Mar 14, 2022
This week, join author Tristram Bahnson and Associate Editor Changsheng Ma as they discuss the article "Association Between Age and Outcomes of Catheter Ablation Versus Medical Therapy for Atrial Fibrillation: Results from the CABANA Trial."
Dr. Carolyn Lam:
Welcome to Circulation On The Run, your weekly podcast summary and backstage pass to the journal and its editors. We're your co-hosts. I'm Dr. Carolyn Lam, Associate Editor from the National Heart Center and Duke National University of Singapore.
Dr. Greg Hundley:
And I'm Dr. Greg Hundley, Associate Editor, Director of the Poly Heart Center at VCU Health in Richmond, Virginia.
Dr. Carolyn Lam:
Guess what, Greg? For today's feature paper, we are going to be looking at a very interesting analysis from the CABANA trial, this time, looking at the association between age and outcomes of catheter ablation versus medical therapy for atrial fibrillation. Cool, huh? Okay, but first, let's go through some other important papers in today's issue. Why don't I let you go first?
Dr. Greg Hundley:
Well, Carolyn, my first paper pertains to the cost effectiveness of coronary artery bypass surgery, and it comes to us from the STICH trial.
Dr. Carolyn Lam:
Ah, very important question, but please remind us what the STICH trial is again.
Dr. Greg Hundley:
Right, Carolyn. So the Surgical Treatment for Ischemic Heart Failure trial, or STICH demonstrated that coronary artery bypass grafting reduced all-cause mortality rates out to 10 years compared with medical therapy alone in patients with ischemic cardiomyopathy and reduced left ventricular function, defined as an ejection fraction of less than or equal to 35%. Now in this study, the authors led by Dr. Derek Chew at University of Calgary examined the economic implications of these results using a decision-analytic patient-level simulation model to estimate the lifetime costs and benefits of CABG versus medical therapy alone, using patient-level resource use and clinical data collected from the STICH trial.
Dr. Carolyn Lam:
Again, really important study. And what did they find?
Dr. Greg Hundley:
Right, Carolyn. So first, using their patient-level simulation model incorporating resource use and clinical data collected from the STICH trial, they found that coronary artery bypass grafting was estimated to cost $63,989 per quality-adjusted life year gain compared to medical therapy alone. Second, in STICH eligible patients with left ventricular ejection fraction of less than 35% in coronary artery disease amenable to CABG, routine use of CABG increased the quality-adjusted life expectancy compared to medical therapy alone for an increased cost within current benchmarks for good value in healthcare within the United States. Then finally, Carolyn, together with the improved clinical outcomes seen in the 10 year extended follow-up of STICH, the findings in this study provide additional economic support for the use of coronary artery bypass grafting in patients with ischemic cardiomyopathy eligible for STICH.
Dr. Carolyn Lam:
Wow, thanks Greg. Well, this next study contributes to the understanding of the effect of lifestyle and genetic risk on the lifetime risk of coronary heart disease. Interesting? Well, listen up. This is from Dr. deVries from UT Health Science Center at Houston and colleagues who aimed to quantify remaining lifetime risk and years free of coronary heart disease according to polygenic risk and the AHA's Life's Simple 7 guidelines in the population base cohort of ARIC. As a reminder, the Life's Simple 7 by the AHA consists of smoking status, body weight, total cholesterol, blood glucose, blood pressure, physical activity, and diet.
Dr. Greg Hundley:
Ah, Carolyn. So genes versus lifestyle. So what did they find?
Dr. Carolyn Lam:
Participants with high polygenic risk may offset their lifetime risk of coronary heart disease by up to 50% through managing their health according to the Life's Simple 7's recommendations, depending on ancestry. Individuals with high polygenic risk scores and ideal Life's Simple 7 scores had 4.5 to 20 more coronary heart disease free years than individuals with high polygenic risk scores, but low Life's Simple 7 scores and again, depending on ancestry. Appropriate management of lifestyle and clinical risk factors of coronary heart disease play larger roles in the overall lifetime risk of coronary heart disease than presently available genetic information. Thus, communicating the effects of Life's Simple 7 measures and polygenic risk on coronary heart disease in terms of absolute risk may have important implications for education, policy, and environmental changes, which can benefit not only high risk individuals, but the whole population.
Dr. Greg Hundley:
Wow, Carolyn, really informative study and so nicely summarized. So Carolyn, my next paper comes to us from the world of preclinical science and it's from Professor Yan from Shanghai, Ruijin University School of Medicine. So Carolyn, previous studies have suggested that mitochondrial dysfunction plays critical roles in the progression of heart failure. However, the underlying mechanisms often remain unclear. Now since kinases have been reported to modulate mitochondrial function team investigated the effects of dual specificity tyrosine regulate kinase one B on mitochondrial, bio energetics, cardiac hypertrophy, and heart failure.
Dr. Carolyn Lam:
Wow. Okay. So what did they find Greg?
Dr. Greg Hundley:
Right, Carolyn. So this team found that Dual Specificity Tyrosine-Regulated Kinase 1B, our DYRK1B expression was clearly up regulated in failing human myocardium as well as in hypertrophic mirroring hearts and cardiac specific DYRK1B over expression resulted in cardiac dysfunction, accompanied by a decline in the left ventricular ejection fraction, as well as the fraction shortening. And it increased left ventricular myocardial fibrosis. Carolyn in striking contrast to DYRK1B over expression, the deletion of DYRK1B mitigated tack-induced cardiac hypertrophy and heart failure. In addition, the authors found that DYRK1B was positively associated with impaired mitochondrial bio-energetics by directly binding with stat three to increase its phosphorylation and nuclear accumulation. Thereby ultimately contributing toward the down regulation of PG C one alpha. Now, furthermore, the inhibition of DYRK1B or stat three activity using specific inhibitors was able to restore cardiac performance by rejuvenating mitochondrial bio-energetics.
Dr. Carolyn Lam:
Cool, Greg. So could you give us a take home?
Dr. Greg Hundley:
Right. So in summary then, Carolyn, taken together, the findings of this study provide new insights into the previously unrecognized role of DYRK1 beta in mitochondrial bio-energetics and the progression of cardiac hypertrophy in heart failure.
Dr. Carolyn Lam:
Fantastic. Thanks, Greg. Well, other papers in today's issue include an exchange of letters between Doctors Nie and Wollert on the article myeloid derived growth factor protects against pressure overload induced heart failure by preserving sarcoplasmic reticulum calcium, ATPase expression in cardiomyocytes. There's an AHA update [AHA Advocacy Page] paper by Dr. Churchwell on improving heart health through value-based payment. An ECG Challenge by Dr. Murphy on a “Curious ECG Morphology of a Cardiac Device.” An On My Mind paper by Dr. Figtree on “Sublingual Nitrates for Patients as a Default in the Post ACS Discharge Pack. Is the Time for a Rethink?”
Dr. Greg Hundley:
Right? Carolyn. Boy, this issue is really packed with great articles. There's a Perspective piece from Professor Stewart entitled “Myocardial Edema Provides A Link Between Pulmonary Arterial Hypertension and Pericardial Effusion.” There's a wonderful Frontiers in medicine piece from Professor Kandzari entitled “A Clinical Trial Design Principles and Outcomes Definitions for Device-Based Therapies for Hypertension: A Consensus Document from the Hypertension Academic Research Consortium.” And then finally, Carolyn, there's a Research Letter from Professor Wold entitled “E-Cigarette Aerosol Reduces Left Ventricular Function in Adolescent Mice. Well, Carolyn, how about we get onto those results from the CABANA trial?”
Dr. Carolyn Lam:
Let's go, Greg.
Dr. Greg Hundley:
Well, listeners, we are now here for our feature discussion and we have with us today, Dr. Tristram Bahnson from Duke University and one of our own Associate Editors, Dr. Changsheng Ma from Beijing. Welcome gentlemen. Tristram, we will start with you first. Could you describe for us some of the background pertaining to this particular research study and what was the hypothesis that you wanted to address?
Dr. Tristram Bahnson:
Sure. Being an active electrophysiologist, a challenge we've had over the years is to try to figure out for whom catheter ablation would be a preferred therapy. I've had the privilege of being part of the CABANA study team over the last several years. As listeners might recall, the CABANA trial was a very large trial looking specifically at hard endpoints, including mortality, to try to determine whether or not catheter ablation provides significant benefits to patient. Apart from what we already knew over the years, which is the catheter ablation was more effective than drug therapy to reduce AFib recurrences. That study, the CABANA proper study was published in 2019.
Dr. Tristram Bahnson:
In the course of that study, pre-specified subgroup analyses were done initially reporting unadjusted outcomes for important clinically relevant subgroups. We found in that initial study that patients with heart failure, minorities, and patients of young age in particular appeared to do better with catheter ablation than with drug therapy. So with that as background, the CABANA study team embarked to focus on each of those subgroups and the heart failure paper was published in 2021, the minorities paper also in 2021 and the subject of our discussion now, the relationship between age and outcome in the CABANA study cohort is a subject of study today.
Dr. Greg Hundley:
Describe just quickly Tristram the hypothesis you wanted to test here and then in order to test that hypothesis, what was the study population that you included and what was your study design?
Dr. Tristram Bahnson:
So the focus was on the relationship between age and outcome in CABANA, and this was pre-specified substudy of the CABANA population. So it's probably worthwhile going over who got into the CABANA trial and to remind folks the CABANA trial enrolled 2,204 patients across 126 sites at 10 countries and randomized them one to one to a treatment strategy of either catheter ablation or drug therapy for simple traumatic atrial fibrillation that in the judgment of the treating physicians warranted therapy, patients had to have had at least two episodes of PAF or one episode of persistent AFib documented by ECG or ambulatory recordings within the six months prior to enrollment and they hadn't have failed more than one anuric drug. In other words, they would have to have been reasonable candidates for drug therapy, should they be so randomized.
Dr. Tristram Bahnson:
In addition, patients that were less than 65 years of age, had to have some additional factors that would increase the likelihood that outcome events would occur. They had to have a CHADSVASC score greater than one. That was not required of the older subjects follow up was 48 and a half months for the population at large, with the interportal range of follow up between 30 and 62 months. The patients had regular follow up every three months for the first year and then six months thereafter. In addition, 1,240 patients received a recording device that allowed them to provide either prescribed episodic recordings or recordings for when they were symptomatic and they also provided 96 hour holters every six months throughout the duration of the trial.
Dr. Tristram Bahnson:
So that's the population that we were working with. The study design, as I said, focused on trying to tease out the relationship between age and outcomes and the primary outcomes of the CABANA trial included the primary outcome, which was a composite. It included all cause mortality, disabling, stroke, serious bleeding or cardiac arrest, and the key secondary endpoints that were looked at included mortality and cardiovascular hospitalization and AF recurrence.
Dr. Greg Hundley:
Very nice. Describe for us your results.
Dr. Tristram Bahnson:
So we actually took a deeper dive into the subgroup of age, and we did a couple things that we thought would be valuable. One was to consider age as a continuous variable because after all, it's pretty arbitrary to bin people into age groups. I think the initial analysis did so with the CABANA proper publication in 2019 to correspond with the break points that we use for CHADSVASC scoring, but we elected to consider age as a continuous variable and we also elected to do adjusted Cox proportional hazard models to account for the various clinical factors that of course varied with age, such as their CHADSVASC score, the occurrence of structural heart disease, like valvular heart disease or coronary disease, the proportion of women, which typically increases with age and did so in this population. The key endpoints that we examined were the CABANA endpoints, including the primary composite endpoint of total mortality, mortality, or CB hospitalization and AF recurrence.
Dr. Tristram Bahnson:
So at the end of the day, we had 766 patients who were less than 65, 1,130 that were between 65 and 74 and 308 that were greater than 75. Mind you, CABANA admitted patients with any kind of AFib. As a matter of fact, more than half of the study population had persistent or longstanding persistent atrial fibrillation, which is not typical of many studies that have been published, looking at the relative benefits of catheter ablation. We had an unexpected finding that was hinted at, at the initial CABANA study and that was the benefit of catheter ablation was greatest in the younger patients and the benefits of catheter ablation relative to drug therapy seemed to decrease with advancing age at enrollment, which was the age criterion that we based the analysis this on and that this effect was primarily driven by changes in mortality.
Dr. Tristram Bahnson:
For the composite endpoint in CABANA, which was total mortality, serious stroke, serious bleeding and cardiac arrest, we saw that the adjusted hazard ratio increased average of 27% for every decade in advancing age, where the age was defined as that at enrollment, and for the total mortality endpoint, the adjusted hazard ratio increased an average of 46% for every 10 year increment in age at enrollment. For all age groups, catheter ablation was superior to drug therapy, a relative to a reduction in AFib consistent with many other studies. The benefit was a reduction in the adjusted hazard ratio of about 50%. So catheter ablation was agnostic to age in terms of the benefit of reducing AFib, but was not agnostic to age with result to these mortality inclusive endpoints. We did notice that there was a trend towards a relative benefit of drug therapy for the oldest age group, but we interpreted that result with caution for a variety of reasons. The oldest age group was least well represented and comprised less than 10% of the CABANA population and less than half of the next best well represented age group, which was the less than 65's.
Dr. Tristram Bahnson:
In looking carefully at the data, we could find no plausible explanation for why the older age group might do better with drug therapy. Again, it was not significant by an intention to treat analysis, but there was a trend towards drug therapy getting better with the oldest age group. We noticed that there was no excess mortality in the old age group within six months of treatment, so it didn't seem like it was related to some adverse procedural effect. We saw no evidence of more advanced forms of AFib in the oldest age group, because they had as good AFib suppression as others, and had the same distribution of paroxysmal versus persistent forms of AFib as the other age groups. There was no difference in crossover after all, if more patients in the old age group crossed over from drug to ablation therapy, who might expect that to be a confounder.
Dr. Tristram Bahnson:
We did see something that was very unusual and unexpected, which is that the mortality of the oldest age group treated with drugs was actually less than their mortality in catheter ablation, which is the issue at hand, but also less than the other age groups, which was unexpected and even less than all but the youngest age group treated with catheter ablation. So we can't explain this finding. It was not statistically significant. At the end of the day, we don't believe that elderly patients who have drug refractory AFib that is symptomatic should be denied ablation.
Dr. Greg Hundley:
Well, thank you so much, Tristram, for these very intriguing results. Changsheng, you have many papers that come across your desk. What drew you to this particular paper?
Dr. Changsheng Ma:
Yes. Dr. Bunch and colleagues should be commanded for the understand and taking important subgroup analysis of CABANA study. There has also been interest in whether the risk and the benefit of ablation may be modulated by patient age. The current analysis suggests that the related benefit of ablation was characterized for those less than 65 years of age are a tiny bit by the increasing age. It is important to emphasize that the current analysis result should not be interpreted to suggest that the cancer ablation has less value in idly patients. As a casual ablation must treated before recurrence across all age groups.
Dr. Changsheng Ma:
The current analysis is assuming we should know age related increase in safety constant in patients and taking ablation therapy. So we must be cautious not to over incorporate the result of the sub-group analysis, especially in the context of CABANA trial, treating in the permanent effect of ITT analysis. So I think it can be a possible that reach age related gradings in the relatively treatment benefits of the ablation is finding a challenge. Secondly, the CABANA trial was not a oral subgroup analysis. So the variation of treatment effect across the different age group were in the further resource. That's my opinion.
Dr. Greg Hundley:
Thank you very much. Well, gentlemen, what do you see is the next study that needs to be performed in this sphere of research and Tristram, we'll start with you.
Dr. Tristram Bahnson:
Well, clearly the clinical task at hand, for those of us who treat patients is to advise patients about relative benefits of therapy when there are choices at hand. And in the case of atrial fibrillation, the fundamental choice obviously is whether or not to pursue catheter ablation or to pursue medical therapy, either for rhythm or rate control. An important part of that decision making is to understand which patients would derive the most benefit from one versus the other therapy. And that need is perhaps the genesis of why we embarked on these subgroup analysis, which admittedly need to be interpreted with caution are not powered to give definitive results, but can certainly help guide future research. So we have noted in the CABANA trial that heart failure patients might do better and that's consistent with other studies looking specifically at heart failure with reduced ejection fraction. So we're contemplating additional studies to help tease that population out since in CABANA, in particular, our heart failure population was mostly those with a preserved ejection fraction and clinical heart failure.
Dr. Tristram Bahnson:
With regard to age, I think it'll be important to do studies to try to understand what factors resulted in the young patients apparently doing better with ablation. Again, this is hypothesis generating in terms of our result with this paper. So it'd be very interesting to find out whether there are some subsets of patients with younger ages or patients who have the relevant characteristics of the young age patients who would derive particular benefit from catheter ablation. This would obviously require a variety of approaches, including prospective randomized studies and carefully done population studies. So this issue about which patients really derive a significant mortality benefit it from catheter ablation is an important one that has not yet been teased out completely.
Dr. Greg Hundley:
Thank you. And Changsheng, do you have anything to add?
Dr. Changsheng Ma:
Yes. I think two streams say it's a very important topic for, you know, who have more and more, the older patients. So we need to answer the question, how about the real influence of age on the outcomes of the atrial fibrillation patients with ablation. So in future, we should consider randomized trial, but I think it's very difficult. So maybe we have to wait more and more, you know, other study to have a trend, how about the outcome for all the patients. It becomes too difficult for a new randomizedtrial.
Dr. Greg Hundley:
Very nice. Well listeners, we want to thank Dr. Tristram Bahnson from Duke University and Dr. Changsheng Ma from Beijing for bringing us the results from this substudy of the CABANA trial indicating that the mortality related benefits of catheter ablation for atrial fibrillation appeared to decrease for every 10 year increment in age, above the age of 65 years. Well, on behalf of Carolyn and myself, we want to wish you a great week and we will catch you next week on the run.
Dr. Greg Hundley:
This program is copyright of the American heart association, 2022. The opinions expressed by speakers in this podcast are their own and not necessarily those of the editors or of the American Heart Association for please visit ahajournals.org.