|
|
||||||||||
|
J Am Coll Cardiol, 2004; 43:39-43, doi:10.1016/j.jacc.2003.07.033 © 2004 by the American College of Cardiology Foundation |





* University of Louisville, Division of Cardiology, Louisville, Kentucky, USA
Health Care Research Center, Procter & Gamble Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Cincinnati, Ohio, USA
Arrhythmia Center, Milwaukee, Wisconsin, USA
Cleveland Clinic Foundation, Cardiology Department, Cleveland, Ohio, USA
|| Bowman Gray School of Medicine, Department of Cardiology, Winston Salem, North Carolina, USA
¶ University of Cincinnati Hospital, Cincinnati, Ohio, USA
* Reprint requests and correspondence: Dr. Igor Singer, Cardiovascular Services, Methodist Medical Center, 221 N. E. Glen Oak Avenue, Atrium Building, Suite 470, Peoria, Illinois 61636-0002, USA.
isinger{at}mmci.org
| Abstract |
|---|
|
|
|---|
BACKGROUND: Animal studies have shown the effectiveness of AZ for therapy of supraventricular and ventricular tachycardia (VT). Azimilide dihydrochloride was investigated as adjunctive treatment for reducing the frequency of VT and, thus, the need for ICD therapies, including ATP and cardioversion/defibrillation (ICD shocks) in patients with inducible monomorphic VT.
METHODS: A total of 172 patients were randomized to daily treatment with placebo, 35 mg, 75 mg, or 125 mg of oral AZ in this dose-ranging pilot study of patients with ICDs. The majority of patients had a history of documented remote myocardial infarction and congestive heart failure New York Heart Association class II or III.
RESULTS: The frequency of appropriate shocks and ATP were significantly decreased among AZ-treated patients compared with placebo patients. The incidence of ICD therapies per patient-year among the placebo group was 36, and it was 10, 12, and 9 among 35 mg, 75 mg, and 125 mg AZ patients, respectively (hazard ratio = 0.31, p = 0.0001). Azimilide dihydrochloride was generally well tolerated and did not affect left ventricular ejection fraction or minimal energy requirements for defibrillation or pacing.
CONCLUSIONS: Azimilide dihydrochloride may be a safe and effective drug for reducing the frequency of VT and ventricular fibrillation in patients with implanted ICDs.
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Methods |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Patients were included in this study if they met one of the following criteria: 1) an ICD implantation had occurred 30 days or more before randomization, and the patient had at least one ICD shock within the preceding year; or 2) an ICD had been implanted for symptomatic VT within 30 days of randomization, and the patient had an inducible sustained monomorphic VT. In this case, patients were required to have documented monomorphic VT or ventricular fibrillation (VF) and to have an inducible VT or VF upon non-invasive, programmed stimulation with an implanted ICD. A baseline electrophysiologic study was required, with induction and termination of VT with up to three extrastimuli at cycle lengths of 600 and 400 ms.
Patients were excluded if they: 1) were <18 years of age; 2) had class IV, New York Heart Association heart failure; 3) were taking class I or class III antiarrhythmic agents; 4) had unresolved angina pectoris or had experienced a myocardial infarction within 90 days of randomization; 5) had QTc longer than 440 ms or JTc >320 ms (if QRS >120 ms); 6) had a history of polymorphic VT, including Torsade de Pointes (TdP); 7) had hypertrophic cardiomyopathy or restrictive heart disease; 8) were hemodynamically unstable; or 9) had clinically significant liver or renal dysfunction.
Patients were randomly assigned to receive 35 mg, 75 mg, or 125 mg of oral AZ or placebo. All patients were evaluated at week 2 and months 1, 3, 6, 9, and 12 after the administration of AZ or placebo during which the following safety assessments were made: 1) 12-lead electrocardiogram (ECG); 2) physical examination with adverse event (AE) assessment; and 3) clinical laboratory parameter assessments. A 24-h ECG recording was obtained at baseline and at the month-1 visit. A two-dimensional echocardiographic assessment of LVEF was obtained at baseline and at the month-6 visit. Non-invasive electrophysiologic testing to determine minimal energy requirement for defibrillation was performed at baseline and at the month-1 visit. The ICD was interrogated at every visit, and stored electrograms (EGMs) were retrieved. All patients were evaluated after a documented ICD shock.
Appropriate ICD shock or ATP was defined as any ICD therapy that occurred in response to a VT or VF retrieved on stored EGMs. An events committee, composed of four electrophysiologists, reviewed the blinded EGM data and classified all arrhythmic events requiring ICD therapies. Events were classified by an agreement of two reviewing electrophysiologists. If there was a disagreement between the two electrophysiologists, the tie was broken by a third electrophysiologist. If no agreement could be reached, the entire committee reviewed the disputed event until a consensus could be achieved. If a consensus was not possible, the majority opinion prevailed as the final interpretation.
Statistical methods. The Andersen-Gill proportional hazards model (10) was used to analyze recurrent ICD therapies. This model used all the ICD therapies that the patients experienced during the follow-up period. In this analysis, only tachycardia detections requiring appropriate shock or ATP therapy were used. The Andersen-Gill analysis was performed using SAS statistical software, Proc Phreg, version 8.2 (SAS Institute, Cary, North Carolina).
In addition, an approximation of the log-rank test (11) was used to compare the ICD therapy rate (incidence) per patient-year exposure across treatment groups. This test is a form of a simple chi-square test. It is used to compare VT incidence between the groups. The test uses the reciprocal of the total VT events for each treatment group as a function of the variance of the test. This type of statistical analysis is particularly useful in this instance because multiple VT events are experienced by some patients.
All appropriate ICD therapies were analyzed. Arrhythmia episodes requiring multiple therapy deliveries to terminate were considered a single event detection. Patients who withdrew before completion of 374 days of the study follow-up had their efficacy measure censored on the day of the withdrawal.
| Results |
|---|
|
|
|---|
|
AEs. The overall proportion of patients who reported AEs was similar across all groups and is presented in Table 2.
|
Effects of AZ on frequency of VT and VF. Azimilide dihydrochloride significantly reduced the frequency of appropriate ICD therapies (shocks and ATP-triggered by VT/VF) at all administered doses by 69%, compared with placebo (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.31, p = 0.0001, Table 3), without affecting pacing or defibrillation or pacing thresholds (Table 4). In addition, AZ significantly reduced the frequency of VTs and the requirement for ATP therapies by 66% to 79% (HR range = 0.21 to 0.34, p = 0.0001, Table 3).
|
|
| Discussion |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Azimilide dihydrochloride caused a significant reduction in the delivery of all appropriate programmed ICD therapies. Previous studies with antiarrhythmic drugs in patients with ICDs have reported the reduction of VT terminated by ICD shocks (12,13). In the present study, we observed a similar decrease in the occurrence of all appropriate ICD therapies, both shocks and ATP triggered by VT/VF. A dose-related decrease in PVC frequency in the 24-h ECG data collected 30 days after dose initiation was also observed. However, a clear dose response was not observed regarding frequency of shocks and ATP. A lack of clear separation is probably related to a relatively small sample size among study groups.
Decreasing the recurrence of ICD therapies triggered by VT/VF is clearly beneficial in the light of the well-documented discomfort of ICD shocks, the worsening of heart failure secondary to frequent VTs and resultant therapies (ATP and shocks), and the negative psychological impact of recurrent shocks, as well as other quality of life issues (1418). On a practical level, reducing the number of inappropriate ICD therapies would also be expected to enhance ICD longevity by conserving the battery drain (19).
Azimilide dihydrochloride was generally well tolerated. No statistical differences were observed between placebo and AZ patients among safety parameters reported in Table 2. Mortality was low and unrelated to tachyarrhythmic events or drug-related AEs. Three episodes of TdP in two patients were effectively treated by the ICD without adverse consequences. In both patients ischemia appeared to be the immediate trigger.
Hemodynamic status was not affected by AZ treatment, and results observed in this study (Table 3) were consistent with results from previous studies with similar doses conducted in patients with supraventricular tachyarrhythmias (20).
Clinical implications. Significant decrease in the ICD therapies (shocks and ATP), associated with a generally favorable AE profile, suggests that AZ may have an important role to play as adjunctive therapy for patients with ICDs in the reduction of VT/VF that leads to recurrent ICD therapies. A larger study called Shock Inhibition Evaluation with AzimiLiDe (SHIELD) is underway to confirm the findings of this pilot study (Appendix).
| APPENDIX |
|---|
|
|
|---|
| Acknowledgments |
|---|
| Footnotes |
|---|
| References |
|---|
|
|
|---|
This article has been cited by other articles:
![]() |
L. van Erven and M. J Schalij Troubleshooting implantable cardioverter-defibrillator related problems Heart, May 1, 2008; 94(5): 649 - 660. [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
I. Ferreira-Gonzalez, L. Dos-Subira, and G. H. Guyatt Adjunctive antiarrhythmic drug therapy in patients with implantable cardioverter defibrillators: a systematic review Eur. Heart J., February 2, 2007; 28(4): 469 - 477. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
A. K. Gehi, D. Mehta, and J. A. Gomes Evaluation and Management of Patients After Implantable Cardioverter-Defibrillator Shock JAMA, December 20, 2006; 296(23): 2839 - 2847. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
F. Lombardi, M. Borggrefe, W. Ruzyllo, B. Luderitz, and for the A-COMET-II Investigators Azimilide vs. placebo and sotalol for persistent atrial fibrillation: the A-COMET-II (Azimilide-CardiOversion MaintEnance Trial-II) trial Eur. Heart J., September 2, 2006; 27(18): 2224 - 2231. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
M Anderson B-type natriuretic peptide: a role in selection and follow up of the implantable cardioverter-defibrillator patient? Heart, February 1, 2006; 92(2): 147 - 148. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
P. Dorian, M. Borggrefe, H. R. Al-Khalidi, S. H. Hohnloser, J. M. Brum, D. S. Tatla, J. Brachmann, R. J. Myerburg, D. S. Cannom, M. van der Laan, et al. Placebo-Controlled, Randomized Clinical Trial of Azimilide for Prevention of Ventricular Tachyarrhythmias in Patients With an Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillator Circulation, December 14, 2004; 110(24): 3646 - 3654. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
A. J. Camm, C. M. Pratt, P. J. Schwartz, H. R. Al-Khalidi, M. J. Spyt, M. J. Holroyde, R. Karam, E. H. Sonnenblick, J. M.G. Brum, and on Behalf of the AzimiLide post Infarct surVival E Mortality in Patients After a Recent Myocardial Infarction: A Randomized, Placebo-Controlled Trial of Azimilide Using Heart Rate Variability for Risk Stratification Circulation, March 2, 2004; 109(8): 990 - 996. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| HOME | SUBSCRIPTIONS | CURRENT ISSUE | PAST ISSUES | CARDIOSOURCE | SEARCH | HELP | FEEDBACK |