FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W1964022133> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W1964022133 endingPage "e308" @default.
• W1964022133 startingPage "e307" @default.
• W1964022133 abstract "HomeCirculationVol. 110, No. 11Rhythm Control and Increased Risk of Noncardiovascular Death in the Atrial Fibrillation Follow-up Investigation of Rhythm Management Trial Free AccessLetterPDF/EPUBAboutView PDFView EPUBSections ToolsAdd to favoritesDownload citationsTrack citationsPermissions ShareShare onFacebookTwitterLinked InMendeleyReddit Jump toFree AccessLetterPDF/EPUBRhythm Control and Increased Risk of Noncardiovascular Death in the Atrial Fibrillation Follow-up Investigation of Rhythm Management Trial Giuseppe Boriani, MD PhD and Mauro Biffi, MD Stefano Mattioli, MD Giuseppe BorianiGiuseppe Boriani Istituto di Cardiologia, Università di Bologna, Policlinico S. Orsola-Malpighi, Bologna, Italy Search for more papers by this author and Mauro BiffiMauro Biffi Istituto di Cardiologia, Università di Bologna, Policlinico S. Orsola-Malpighi, Bologna, Italy Search for more papers by this author Stefano MattioliStefano Mattioli Laboratorio di Epidemiologia, Unità Operativa di Medicina del Lavoro, Policlinico S. Orsola-Malpighi, Bologna, Italy Search for more papers by this author Originally published14 Sep 2004https://doi.org/10.1161/01.CIR.0000141502.16209.D4Circulation. 2004;110:e307–e308In their recent analysis of the causes of death that occurred in the course of the Atrial Fibrillation Follow-up Investigation of Rhythm Management (AFFIRM) trial,1 the AFFIRM investigators speculate that a favorable effect of oral anticoagulants and/or an unfavorable effect of amiodarone could explain the higher noncardiovascular death rate—especially pulmonary and cancer-related deaths—recorded among patients originally randomized to rhythm control (versus rate control). Cause-specific mortality was analyzed on an intention-to-treat basis.1 However, in view of the high crossover rates (21% of the population during the course of the study),2 we think that exposure times to each of the strategies and therapies need to be taken into account. To do this, a time-dependent, on-treatment analysis would be necessary, whereby patients are analyzed according to the actual therapy received, and adverse events or outcomes are attributed to the treatments actually applied.3 The necessity for this is stressed by the survival curves for noncardiovascular mortality, where excess mortality in the rhythm control arm began to emerge after 1 year of treatment.1 By that time, the crossover from rhythm to rate control was already substantial (rates of 16.7%, 27.3%, and 37.5% were recorded at 1, 3, and 5 years, respectively).2 In addition to evaluation of time-dependent covariates, a series of known potential determinants of pulmonary and cancer-related mortality (including environmental, lifestyle, and occupational factors) also require consideration. Such an analysis would allow a more reliable exploration of the possible relations between rhythm control and occurrence of pulmonary and cancer-related deaths.1 Steinberg JS, Sadaniantz A, Kron J, et al. Analysis of cause-specific mortality in the Atrial Fibrillation Follow-up Investigation of Rhythm Management (AFFIRM) Study. Circulation. 2004; 109: 1973–1980.LinkGoogle Scholar2 Wyse DG, Waldo AL, DiMarco JP, et al. A comparison of rate control and rhythm control in patients with atrial fibrillation. N Engl J Med. 2002; 347: 1825–1833.CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar3 Corley SD, Epstein AE, DiMarco JP, et al. Relationships between sinus rhythm, treatment, and survival in the Atrial Fibrillation Follow-up Investigation of Rhythm Management (AFFIRM) Study. Circulation. 2004; 109: 1509–1513.LinkGoogle ScholarcirculationahaCirculationCirculationCirculation0009-73221524-4539Lippincott Williams & WilkinsResponseSteinberg Jonathan S., , MD, Sadaniantz Ara, , MD, Kron Jack, , MD, Krahn Andrew, , MD, Denny D. Marty, , MD, Daubert James, , MD, Campbell W. Barton, , MD, Havranek Edward, , MD, Murray Katherine, , MD, Olshansky Brian, , MD, O’Neill Gearoid, , MD, Sami Magdi, , MD, Schmidt Stanley, , MD, Storm Randle, , MD, Zabalgoitia Miguel, , MD, Miller John, , MD, Chandler Mary, , MD, Nasco Elaine M., , BA, and Greene H. Leon, , MD14092004We thank Boriani et al for their interest in our paper describing modes of death in Atrial Fibrillation Follow-up Investigation of Rhythm Management (AFFIRM) patients, a study indicating a higher noncardiovascular death rate in the rhythm-control arm.1 They suggest that the analysis should be redone using a time-dependent, on-treatment methodology, rather than the intention-to-treat protocol that we followed.There are multiple problems inherent to an on-treatment analysis, including the potential introduction of bias by investigators’ actions regarding changes of drug therapy and the loss of balance of clinical factors inherent to randomized groups. Compounding the problems with this type of analysis are our lack of specific start/stop dates for medications and an absence of knowledge of patients’ compliance with drug administration. Furthermore, it is difficult to assess when a drug effect ends, even if the stop date of the drug is known, especially for amiodarone. It is also difficult to assess patients who repeatedly change drugs, dropping in and out of the assigned randomized arms (common in the management of atrial fibrillation). Additionally, we imposed protocol restrictions on antiarrhythmic drugs, dictating which drugs could be prescribed to certain clinical subgroups, making bias certain in drug administration.Data were not collected on “environmental, lifestyle and occupational factors,” except for smoking history.With these limitations in mind, it is noteworthy that another recent AFFIRM paper2 performed a retrospective on-treatment analysis and found a negative association between rhythm-control drug use and all-cause mortality, in keeping with our findings. Thus, we continue to have a fundamental paucity of knowledge on how rhythm-control strategy or drugs may have adversely contributed to fatal outcomes. Previous Back to top Next FiguresReferencesRelatedDetailsCited ByVermeersch P, Buys E, Pokreisz P, Marsboom G, Ichinose F, Sips P, Pellens M, Gillijns H, Swinnen M, Graveline A, Collen D, Dewerchin M, Brouckaert P, Bloch K and Janssens S (2007) Soluble Guanylate Cyclase-α1 Deficiency Selectively Inhibits the Pulmonary Vasodilator Response to Nitric Oxide and Increases the Pulmonary Vascular Remodeling Response to Chronic Hypoxia, Circulation, 116:8, (936-943), Online publication date: 21-Aug-2007. September 14, 2004Vol 110, Issue 11 Advertisement Article InformationMetrics https://doi.org/10.1161/01.CIR.0000141502.16209.D4PMID: 15364827 Originally publishedSeptember 14, 2004 PDF download Advertisement SubjectsArrhythmiasCardiopulmonary Resuscitation and Emergency Cardiac CareCatheter Ablation and Implantable Cardioverter-DefibrillatorElectrophysiologyMyocardial InfarctionSecondary Prevention" @default.
• W1964022133 created "2016-06-24" @default.
• W1964022133 creator A5006111404 @default.
• W1964022133 creator A5048738698 @default.
• W1964022133 creator A5076338368 @default.
• W1964022133 date "2004-09-14" @default.
• W1964022133 modified "2023-10-04" @default.
• W1964022133 title "Rhythm Control and Increased Risk of Noncardiovascular Death in the Atrial Fibrillation Follow-up Investigation of Rhythm Management Trial * Response" @default.
• W1964022133 cites W1207268963 @default.
• W1964022133 cites W2115580917 @default.
• W1964022133 doi "https://doi.org/10.1161/01.cir.0000141502.16209.d4" @default.
• W1964022133 hasPubMedId "https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/15364827" @default.
• W1964022133 hasPublicationYear "2004" @default.
• W1964022133 type Work @default.
• W1964022133 sameAs 1964022133 @default.
• W1964022133 citedByCount "1" @default.
• W1964022133 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W1964022133 hasAuthorship W1964022133A5006111404 @default.
• W1964022133 hasAuthorship W1964022133A5048738698 @default.
• W1964022133 hasAuthorship W1964022133A5076338368 @default.
• W1964022133 hasBestOaLocation W19640221331 @default.
• W1964022133 hasConcept C126322002 @default.
• W1964022133 hasConcept C135343436 @default.
• W1964022133 hasConcept C164705383 @default.
• W1964022133 hasConcept C168563851 @default.
• W1964022133 hasConcept C2778094803 @default.
• W1964022133 hasConcept C2779161974 @default.
• W1964022133 hasConcept C2780065318 @default.
• W1964022133 hasConcept C71924100 @default.
• W1964022133 hasConceptScore W1964022133C126322002 @default.
• W1964022133 hasConceptScore W1964022133C135343436 @default.
• W1964022133 hasConceptScore W1964022133C164705383 @default.
• W1964022133 hasConceptScore W1964022133C168563851 @default.
• W1964022133 hasConceptScore W1964022133C2778094803 @default.
• W1964022133 hasConceptScore W1964022133C2779161974 @default.
• W1964022133 hasConceptScore W1964022133C2780065318 @default.
• W1964022133 hasConceptScore W1964022133C71924100 @default.
• W1964022133 hasIssue "11" @default.
• W1964022133 hasLocation W19640221331 @default.
• W1964022133 hasLocation W19640221332 @default.
• W1964022133 hasLocation W19640221333 @default.
• W1964022133 hasOpenAccess W1964022133 @default.
• W1964022133 hasPrimaryLocation W19640221331 @default.
• W1964022133 hasRelatedWork W1990523300 @default.
• W1964022133 hasRelatedWork W1997288336 @default.
• W1964022133 hasRelatedWork W2014195660 @default.
• W1964022133 hasRelatedWork W2350747943 @default.
• W1964022133 hasRelatedWork W2406261898 @default.
• W1964022133 hasRelatedWork W2597303555 @default.
• W1964022133 hasRelatedWork W3012508844 @default.
• W1964022133 hasRelatedWork W4251262451 @default.
• W1964022133 hasRelatedWork W4254260782 @default.
• W1964022133 hasRelatedWork W4291982162 @default.
• W1964022133 hasVolume "110" @default.
• W1964022133 isParatext "false" @default.
• W1964022133 isRetracted "false" @default.
• W1964022133 magId "1964022133" @default.
• W1964022133 workType "article" @default.