A matching-adjusted indirect comparison of results from REDUCE and RESPECT-two randomized trials on patent foramen ovale closure devices to prevent recurrent cryptogenic stroke

Scott E Kasner*, Lars Sondergaard, Mitesh Nakum, Melissa Gomez Montero, Mahmoud Hashim, Erik J Landaas

*Corresponding author af dette arbejde

Abstract

AIMS: Two randomized clinical trials, REDUCE and RESPECT, demonstrated that patent foramen ovale (PFO) closure in combination with antithrombotic therapy was more effective for the prevention of recurrent ischemic stroke compared with antithrombotic therapy alone. The aim of this study was to determine the relative efficacy and safety of the PFO closure devices used in REDUCE (HELEX and CARDIOFORM Septal Occluders) compared with the device used in RESPECT (Amplatzer PFO Occluder).

METHODS: An unanchored matching-adjusted indirect comparison (MAIC) of the PFO closure arms of the REDUCE and RESPECT trials was performed using patient-level data from REDUCE weighted to match baseline characteristics from RESPECT. Comparisons of the following outcomes were made between the devices assessed in the trials: risk of recurrent ischemic stroke; recurrent ischemic stroke one year after randomization; any serious adverse event (SAE) related to the procedure or device; and atrial fibrillation or atrial flutter as an SAE related to the procedure or device.

RESULTS: After conducting the MAIC, baseline characteristics were well-matched between the two trials. Compared to RESPECT, PFO closure using the devices from REDUCE resulted in a hazard ratio of 0.46 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.15-1.43; p  = 0.17) for the risk of recurrent stroke. For the recurrence of stroke after one year, SAE related to the procedure or device, and atrial fibrillation or atrial flutter as SAE related to the procedure or device, the MAIC resulted in a rate difference of -0.68 (95%CI -2.06 to 0.70; p  = .34), -1.29 (95%CI -3.82 to 1.25; p  = .32), and -0.19 (95%CI -1.16 to 0.78; p  = .71), respectively. These findings were consistent across scenario analyses.

CONCLUSIONS: This MAIC analysis found no statistically significant differences in efficacy and safety outcomes between PFO closure with the HELEX and CARDIOFORM Septal Occluders versus the Amplatzer PFO Occluder, as used in the REDUCE and RESPECT trials.

OriginalsprogEngelsk
TidsskriftJournal of Medical Economics
Vol/bind27
Udgave nummer1
Sider (fra-til)337-343
Antal sider7
ISSN1369-6998
DOI
StatusUdgivet - 2024
Udgivet eksterntJa

Fingeraftryk

Dyk ned i forskningsemnerne om 'A matching-adjusted indirect comparison of results from REDUCE and RESPECT-two randomized trials on patent foramen ovale closure devices to prevent recurrent cryptogenic stroke'. Sammen danner de et unikt fingeraftryk.

Citationsformater