MétaCan
← tous les travaux

Dose-limiting, adverse event–associated bradycardia with β-blocker treatment of atrial fibrillation in the GENETIC-AF trial

2021· article· en· 4 citations· W3212329417 sur OpenAlex· 10.1016/j.hroo.2021.11.005

Pourquoi ce travail est-il dans la base ?

Une base qui oublie comment elle a trouvé un travail ne peut pas être vérifiée. Voici les voies qui ont admis celui-ci.

Affiliation canadienneUne personne signataire a déclaré un établissement canadien. C'est la seule voie dont dispose la base habituelle.

Le tri à trois modèles

les 1 000 travaux triés →

Les trois modèles l'ont jugé hors champ.

strate : aff_core · poids de sondage : 5595.24 (l'échantillon est stratifié ; tout taux calculé sans le poids est faux)
Claude Opus 4.8OUT
genre : empirical
porte sur le Canada: non
confiance: high

Post hoc analysis of bradycardia during beta-blocker treatment in the GENETIC-AF trial; uses trial data to answer a clinical question.

GPT-5.6 (high)OUT
genre : empirical
porte sur le Canada: non
confiance: high

The analysis concerns adverse events and dosing in a clinical trial.

Grok 4.5OUT
genre : empirical
porte sur le Canada: non
confiance: high

Clinical cardiology analysis of bradycardia under beta-blockers in an AF trial.

Résumé

BackgroundHeart failure (HF) patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) often have conduction system disorders, which may be worsened by β-blocker therapy.ObjectiveIn a post hoc analysis we examined the prevalence of bradycardia and its association with adverse events (AEs) and failure to achieve target dose in the GENETIC-AF trial.MethodsPatients randomized to metoprolol (n = 125) or bucindolol (n = 131) entering 24-week efficacy follow-up and receiving study medication were evaluated. Bradycardia was defined as an electrocardiogram (ECG) heart rate (HR) <60 beats per minute (bpm) and severe bradycardia <50 bpm.ResultsMean HR in sinus rhythm (SR) was 62.6 ± 12.5 bpm for metoprolol and 68.3 ± 11.1 bpm for bucindolol (P < .0001), but in AF HRs were not different (87.5 bpm vs 89.7 bpm, respectively). Episodes per patient for bucindolol vs metoprolol were 0.82 vs 2.08 (P < .001) for bradycardia and 0.24 vs 0.57 for severe bradycardia (P < .001), with 98.9% of the episodes occurring in SR. Patients experiencing bradycardia had a 4.15-fold higher prevalence of study medication dose reduction (P <.0001) compared to patients without bradycardia. Fewer patients receiving metoprolol were at target dose (61.7% vs 74.9% for bucindolol, P < .0001) at ECG recordings, and bradycardia AEs were more prevalent in the metoprolol group (13 vs 1 for bucindolol, P = .001). On multivariate analysis of 21 candidate bradycardia predictors including presence of a device with pacing capability, bucindolol treatment was associated with the greatest degree of prevention (Zodds ratio -4.24, P < .0001).ConclusionIn AF-prone HF patients bradycardia may limit the effectiveness of β blockers, and this property is agent-dependent. Heart failure (HF) patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) often have conduction system disorders, which may be worsened by β-blocker therapy. In a post hoc analysis we examined the prevalence of bradycardia and its association with adverse events (AEs) and failure to achieve target dose in the GENETIC-AF trial. Patients randomized to metoprolol (n = 125) or bucindolol (n = 131) entering 24-week efficacy follow-up and receiving study medication were evaluated. Bradycardia was defined as an electrocardiogram (ECG) heart rate (HR) <60 beats per minute (bpm) and severe bradycardia <50 bpm. Mean HR in sinus rhythm (SR) was 62.6 ± 12.5 bpm for metoprolol and 68.3 ± 11.1 bpm for bucindolol (P < .0001), but in AF HRs were not different (87.5 bpm vs 89.7 bpm, respectively). Episodes per patient for bucindolol vs metoprolol were 0.82 vs 2.08 (P < .001) for bradycardia and 0.24 vs 0.57 for severe bradycardia (P < .001), with 98.9% of the episodes occurring in SR. Patients experiencing bradycardia had a 4.15-fold higher prevalence of study medication dose reduction (P <.0001) compared to patients without bradycardia. Fewer patients receiving metoprolol were at target dose (61.7% vs 74.9% for bucindolol, P < .0001) at ECG recordings, and bradycardia AEs were more prevalent in the metoprolol group (13 vs 1 for bucindolol, P = .001). On multivariate analysis of 21 candidate bradycardia predictors including presence of a device with pacing capability, bucindolol treatment was associated with the greatest degree of prevention (Zodds ratio -4.24, P < .0001). In AF-prone HF patients bradycardia may limit the effectiveness of β blockers, and this property is agent-dependent.

Conservé avec la notice de tri, où il sert de preuve aux étiquettes ci-dessus.

La notice

Revue
Heart Rhythm O2
Thématique
Atrial Fibrillation Management and Outcomes
Domaine
Medicine
Établissements canadiens
Montreal Heart InstituteLibin Cardiovascular Institute of AlbertaUniversity of Calgary
Organismes subventionnaires
Mots-clés
BradycardiaMedicineMetoprololAtrial fibrillationCardiologyInternal medicineHeart rateSinus bradycardiaBeta blockerAnesthesiaHeart failureBlood pressure
Résumé présent dans OpenAlex
oui