Rivaroxaban compared with warfarin in patients with atrial fibrillation and previous stroke or transient ischaemic attack: a subgroup analysis of ROCKET AF

Background In ROCKET AF, rivaroxaban was non-inferior to adjusted-dose warfarin in preventing stroke or systemic embolism among patients with atrial fibrillation (AF). We aimed to investigate whether the efficacy and safety of rivaroxaban compared with warfarin is consistent among the subgroups of patients with and without previous stroke or transient ischaemic attack (TIA). Methods In ROCKET AF, patients with AF who were at increased risk of stroke were randomly assigned (1:1) in a double-blind manner to rivaroxaban 20 mg daily or adjusted dose warfarin (international normalised ratio 2-0-3.0). Patients and investigators were masked to treatment allocation. Between Dec 18,2006, and June 17,2009,14 264 patients from 1178 centres in 45 countries were randomly assigned. The primary endpoint was the composite of stroke or non-CNS systemic embolism. In this substudy we assessed the interaction of the treatment effects of rivaroxaban and warfarin among patients with and without previous stroke or TIA. Efficacy analyses were by intention to treat and safety analyses were done in the on-treatment population. ROCKET AF is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00403767. Findings 7468 (52%) patients had a previous stroke (n=4907) or TIA (n=2561) and 6796 (48%) had no previous stroke or TIA. The number of events per 100 person-years for the primary endpoint in patients treated with rivaroxaban compared with warfarin was consistent among patients with previous stroke or TIA (2.79% rivaroxaban vs 2.96% warfarin; hazard ratio [HR] 0-94,95% CI 0.77-1.16) and those without (1.44% vs 1.88%; 0.77, 0.58-1-01; interaction p=0.23). The number of major and non-major clinically relevant bleeding events per 100 person-years in patients treated with rivaroxaban compared with warfarin was consistent among patients with previous stroke or TIA (13.31% rivaroxaban vs 13.87% warfarin; HR 0.96,95% CI 0.87-1-07) and those without (16.69% vs 15.19%; 1.10, 0.99-1.21; interaction p=0.08). Interpretation There was no evidence that the relative efficacy and safety of rivaroxaban compared with warfarin was different between patients who had a previous stroke or TIA and those who had no previous stroke or TIA. These results support the use of rivaroxaban as an alternative to warfarin for prevention of recurrent as well as initial stroke in patients with AF.

Association between education in EOL care and variability in EOL practice: a survey of ICU physicians

This study investigated the association between physician education in EOL and variability in EOL practice, as well as the differences between beliefs and practices regarding EOL in the ICU. Physicians from 11 ICUs at a university hospital completed a survey presenting a patient in a vegetative state with no family or advance directives. Questions addressed approaches to EOL care, as well physicians' personal, professional and EOL educational characteristics. The response rate was 89%, with 105 questionnaires analyzed. Mean age was 38 +/- A 8 years, with a mean of 14 +/- A 7 years since graduation. Physicians who did not apply do-not-resuscitate (DNR) orders were less likely to have attended EOL classes than those who applied written DNR orders [0/7 vs. 31/47, OR = 0.549 (0.356-0.848), P = 0.001]. Physicians who involved nurses in the decision-making process were more likely to be ICU specialists [17/22 vs. 46/83, OR = 4.1959 (1.271-13.845), P = 0.013] than physicians who made such decisions among themselves or referred to ethical or judicial committees. Physicians who would apply "full code" had less often read about EOL [3/22 vs. 11/20, OR = 0.0939 (0.012-0.710), P = 0.012] and had less interest in discussing EOL [17/22 vs. 20/20, OR = 0.210 (0.122-0.361), P < 0.001], than physicians who would withdraw life-sustaining therapies. Forty-four percent of respondents would not do what they believed was best for their patient, with 98% of them believing a less aggressive attitude preferable. Legal concerns were the leading cause for this dichotomy. Physician education about EOL is associated with variability in EOL decisions in the ICU. Moreover, actual practice may differ from what physicians believe is best for the patient.

Mutation Spectrum in the Large GTPase Dynamin 2, and Genotype-Phenotype Correlation in Autosomal Dominant Centronuclear Myopathy

Centronuclear myopathy (CNM) is a genetically heterogeneous disorder associated with general skeletal muscle weakness, type I fiber predominance and atrophy, and abnormally centralized nuclei. Autosomal dominant CNM is due to mutations in the large GTPase dynamin 2 (DNM2), a mechanochemical enzyme regulating cytoskeleton and membrane trafficking in cells. To date, 40 families with CNM-related DNM2 mutations have been described, and here we report 60 additional families encompassing a broad genotypic and phenotypic spectrum. In total, 18 different mutations are reported in 100 families and our cohort harbors nine known and four new mutations, including the first splice-site mutation. Genotype-phenotype correlation hypotheses are drawn from the published and new data, and allow an efficient screening strategy for molecular diagnosis. In addition to CNM, dissimilar DNM2 mutations are associated with Charcot-Marie-Tooth (CMT) peripheral neuropathy (CMTD1B and CMT2M), suggesting a tissue-specific impact of the mutations. In this study, we discuss the possible clinical overlap of CNM and CMT, and the biological significance of the respective mutations based on the known functions of dynamin 2 and its protein structure. Defects in membrane trafficking due to DNM2 mutations potentially represent a common pathological mechanism in CNM and CMT. Hum Mutat 33: 949-959, 2012. (C) 2012 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.