4.7 Article

Comparative Reductions in Investigator-Reported and Adjudicated Ischemic Events in REDUCE-IT

Journal

JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN COLLEGE OF CARDIOLOGY
Volume 78, Issue 15, Pages 1525-1537

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.jacc.2021.08.009

Keywords

central adjudication; clinical trials; icosapent ethyl; investigator-reported endpoints

Funding

  1. Amarin
  2. Data Monitoring Committees for Baim Institute for Clinical Research
  3. Abbott
  4. Edwards
  5. Daiichi-Sankyo
  6. Population Health Research Institute
  7. Baim Institute for Clinical Research
  8. Boehringer Ingelheim
  9. CSL Behring
  10. Bayer
  11. Afimmune
  12. Amgen
  13. AstraZeneca
  14. Bristol Myers Squibb
  15. Cardax
  16. CellProthera
  17. Cereno Scientific
  18. Chiesi
  19. Eisai
  20. Ethicon
  21. Ferring Pharmaceuticals
  22. Forest Laboratories
  23. Fractyl
  24. Garmin
  25. HLS Therapeutics
  26. Idorsia
  27. Ironwood
  28. Ischemix
  29. Janssen
  30. Lexicon
  31. Medtronic
  32. MyoKardia
  33. NirvaMed
  34. Novartis
  35. Novo Nordisk
  36. Owkin
  37. Pfizer
  38. PhaseBio
  39. PLx Pharma
  40. Regeneron
  41. Roche
  42. Sanofi
  43. Synaptic
  44. The Medicines Company
  45. 89Bio

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The REDUCE-IT trial found that IPE significantly reduced cardiovascular events as reported by investigators with a high degree of concordance between investigator-reported and adjudicated endpoints.
BACKGROUND REDUCE-IT (Reduction of Cardiovascular Events With Icosapent Ethyl-Intervention Trial) randomized statin-treated patients with elevated triglycerides to icosapent ethyl (IPE) or placebo. There was a significant reduction in adjudicated events, including the primary endpoint (cardiovascular [CV] death, myocardial infarction [MI], stroke, coronary revascularization, unstable angina requiring hospitalization) and key secondary endpoint (CV death, MI, stroke) with IPE. OBJECTIVES The purpose of this study was to determine the effects of IPE on investigator-reported events. METHODS Potential endpoints were collected by blinded site investigators and subsequently adjudicated by a blinded Clinical Endpoint Committee (CEC) according to a prespecified charter. Investigator-reported events were compared with adjudicated events for concordance. RESULTS There was a high degree of concordance between investigator-reported and adjudicated endpoints. The simple Kappa statistic between CEC-adjudicated vs site-reported events for the primary endpoint was 0.89 and for the key secondary endpoint was 0.90. Based on investigator-reported events in 8,179 randomized patients, IPE significantly reduced the rate of the primary endpoint (19.1% vs 24.6%; HR: 0.74 [95% CI: 0.67-0.81]; P < 0.0001) and the key secondary endpoint (10.5% vs 13.6%; HR: 0.75 [95% CI: 0.66-0.85]; P < 0.0001). Among adjudicated events, IPE similarly reduced the rate of the primary and key secondary endpoints. CONCLUSIONS IPE led to consistent, significant reductions in CV events, including MI and coronary revascularization, as determined by independent, blinded CEC adjudication as well as by blinded investigator-reported assessment. These results highlight the robust evidence for the substantial CV benefits of IPE seen in REDUCE-IT and further raise the question of whether adjudication of CV outcome trial endpoints is routinely required in blinded, placebo-controlled trials. (Evaluation of the Effect of AMR101 on Cardiovascular Health and Mortality in Hypertriglyceridemic Patients With Cardiovascular Disease or at High Risk for Cardiovascular Disease: REDUCE-IT [Reduction of Cardiovascular Events With EPA - Intervention Trial]; NCT01492361) (C) 2021 The Authors. Published by Elsevier on behalf of the American College of Cardiology Foundation.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available