MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4306255310 · doi:10.1093/eurheartj/ehac544.433

Dronedarone as early rhythm control: post-hoc analysis of the ATHENA trial using EAST-AFNET4 criteria

2022· article· en· W4306255310 on OpenAlexaff
Paulus Kirchhof, A. John Camm, Harry J.G.M. Crijns, Jonathan P. Piccini, C. Torp‐Pedersen, David S. McKindley, James F. Stewart, Mattias Wieloch, S. H. Hohnloser

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Heart Journal · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAtrial Fibrillation Management and Outcomes
Canadian institutionsSanofi (Canada)
FundersSanofi
KeywordsMedicineDronedaroneAtrial fibrillationPost-hoc analysisPlaceboStroke (engine)Internal medicineAtrial flutterPopulationHeart failureCardiologyAcute coronary syndromeAdverse effectAmiodaroneMyocardial infarction

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Introduction The EAST-AFNET4 study found that early, systematic rhythm control reduced cardiovascular (CV) outcomes in patients with early atrial fibrillation/atrial flutter (AF) of ≤12 months compared to guideline-recommended usual care. Purpose This post-hoc analysis aimed to assess whether antiarrhythmic drug therapy alone (i.e. dronedarone 400 mg BID) improved CV outcomes compared to placebo in patients with early AF in the ATHENA trial (NCT00174785; Ref 2) applying the EAST-AFNET4 criteria. Methods All patients in the randomised, placebo-controlled ATHENA trial with ≥2 CV conditions as defined in the EAST-AFNET 4 inclusion criteria and known AF duration at baseline were identified. Patients were split into early AF (≤12 months duration) and late AF (>12 months duration) subgroups. Outcomes were collected over a mean follow-up of 21 months and included a composite of CV death, stroke, or hospitalisation with worsening of heart failure or acute coronary syndrome; nights spent in hospital per year; and a safety composite endpoint comprising death, stroke, or pre-specified serious adverse events. All analyses were conducted in the intention-to-treat population. Results Dronedarone treatment was associated with significantly (p=0.014) fewer CV events vs placebo in patients with early AF (Fig 1). There was no interaction with AF duration (p=0.64). Patients on dronedarone spent numerically fewer nights in hospital vs placebo in early (13.4 vs 14.0) and late AF (13.9 vs 16.3), with no treatment interaction between subgroups (p=NS). Dronedarone was associated with more sinus rhythm (SR) at 12 months vs placebo (early AF: 79.9% vs 70.3%; late AF: 60.6% vs 54.0%), and similar rates of SR at 24 months (early AF: 65.8% vs 65.7%; late AF: 54.7% vs 54.1%). For the safety composite endpoint, estimated events/patients were as follows for the early AF group (dronedarone: 153/135; placebo: 182/165) and the late AF group (dronedarone: 86/81; placebo: 95/89). Conclusions The clinical benefit of early rhythm control found in the EAST-AFNET4 trial can be replicated in this analysis of patients with early AF treated in the ATHENA trial comparing dronedarone to placebo. These data support the use of dronedarone as part of early rhythm control. Funding Acknowledgement Type of funding sources: Private company. Main funding source(s): Sanofi

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)0.013
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.011
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.066

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0130.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0050.007
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.000

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 head0.096
GPT teacher head0.358
Teacher spread0.262 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations1
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEuropean Heart Journal→Same topicAtrial Fibrillation Management and Outcomes→French-language works237,207→