Testing the effectiveness of converting patients to long-acting antianginal medications: The Quality of Life in Angina Research Trial (QUART)

Quality of Life Assessment in Trials of Revascularization for Chronic Stable Angina: Insights from ORBITA and the Implications of Blinding

The main aims of therapy in chronic stable angina are to reduce the risk of myocardial infarction and death and improve symptoms and quality of life (QoL). Unblinded trials have shown that revascularization does not reduce the risk of myocardial infarction or death but does appear to improve symptoms. However, symptoms are susceptible to the placebo effect which can bias therapies to appear more effective than they are. To assess the true physical impact of a treatment on symptoms, placebo-controlled trials with patients and medical and research teams blinded to treatment allocation are necessary. Symptoms and QoL can be reported directly by the patient or indirectly by the physician. Patient-reported outcome measures in angina trials can include angina frequency, frequency of nitrate use, exercise capacity, and questionnaires such as the Seattle Angina Questionnaire (SAQ) and the generic EuroQOL-5D-5L (EQ-5D-5L) QoL questionnaire. Physician-assessed outcome measures include Canadian Cardiovascular Society Class. The Objective Randomised Blinded Investigation with Optimal Medical Therapy of Angioplasty in Stable Angina (ORBITA) trial was the first blinded placebo-controlled study investigating the role of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in chronic stable angina. The trial showed a smaller than expected and not statistically significant effect of placebo-controlled PCI on the primary endpoint of change in exercise time at 6 weeks follow-up in single-vessel coronary artery disease. There was also no significant placebo-controlled treatment effect of PCI for the prespecified secondary endpoints of SAQ or EQ-5D-5L, although PCI did result in 20% more patients becoming free from angina than placebo in a non-prespecified secondary analysis. ORBITA has demonstrated the need for symptomatic and QoL effects of PCI to be studied using placebo control. Here, we describe ways of measuring QoL, the impact of the unblinded and blinded trials to date, what we have learned from ORBITA, and what is next for this common and complex condition.

Interpretation of the Seattle Angina Questionnaire as an Outcome Measure in Clinical Trials and Clinical Care: A Review

Importance

Patient-reported outcomes are increasingly used as end points in clinical trials, assessments in clinical care, and tools for population health, with an increasing role in quality assessment. For patients with coronary artery disease, the Seattle Angina Questionnaire (SAQ) has emerged as the most commonly used measure of disease-specific health status to quantify patients' symptoms of angina and the extent to which their angina affects their functioning and quality of life. This review explains how to interpret the SAQ and describes the construction and face validity of the SAQ, focusing on aligning scores and changes in scores with clinical constructs.

Observations

The SAQ asks questions similar to those an experienced clinician would ask of a patient with stable ischemic heart disease. Therefore, SAQ scores can be aligned with clinical constructs (eg, scores on the SAQ angina frequency scale of 0-30 points indicate daily angina, 31-60 points indicate weekly angina, 61-99 points indicate monthly angina, and 100 points indicate no angina), and changes in scores can be described by aligning them with changes in question responses. After clinical thresholds are defined, it is important for clinical trials to not simply report mean differences between treatment arms but to also report the distributions of patients who have had clinically important benefits so that a number needed to treat can be generated.

Conclusions and Relevance

The widespread use of the SAQ is a consequence of its well-established validity, reproducibility, prognostic importance, and sensitivity to clinical change. Nevertheless, interpreting the SAQ can be challenging because of lack of familiarity with the clinical importance of its domains, either cross-sectionally or longitudinally. This review provides an overview of the interpretability of the SAQ as a foundation for its use as an end point in clinical trials, a tool to support more patient-centered care, and a means of facilitating population health strategies to provide a better foundation for the integration of patient experiences with clinical care.

Clinical Acceptability Of Trimetazidine Modified-Release 80 mg Once Daily Versus Trimetazidine Modified-Release 35 mg Twice Daily In Stable Angina Pectoris

Introduction

Trimetazidine (TMZ) is an anti-ischemic metabolic agent that has been shown to be efficacious in angina treatment, both in monotherapy and in combination. A new formulation of TMZ modified-release (MR) 80 mg was developed, which is to be taken once daily (od), instead of twice daily (bid) for the currently available TMZ MR 35 mg, with the aim of simplifying the medication regimen.

Methods

The present study was an international, multicenter, randomized, double-blind, parallel-group phase III study with a 12-week treatment period. The safety of TMZ MR 80 mg once daily was assessed compared to TMZ MR 35 mg twice daily, in patients previously treated successfully by the latter. Emergent adverse events (EAEs), biological parameters, vital signs, 12-lead resting ECG (electrocardiogram) and Canadian Cardiovascular Society (CCS) classification were recorded.

Results

One-hundred and sixty-five patients previously diagnosed with stable angina pectoris on treatment were randomized to receive either TMZ MR 80 mg od or TMZ MR 35 mg bid. In the TMZ MR 80 mg group, fewer patients had ≥ 1 EAE (17.1 vs. 22.9% in the TMZ MR 35 mg group). Serious EAEs were reported by three patients in each group. No EAE required dose modification, withdrawal, or temporary interruption of study treatments. Vital signs, 12-lead ECG, and laboratory parameters did not change. No worsening in CCS classes was observed with either treatment.

Conclusions

TMZ MR 80 mg od and TMZ MR 35 mg bid have similar safety profiles. This new once-daily formulation could improve patient compliance with therapy, thereby enhancing clinical benefit.

Trial Registration

ISRCTN registry, ISRCTN 84362208.

Funding

Institut de Recherches Internationales Servier and Servier, Moscow, Russian Federation.

Plain Language Summary

Plain language summary available for this article.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1007/s40119-018-0110-5) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Evaluating symptoms to improve quality of life in patients with chronic stable angina

Chronic stable angina (CSA) is a significant problem in the United States that can negatively impact patient quality of life (QoL). An accurate assessment of the severity of a patient's angina, the impact on their functional status, and their risk of cardiovascular complications is key to successful treatment of CSA. Active communication between the patient and their healthcare provider is necessary to ensure that patients receive optimal therapy. Healthcare providers should be aware of atypical symptoms of CSA in their patients, as patients may continue to suffer from angina despite the availability of multiple therapies. Patient questionnaires and symptom checklists can help patients communicate proactively with their healthcare providers. This paper discusses the prevalence of CSA, its impact on QoL, and the tools that healthcare providers can use to assess the severity of their patients' angina and the impact on QoL.

Angina frequency after myocardial infarction and quality of life in older versus younger adults: the Prospective Registry Evaluating Myocardial Infarction: Event and Recovery study

BACKGROUND

Residual angina is known to be strongly associated with health-related quality of life (HRQL) in patients with chronic coronary artery disease. As the age of myocardial infarction (MI) survivors increases, better insights into the relationship between angina frequency and HRQL in older as compared to younger patients are needed to efficiently target medical resources.

METHODS

We evaluated angina frequency and HRQL at 1 and 6 months after MI in 1,795 post-MI survivors using the Seattle Angina Questionnaire (SAQ). We compared changes in HRQL between older (age ≥70 years, n = 464) and younger (age <70 years, n = 1,331) patients as a function of change in SAQ angina frequency scores using hierarchical linear modeling within site.

RESULTS

After adjusting for baseline HRQL and 26 other covariates, older patients with similar or improved angina control at 6 months had significantly greater improvements in HRQL than younger patients (difference in SAQ quality-of-life scale 8.77 points [CI 4.00-13.54, P = .0003] and 2.56 points [CI 0.66-4.47, P = .0084], respectively). However, older patients with increased angina experienced similar declines in HRQL as compared to younger patients.

CONCLUSION

In stable patients with coronary artery disease after a recent MI, changes in angina control were correlated with HRQL in both older and younger patients. However, improved angina control was associated with greater HRQL improvements in older than in younger adults, underscoring the importance of aggressive angina control in older patients.

Temporal trends in adherence to cardiovascular medications in elderly patients after hospitalization for heart failure

Although the complexity of treatment regimens for patients with heart failure (HF) has increased over time because of the increased availability of efficacious medications, little is known about temporal trends in adherence to treatment regimens in these patients. We assessed trends in adherence to angiotensin-system blockers (ABs), β-blockers (BBs), and spironolactone (SL) for HF in Medicare beneficiaries enrolled in two statewide pharmacy benefit programs from 1995 to 2004. The proportion of days covered (PDC) (%) was assessed after the first dispensing among users of an AB, BB, or SL. Proportions of full adherence (PDC >80%) did not change over time for ABs (54% in both 1996 and 2003) but increased slightly for BBs (from 47% in 1996 to 57% in 2003) and SL (from 31% in 1996 to 42% in 2003). Black race and dialysis treatment predicted poor adherence to any medications. Adherence to BBs and SL increased modestly over time, but overall nonadherence remained high.

Adherence with once daily versus twice daily carvedilol in patients with heart failure: the Compliance And Quality of Life Study Comparing Once-Daily Controlled-Release Carvedilol CR and Twice-Daily Immediate-Release Carvedilol IR in Patients with Heart Failure (CASPER) Trial

BACKGROUND

Suboptimal compliance in taking guideline-based pharmacotherapy in patients with chronic heart failure (HF) potentially increases the burden of hospitalizations and diminishes quality of life. By simplifying the medical regimen, once-daily dosing can potentially improve compliance. The Compliance And Quality of Life Study Comparing Once-Daily Controlled-Release Carvedilol CR and Twice-Daily Immediate-Release Carvedilol IR in Patients with Heart Failure (CASPER) Trial was designed to measure differential compliance, satisfaction, and quality of life in chronic HF patients taking carvedilol immediate release (IR) twice daily versus the bioequivalent carvedilol controlled-release (CR) once daily.

METHODS AND RESULTS

CASPER was a prospective multicenter, 3-arm, parallel-group, randomized clinical trial for a 5-month period. The primary objective of the study was to evaluate and compare compliance with carvedilol IR twice daily (BID) and carvedilol phosphate CR once daily (QD) in patients with chronic HF who were taking carvedilol IR. Secondary objectives included comparisons of quality of life (Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire), satisfaction with medication, and brain natriuretic peptide levels between subjects taking the two formulations. A total of 405 patients with chronic HF and left ventricular dysfunction were randomized to: (A) carvedilol IR twice daily, given double blind; (B) carvedilol CR taken in the morning and placebo in the afternoon, given double blind; or (C) carvedilol CR once daily, open label. Compliance was measured using the medication event monitoring system that captures time of bottle opening. The primary end point was a comparison of taking compliance (doses taken divided by total number of prescribed doses over the actual duration of the study) between the double-blind carvedilol IR BID versus the open-label carvedilol CR QD groups. Sample size estimates were based on assumptions of 75% compliance with BID dosing and 90% compliance with QD dosing. Mean compliance with carvedilol IR BID was 89.3% compared with 88.2% for carvedilol CR QD, and differential mean compliance was 1.1% (95% CI -4.4%, 6.6%; ie, not significant). There were no statistically significant differences in compliance between any of the 3 groups, nor differences in quality of life, treatment satisfaction, or physiologic measures among the 3 study arms. There were also no significant differences in adverse events or side effects among patients switching from carvedilol IR to carvedilol CR in arms B or C over the 5-month study duration compared with patients remaining on carvedilol IR.

CONCLUSIONS

Compliance among chronic HF patients in the CASPER trial was high at baseline and unaffected by QD versus BID dosing. Over the 5-month follow-up period, there were no differences in adverse events among patients switching from carvedilol IR to CR.

Evolving applications for patient-centered health status measures

Patient-centered health status measures-assessments of patients' symptoms, function, and quality of life-have matured substantially over the past 2 decades. Currently, valid, reliable, and sensitive disease-specific measures are available for quantifying the health status of patients with cardiovascular disease. This article briefly reviews the concept of health status measures, with a focus on their interpretation. It then discusses both the rationale and potential applications of health status measures in clinical care. Health status measures are not surrogate measures of outcome but rather highly meaningful outcomes of care. As such, they have important emerging roles as outcomes in clinical trials, as tools for monitoring patients in routine clinical care, as a mechanism for operationalizing and evaluating disease management programs, and as tools for quality assessment/improvement. Over time, it is expected that health status measures will also have an increasingly important role in patient-centered medical decision making. By becoming aware of the evolving roles of health status measures, clinicians can help to accelerate the realization of the Institute of Medicine's vision for a more transparent, evidence-based, patient-centered healthcare system.

Medication adherence in heart failure

Non-adherence with medical regimens in heart failure is a significant challenge and serves as a major reason that favorable outcomes associated with various therapies evaluated in clinical trials have not translated to the so-called real-world setting. Non-adherence has complex influences and is clearly associated with poorer outcomes. The approaches that are used or have been proposed to improve drug-taking behavior, such as in-hospital initiation of therapy, simplification of dosing regimens through adoption of combination and long-acting formulations, and improvements in provider-patient communication, are reviewed.

Rationale and design of CASPER: compliance and quality of life study comparing once-daily carvedilol CR and twice-daily carvedilol IR in patients with heart failure

Adherence to a complex medical regimen in patients with chronic heart failure is an important problem. In the Medicare population, patients with heart failure take an average of 7-8 distinct medications that require >11 separate doses on a daily basis. Nonadherence to these regimens accounts for a significant proportion of hospital admissions. Simplification of the medical regimen for patients with heart failure is likely to be associated with improved adherence and, in parallel, may lead to greater satisfaction and potentially improved outcomes. Therefore, the Compliance and Quality of Life Study Comparing Once-Daily Controlled-Release Carvedilol CR and Twice-Daily Immediate-Release Carvedilol IR in Patients with Heart Failure (CASPER) trial has been designed to rigorously test the hypothesis that a once-daily formulation of carvedilol will result in better compliance and increased patient satisfaction relative to the twice-daily formulation. The background, methods, and statistical approaches used in this trial are reviewed in this article.

Tolerability to 1-year treatment with once-daily molsidomine in patients with stable angina

Prolonged-release molsidomine 16 mg once daily) QD (has proved effective in the short-term treatment of patients with stable angina. The purpose of this multicenter study was to assess its long-term tolerability and clinical effectiveness. A total of 320 patients with stable angina were treated for 1 year with molsidomine 16 mg QD administered open label as monotherapy or add-on therapy, when beta blockers and/or calcium antagonists were prescribed concomitantly) in 128 patients, ie, 40% of cases), depending on the severity of disease and/or local therapeutic policies. In all, 293 patients (91.6%) completed the study. The proportion of patients who reported drug-related adverse events (AEs) was 9.1%, which is not significantly different (P=.13) from the 5.9% observed during previous short-term (2-4 wk) treatment. Headache accounted for 80.6% of all drug-related AEs and required discontinuation of the drug in one quarter of patients who reported the symptom (ie, 1.9% of the 320 patients involved in the study). No serious drug-related AEs occurred during the study. Tolerability to molsidomine, evaluated with use of a visual analog scale (VAS), improved by 20% from beginning to end of 1-year follow-up. Two-by-two Bonferroni's comparisons were significant at the .05 level between the 2-month assessment and assessments performed at 8, 10, and 12 months. No age-time interaction was noted (P=.82). Heart rate, blood pressure, electrocardiogram, and blood parameters showed no statistically significant or clinically relevant changes during the study. Compliance with treatment was satisfactory throughout the follow-up period. There was no significant change in the weekly frequency of anginal attacks and consumption of short-acting nitroderivatives during the 1-year study (P=.07 and P=.12,respectively), but their frequency was significantly (ie, approximately 50%) lower than during a preceding short-term treatment period (P<.0001 and P=.014, respectively). Subjective clinical status, evaluated through an appropriate VAS, improved by 38% from start to end of 1-year follow-up. Bonferroni's comparisons between baseline and subsequent 2-month evaluations were all significant at the .05 level. No age-time interaction could be seen for frequency of anginal attacks and consumption of short-acting nitroderivatives, nor for clinical status )P=.10, P=.11, and P=.51, respectively). Neither tolerability to molsidomine nor effectiveness of the drug was biased by concomitant antianginal therapies, insofar as none of these parameters showed a significant treatment type (ie, molsidomine administered as monotherapy or add-on therapy)-time interaction (VAS for tolerability: P=.44; angina: P=.39; nitroderivatives: P=.72; VAS for clinical status: P=.62). Molsidomine 16 mg QD administered for 1 y to patients with stable angina was well tolerated and remained effective during the entire treatment period, independent of age and concomitant antianginal therapy.

Efficacy and safety of once- and twice-daily formulations of molsidomine in patients with stable angina pectoris: double-blind and open-label studies

Molsidomine, a sydnonimine acting as a heterocyclic direct nitric oxide donor, has been used for many years in several European countries for the treatment of patients with stable angina pectoris. The efficacy and tolerability of a novel once-daily 16-mg formulation of molsidomine (M16) were compared with those of the currently used twice-daily 8-mg molsidomine tablet (M8) in 666 patients. Study 1, a multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, twin crossover study, involved 533 patients given acute and 2-week treatment with each drug formulation. Study 2, a multicenter, open-label, sequential, add-on trial, compared M16 and M8 in 133 patients. Drug effects on exercise capacity (study 1 only), frequency of anginal attacks and consumption of short-acting itroderivatives, and incidence of adverse events (AEs) were evaluated. Compared with placebo, M16 increased exercise capacity by 15% (P<.001) at the start of study 1 and by 13% (P<.001) after 2 weeks' treatment, and was not inferior to M8. In terms of anginal attack frequency and nitroderivative consumption, M16 was not inferior to M8 in either study. Moreover, compared with M8, M16 produced a statistically and clinically significant reduction in the incidence of anginal attacks in elderly (>/=75 y) but not in younger patients (<75 y) (study 2), nor in patients from study 1. No significant difference from M8 was found in either study in short-acting nitroderivative consumption. No tolerance to M8 or M16 was observed after 2-week treatment. No statistically significant differences in incidences of all AEs and drug-related AEs were observed between M16 and M8 in either study. The same held true for proportions of patients experiencing AEs and drug-related AEs on M16 vs M8: in study 1-14.3% and 11.8% for all AEs (P=.218), 6.9% and 5.4% for drug-related AEs (P=.280); in study 2-1.3% and 1.3% for all AEs, 0% and 1.3% for drug-related AEs (P>.10) in young patients; and in the elderly, 3.6% and 0% for drug-related AEs (P>.10). Only the proportion of elderly patients with all AEs was significantly higher with M16 than with M8: 14.5% vs 1.8% (P=.039). M16 once daily was effective and well tolerated in investigated patients with stable angina pectoris, particularly the elderly, affording 24 hours of therapeutic activity. M16 was not inferior to M8 given twice daily in terms of efficacy, safety profile, and tolerability.

Efficacy and safety of molsidomine once-a-day in patients with stable angina pectoris

BACKGROUND

The objective of this study was to compare the efficacy and tolerability of molsidomine prolonged-release 16 mg once-a-day (o.a.d.) with 8 mg twice-a-day (b.i.d.) and placebo in patients with stable angina pectoris.

METHODS

After a run-in placebo period of 7 days, the two formulations were compared acutely and then chronically (2 weeks) using cycloergometric tests and a randomized, multicenter, double-blind, double-dummy, crossover design in 533 patients. The quality of life was assessed using the frequency of anginal crises and nitrate sublingual tablets consumption.

RESULTS

Both formulations significantly improved exercise test parameters compared with placebo, being it after acute drug intake or after a 2-week treatment period and independently of spontaneous diurnal variation in exercise tolerance. Noninferiority of molsidomine 16 mg compared with 8 mg was demonstrated with a statistically significant superiority of the 16-mg formulation from 14 to 24 h postintake. Both treatments reduced incidence of anginal attacks and use of sublingual isosorbide dinitrate tablets. Tolerability of active drugs was satisfactory, the incidence of drug-related headache being not significantly different from placebo. Only hypotension was significantly more frequent with molsidomine 16 mg than with placebo, pretrial diastolic blood pressure being significantly lower in these patients than in those who did not develop hypotension during the study.

CONCLUSIONS

Both molsidomine formulations were effective in controlling patients' angina, did not induce any habituation and were well tolerated. However, the once-daily 16-mg formulation tended to provide better 24-h protection against myocardial ischemia than the 8-mg b.i.d. formulation.

Chronic angina pectoris: inadequacies of current therapy

Chronic angina is a major medical problem in the United States with more than 6 million patients affected, a number that will increase substantially because of the progressive aging of the population. The annual mortality rate for patients with chronic angina is approximately 2%, but is much higher in certain subsets of patients, particularly the elderly. Angina is also associated with major social and economic burdens. Because of poor symptom control and hemodynamic, as well as other drug side effects, angina is commonly associated with a poor quality of life. No new class of drug has been available for angina treatment in more than two decades, and current medications frequently fail to provide adequate symptom control. Thus, the majority of patients are taking two or three antianginal medications. New agents that modulate myocardial metabolism have shown antianginal efficacy, a favorable side-effect profile, and an absence of hemodynamic effects.

Health-related quality of life in patients with coronary artery disease treated for angina: validity and reliability of German translations of two specific questionnaires

The German versions of two patient-perceived heart disease specific health-related quality of life (HRQL) questionnaires, the Seattle Angina Questionnaire (SAQ) and the MacNew Heart Disease questionnaire, were examined for their psychometric properties in patients with angiographically documented coronary artery disease and angina who were treated either medically or invasively and followed up for 1 year. Both HRQL questionnaires and the modified Canadian Cardiovascular Society (CCS) angina-associated disability scale were completed by 158 patients at baseline and 12 months later when they also completed a generic health status questionnaire, the SF-36. Both specific HRQL questionnaires were acceptable to patients. Three of the four MacNew scales, but none of the SAQ scales, discriminated between patients by baseline CCS disability levels I and IV. Internal consistency ranged from 0.75 to 0.94 for the SAQ and from 0.86 to 0.97 for the MacNew scales. Test-retest reliability over a 4-week period of time ranged from 0.45 to 0.81 for the SAQ scales and 0.61 to 0.68 for the MacNew scales. Over 12 months, HRQL improved (p < 0.001) on three of the five SAQ and on all four of the MacNew scales with the responsiveness statistic ranging from 0.59 to 1.55 for the SAQ and 0.86 to 1.12 for the MacNew. The 12 month scores on all SAQ and MacNew scales were significantly higher in patients who improved than those who deteriorated on the SF-36 reported health transition question. We conclude that the SAQ and the MacNew are both valid, reliable, and responsive in German, that the MacNew discriminates better between angina grades at baseline, that HRQL improves over 12 months with both measures, that the SAQ angina frequency and disease perception scales have the largest effect sizes, and that the 12-month change in HRQL with both instruments was associated with change in SF-36 reported health transition status.