Initiation of rivaroxaban in patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation at the primary care level:: The Swiss Therapy in Atrial Fibrillation for the Regulation of Coagulation (STAR) Study.

BACKGROUND Rivaroxaban has become an alternative to vitamin-K antagonists (VKA) for stroke prevention in non-valvular atrial fibrillation (AF) patients due to its favourable risk-benefit profile in the restrictive setting of a large randomized trial. However in the primary care setting, physician's motivation to begin with rivaroxaban, treatment satisfaction and the clinical event rate after the initiation of rivaroxaban are not known. METHODS Prospective data collection by 115 primary care physicians in Switzerland on consecutive nonvalvular AF patients with newly established rivaroxaban anticoagulation with 3-month follow-up. RESULTS We enrolled 537 patients (73±11years, 57% men) with mean CHADS2 and HAS-BLED-scores of 2.2±1.3 and 2.4±1.1, respectively: 301(56%) were switched from VKA to rivaroxaban (STR-group) and 236(44%) were VKA-naïve (VN-group). Absence of routine coagulation monitoring (68%) and fixed-dose once-daily treatment (58%) were the most frequent criteria for physicians to initiate rivaroxaban. In the STR-group, patient's satisfaction increased from 3.6±1.4 under VKA to 5.5±0.8 points (P<0.001), and overall physician satisfaction from 3.9±1.3 to 5.4±0.9 points (P<0.001) at 3months of rivaroxaban therapy (score from 1 to 6 with higher scores indicating greater satisfaction). In the VN-group, both patient's (5.4±0.9) and physician's satisfaction (5.5±0.7) at follow-up were comparable to the STR-group. During follow-up, 1(0.19%; 95%CI, 0.01-1.03%) ischemic stroke, 2(0.37%; 95%CI, 0.05-1.34%) major non-fatal bleeding and 11(2.05%; 95%CI, 1.03-3.64%) minor bleeding complications occurred. Rivaroxaban was stopped in 30(5.6%) patients, with side effects being the most frequent reason. CONCLUSION Initiation of rivaroxaban for patients with nonvalvular AF by primary care physicians was associated with a low clinical event rate and with high overall patient's and physician's satisfaction.

Neoadjuvant chemotherapy and extrapleural pneumonectomy of malignant pleural mesothelioma with or without hemithoracic radiotherapy (SAKK 17/04): a randomised, international, multicentre phase 2 trial

BACKGROUND Postoperative hemithoracic radiotherapy has been used to treat malignant pleural mesothelioma, but it has not been assessed in a randomised trial. We assessed high-dose hemithoracic radiotherapy after neoadjuvant chemotherapy and extrapleural pneumonectomy in patients with malignant pleural mesothelioma. METHODS We did this phase 2 trial in two parts at 14 hospitals in Switzerland, Belgium, and Germany. We enrolled patients with pathologically confirmed malignant pleural mesothelioma; resectable TNM stages T1-3 N0-2, M0; WHO performance status 0-1; age 18-70 years. In part 1, patients were given three cycles of neoadjuvant chemotherapy (cisplatin 75 mg/m(2) and pemetrexed 500 mg/m(2) on day 1 given every 3 weeks) and extrapleural pneumonectomy; the primary endpoint was complete macroscopic resection (R0-1). In part 2, participants with complete macroscopic resection were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive high-dose radiotherapy or not. The target volume for radiotherapy encompassed the entire hemithorax, the thoracotomy channel, and mediastinal nodal stations if affected by the disease or violated surgically. A boost was given to areas at high risk for locoregional relapse. The allocation was stratified by centre, histology (sarcomatoid vs epithelioid or mixed), mediastinal lymph node involvement (N0-1 vs N2), and T stage (T1-2 vs T3). The primary endpoint of part 1 was the proportion of patients achieving complete macroscopic resection (R0 and R1). The primary endpoint in part 2 was locoregional relapse-free survival, analysed by intention to treat. The trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00334594. FINDINGS We enrolled patients between Dec 7, 2005, and Oct 17, 2012. Overall, we analysed 151 patients receiving neoadjuvant chemotherapy, of whom 113 (75%) had extrapleural pneumonectomy. Median follow-up was 54·2 months (IQR 32-66). 52 (34%) of 151 patients achieved an objective response. The most common grade 3 or 4 toxic effects were neutropenia (21 [14%] of 151 patients), anaemia (11 [7%]), and nausea or vomiting (eight [5%]). 113 patients had extrapleural pneumonectomy, with complete macroscopic resection achieved in 96 (64%) of 151 patients. We enrolled 54 patients in part 2; 27 in each group. The main reasons for exclusion were patient refusal (n=20) and ineligibility (n=10). 25 of 27 patients completed radiotherapy. Median total radiotherapy dose was 55·9 Gy (IQR 46·8-56·0). Median locoregional relapse-free survival from surgery, was 7·6 months (95% CI 4·5-10·7) in the no radiotherapy group and 9·4 months (6·5-11·9) in the radiotherapy group. The most common grade 3 or higher toxic effects related to radiotherapy were nausea or vomiting (three [11%] of 27 patients), oesophagitis (two [7%]), and pneumonitis (two [7%]). One patient died of pneumonitis. We recorded no toxic effects data for the control group. INTERPRETATION Our findings do not support the routine use of hemithoracic radiotherapy for malignant pleural mesothelioma after neoadjuvant chemotherapy and extrapleural pneumonectomy. FUNDING Swiss Group for Clinical Cancer Research, Swiss State Secretariat for Education, Research and Innovation, Eli Lilly.