MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4220977210 · doi:10.1002/ejhf.2487

Dronedarone for the treatment of atrial fibrillation with concomitant heart failure with preserved and mildly reduced ejection fraction: a <scp>post‐hoc</scp> analysis of the <scp>ATHENA</scp> trial

2022· article· en· W4220977210 on OpenAlexaff
Muthiah Vaduganathan, Jonathan P. Piccini, A. John Camm, Harry J.G.M. Crijns, Stefan D. Anker, Javed Butler, John A. Stewart, Rogelio Braceras, Alessandro P.A. Albuquerque, Mattias Wieloch, Stefan H. Hohnloser

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Journal of Heart Failure · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAtrial Fibrillation Management and Outcomes
Canadian institutionsSanofi (Canada)
FundersRelypsaAbbott VascularServierBoston Scientific CorporationImpulse DynamicsCytokineticsBrigham and Women's HospitalAmgenPfizerAstraZenecaBristol-Myers SquibbBayerDaiichi Sankyo EuropeAmerican RegentSanofiAmerican Heart Association
KeywordsMedicineDronedaroneEjection fractionCardiologyHeart failureInternal medicineAtrial fibrillationHazard ratioClinical endpointHeart failure with preserved ejection fractionLoop diureticConcomitantPlaceboConfidence intervalRandomized controlled trialAmiodarone

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Aims Limited therapeutic options are available for the management of atrial fibrillation/flutter (AF/AFL) with concomitant heart failure (HF) with preserved (HFpEF) and mildly reduced ejection fraction (HFmrEF). Dronedarone reduces the risk of cardiovascular events in patients with AF, but sparse data are available examining its role in patients with AF complicated by HFpEF and HFmrEF. Methods and results ATHENA was an international, multicentre trial that randomized 4628 patients with paroxysmal or persistent AF/AFL and cardiovascular risk factors to dronedarone 400 mg twice daily versus placebo. We evaluated patients with (i) symptomatic HFpEF and HFmrEF (defined as left ventricular ejection fraction [LVEF] >40%, evidence of structural heart disease, and New York Heart Association class II/III or diuretic use), (ii) HF with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) or left ventricular dysfunction (LVEF ≤40%), and (iii) those without HF. We assessed effects of dronedarone versus placebo on death or cardiovascular hospitalization (primary endpoint), other key efficacy endpoints, and safety. Overall, 534 (12%) had HFpEF or HFmrEF, 422 (9%) had HFrEF or left ventricular dysfunction, and 3672 (79%) did not have HF. Patients with HFpEF and HFmrEF had a mean age of 73 ± 9 years, 37% were women, and had a mean LVEF of 57 ± 9%. Over a mean follow‐up of 21 ± 5 months, dronedarone consistently reduced risk of death or cardiovascular hospitalization (hazard ratio 0.76; 95% confidence interval 0.69–0.84) without heterogeneity based on HF status ( p interaction >0.10). This risk reduction in the primary endpoint was consistent across the range of LVEF (as a continuous function) in HF without heterogeneity ( p interaction = 0.71). Rates of death, cardiovascular hospitalization, and HF hospitalization each directionally favoured dronedarone versus placebo in HFpEF and HFmrEF, but these treatment effects were not statistically significant in this subgroup. Conclusions Dronedarone is associated with reduced cardiovascular events in patients with paroxysmal or persistent AF/AFL and HF across the spectrum of LVEF, including among those with HFpEF and HFmrEF. These data support a rationale for a future dedicated and powered clinical trial to affirm the net clinical benefit of dronedarone in this population.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.003
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.029
GPT teacher head0.275
Teacher spread0.245 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designMeta-analysis
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations32
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEuropean Journal of Heart FailureSame topicAtrial Fibrillation Management and OutcomesFrench-language works237,207