Association Between Sex and Treatment Outcomes of Atrial Fibrillation Ablation Versus Drug Therapy: Results From the CABANA Trial.
Date
2021-02
Journal Title
Journal ISSN
Volume Title
Repository Usage Stats
views
downloads
Citation Stats
Attention Stats
Abstract
Background
Among patients with atrial fibrillation (AF), women are less likely to receive catheter ablation and may have more complications and less durable results. Most information about sex-specific differences after ablation comes from observational data. We prespecified an examination of outcomes by sex in the 2204-patient CABANA trial (Catheter Ablation Versus Antiarrhythmic Drug Therapy for Atrial Fibrillation).Methods
CABANA randomized patients with AF age ≥65 years or <65 years with ≥1 risk factor for stroke to a strategy of catheter ablation with pulmonary vein isolation versus drug therapy with rate/rhythm control agents. The primary composite outcome was death, disabling stroke, serious bleeding, or cardiac arrest, and key secondary outcomes included AF recurrence.Results
CABANA randomized 819 (37%) women (ablation 413, drug 406) and 1385 men (ablation 695, drug 690). Compared with men, women were older (median age, 69 years versus 67 years for men), were more symptomatic (48% Canadian Cardiovascular Society AF Severity Class 3 or 4 versus 39% for men), had more symptomatic heart failure (42% with New York Heart Association Class ≥II versus 32% for men), and more often had a paroxysmal AF pattern at enrollment (50% versus 39% for men) (P<0.0001 for all). Women were less likely to have ancillary (nonpulmonary vein) ablation procedures performed during the index procedure (55.7% versus 62.2% in men, P=0.043), and complications from treatment were infrequent in both sexes. For the primary outcome, the hazard ratio for those who underwent ablation versus drug therapy was 1.01 (95% CI, 0.62-1.65) in women and 0.73 (95% CI, 0.51-1.05) in men (interaction P value=0.299). The risk of recurrent AF was significantly reduced in patients undergoing ablation compared with those receiving drug therapy regardless of sex, but the effect was greater in men (hazard ratio, 0.64 [95% CI, 0.51-0.82] for women versus hazard ratio, 0.48 [95% CI, 0.40-0.58] for men; interaction P value=0.060).Conclusions
Clinically relevant treatment-related strategy differences in the primary and secondary clinical outcomes of CABANA were not seen between men and women, and there were no sex differences in adverse events. The CABANA trial results support catheter ablation as an effective treatment strategy for both women and men. Registration: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT00911508.Type
Department
Description
Provenance
Citation
Permalink
Published Version (Please cite this version)
Publication Info
Russo, Andrea M, Emily P Zeitler, Anna Giczewska, Adam P Silverstein, Hussein R Al-Khalidi, Yong-Mei Cha, Kristi H Monahan, Tristram D Bahnson, et al. (2021). Association Between Sex and Treatment Outcomes of Atrial Fibrillation Ablation Versus Drug Therapy: Results From the CABANA Trial. Circulation, 143(7). pp. 661–672. 10.1161/circulationaha.120.051558 Retrieved from https://hdl.handle.net/10161/31123.
This is constructed from limited available data and may be imprecise. To cite this article, please review & use the official citation provided by the journal.
Collections
Scholars@Duke
Hussein Rashid Al-Khalidi
My research interest includes design and analysis of cardiovascular clinical trials, medical devices, survival analysis, group-sequential analysis, time-to-recurrent or multiple events, continuous-time Markov models, stochastic process, linear model, dose-response modeling, design of experiments and adaptive designs.
Tristram Dan Bahnson
Daniel Benjamin Mark
Dr. Mark is a clinical cardiologist with the rank of Professor of Medicine (with tenure) as well as Vice Chief for Academic Affairs in the Division of Cardiology, Department of Medicine at Duke University Medical Center. He is also the Director of Outcomes Research at the Duke Clinical Research Institute. He has been on the full-time faculty at Duke since 1985. Prior to that he completed his cardiology fellowship at Duke, his residency and internship at the University of Virginia Hospital, and received his medical degree from Tufts University and his Master’s degree from Harvard. In 1998, he was given the honor of being elected to the American Society for Clinical Investigators and in 2002 he was honored by election to the Association of American Physicians. These organizations are the two most prestigious honor societies in academic medicine. In 2009, Dr. Mark was awarded the American College of Cardiology Distinguished Scientist Award.
Dr. Mark's major research interests include medical economics and quality of life outcomes, outcomes research, and quality of medical care. Currently, Dr. Mark is directing a number of outcomes analyses for ongoing clinical trials including PROMISE (anatomic versus functional testing for coronary artery disease, NIH), CABANA (catheter ablation versus antiarrhythmic drug therapy for atrial fibrillation, NIH), ISCHEMIA (percutaneous coronary intervention versus optimal medical therapy for moderate-severe ischemia), and STICH (CABG +/- ventricular reconstruction versus medical therapy for ischemic heart disease, NIH). He was the principal author of the AHCPR Unstable Angina Guidelines and is a co-author of both the American College of Cardiology Guideline on Exercise Testing and their Coronary Stent Consensus Guideline. He is also the Editor of the American Heart Journal. Dr. Mark has published over 270 peer-reviewed articles, two books, and 80 book chapters. He lectures widely in the US, as well as in Canada, South America, and Europe.
Keywords: cost-effectiveness analysis, disease management, quality of life assessment, resource use.
Unless otherwise indicated, scholarly articles published by Duke faculty members are made available here with a CC-BY-NC (Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial) license, as enabled by the Duke Open Access Policy. If you wish to use the materials in ways not already permitted under CC-BY-NC, please consult the copyright owner. Other materials are made available here through the author’s grant of a non-exclusive license to make their work openly accessible.