;41:423-435

Leipzig DEB BTK Registry Singe center Registry of IN.PACT Amphirion for long BTK lesions / occlusions (Andrej Schmidt MD Leipzig, Germany) Prim. Endpoint: 3m Angio Rest. Rate 104 patients Angio subgroup: CLI = 82.6% Diabetics = 73% Avg A Lesion length = 173 ± 87 mm Tot Occlusions = 61.9% 27.4% angiographic Restenosis Rate at 3 months with 17.3 TLR rate at 12 months DEB (angio subgroup) PTA* (historical group) 3m Angiographic FU Restenosis (>50%) 27.4% 69% Full-segment Resten. 10% 56% Restenosis Length 64 mm 155 mm 12m Clinical FU 15m Clinical FU Deaths 16.3% 10.5% Limb Salvage 95.6% 100% Clinical i l Improvement (1) 91.2% 76.5% Compl. wound healing 74.2% 78.6% TLR 17.3% 50% *A.Schmidt et al. CCI 2010 A.Schmidt et al. JACC 2011

DEBATE Randomized Trial Single center RCT of IN.PACT Amphirion vs. PTA in BTK-CLI- DIABETICS de-novo lesions (Francesco Liistro MD Arezzo, Italy) Prim. Endpoint: 12m Angio Rest. Rate 120 patients (preliminary results) Baseline (DEB vs. PTA): CLI = 100% Diabetics = 100% Mean lesion length = 121 ± 83 vs. 123 ± 68 (p=ns) Tot T t Occlusions = 80% vs. 82% (p=ns) Pre-dilat. = 100% IN.PACT significantly reduces Restenosis Rate at 12-month vs. PTA in BTK-CLI-Diabetics F.Liistro LINC 2012 12-month FU Angio: 81% (DEB) / 89% (PTA) Duplex: 18% (DEB) / 11% (PTA) P=0.0004 P=0.0006 0006 PTA DEB

DEBELLUM Randomized Trial Drug Eluting Balloon Evaluation for Lower Limb multilevel treatment Single center RCT of IN.PACT vs. PTA in MULTILEVEL lower limb disease (Fabrizio Fanelli MD - Roma, Italy) Prim. Endpoint: 6m LLL 50 patients Fempop / BTK = 76% / 24% LLC / CLI = 62% / 38% IN.PACT shows reduction of restenosis vs. PTA in multilevel (SFA + BTK) disease with and without Stent F.Fanelli LINC 2012

Opportunities for Improvement Drug Carrier Balloon Catheter Others All available DCBs use Paclitaxel Change in Paclitaxel form, size or chemical features Drug micro encapsulation or advanced drug systems Alternative drugs (limus-based or others) Alternative carriers aiming to improve coatings: Reduce total drug concentration Enhance tissue transfer Increasing tissue drug retention Plaque modification delivery systems Low-injury balloon techniques Optimized delivery carrier surfaces Local tissue delivery Adjunctive technologies Atherectomy & stents Dedicated niche applications Bifurcations, AMI, calcified lesions, etc

Paclitaxel DCB Types Impact on Biological Performance Coating A Crystalline Coating B Amorphous Crystalline Amorphous Particles Released +++ ++ Uniform Coating ++ +++ Drug Transfer to Vessel +++ ++ Drug Retention vs. Time +++ + Biological Effectiveness +++?

Separate Variables to be Optimized Crystalline vs Amorphous; Tissue Uptake vs. Retention Tissue Drug Concentration (%) 100.00 EFFECTIVE 50.00 25.00 12.50 Crystalline Coating 1: higher uptake, higher retention 6.25 3.13 3.06 1.53 0.77 038 0.38 0.19 0.10 Amorphous Coating 3: higher uptake, lower retention Crystalline Coating 2: lower uptake, higher retention 1h 24h 7d 28d Time SAFE

Sirolimus-Based Nanocrystal Balloon Coating Technology Drug Load: 180µg on 3.0x15 mm balloon Slide courtesy (modified) of Concept Medical Inc

PCB for the Treatment of ISR Angiographic Outcomes (Absence of Stent) In- -Segment Binary Restenosis s (%) 0.9 0.8 0.7 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 0-0.1 86% RRR 297 Patients with Angiographic Data at Fol 0.80±0.79 PCB Control (Taxus) 0.45±0.68 PEPPER Study (Biotronik) 81 patients 47% DES-ISR. LL: 0.07 mm. 55% RRR 126 Patients BMS-ISR= 52% DES-ISR= 48% ISR + SV (< 2.5mm) 54% ISR + Bifurcation 29% 0.31±0.22 0.20±0.45 0.16±0.40 0.11±0.44 N= 23 N=54 N=54-0.02±0.50 002 0 0 N=66 N=65 N=39 N=34 PACOCCATH I/II INPACT ISR PEPCAD II PERVIDEO I Spanish Registry (Medrad)(Medtronic)(BBraun) (Lutonix) (Eurocor)

Angiographic Outcomes: PCB Trials for De Novo Applications PEPCAD III: BMS Crimped on PCB (3 µg/mm 2 ) versus Cypher Stent Lutonix De Novo Registry: Pre or Post Dilatation Using PCB (2 µg/mm 2 ) Angiographic Late Loss (mm) Binary Restenosis (%) PEPCAD III N= 325 0.11 P<0.001 N= 312 0.2 Control PCB PEPCAD III N= 325 4.9 P<0.001 N= 312 13.8 Lutonix Pre- DCB N= 11 0.53 Lutonix Pre- DCB N= 11 9.1 Control PCB Lutonix Post DCB N= 12 0.45 Lutonix Post DCB N= 12 16.7 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0 5 10 15 20