The results of the COMPASS trial testing rivaroxaban plus aspirin in patients with coronary artery disease or peripheral artery disease showed such significant benefits for reducing ischemic events that it was stopped early, explained Deepak Bhatt, MD, MPH, of Brigham and Women's Hospital and Harvard Medical School.
The results of the COMPASS trial testing rivaroxaban plus aspirin in patients with coronary artery disease or peripheral artery disease showed such significant benefits for reducing ischemic events that it was stopped early, explained Deepak Bhatt, MD, MPH, of Brigham and Women's Hospital and Harvard Medical School.
Transcript
What where the findings of the COMPASS trial and what do they mean for patients with coronary artery disease and peripheral artery disease?
The COMPASS trial took patients with stable coronary artery disease (CAD) or stable peripheral artery disease (PAD) and randomized them into 1 of 3 arms: aspirin alone, the control arm; or rivaroxaban 5 mg twice a day alone, the experimental arm of anticoagulant alone versus antiplatelet alone; and then a combo arm of aspirin plus 2.5 mg twice a day of rivaroxaban–so a very low dose of rivaroxaban. In fact, both those doses I mentioned are much lower than the atrial fibrillation dose, for example.
And these 3 arms of patients were followed for about an average of 2 years or so, and what was found for the primary efficacy endpoint, of cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, or stroke, was a significant reduction in that important triple ischemic composite. In fact, it was so significant that the data safety monitoring board stopped the trial early because they felt that the data showed overwhelming efficacy. In fact, that's what the company-issued press release said when the trial was stopped. In addition to seeing a benefit in that triple ischemic endpoint, they also saw a lower rate of mortality, of all-cause mortality. So that combination of findings made them say, "stop the trial," which is what the COMPASS investigators then did.
The efficacy results, I think, are quite robust. In terms of bleeding, there's always a downside with potent antithrombotic therapy. There was a significant excess in major bleeding. Fortunately, there was no, at least, statistically significant excess in fatal bleeding or intercrancial bleeding. So overall, a very good net clinical benefit–about a 20% or so reduction in that endpoint.
Overall, I would then say that it was a very positive trial. How exactly to integrate it into the practice of stable CAD, stable PAD versus other therapies, that is going to be a topic of discussion, I'm sure.
Clinical Characteristics, Outcomes of Patients With Plaque Psoriasis on Tapinarof Cream
December 5th 2023Two posters presented at the 2023 Fall Clinical Dermatology Conference examined patient demographics, clinical characteristics, and outcomes in patients with plaque psoriasis treated with tapinerof cream.
Read More
The Importance of Examining and Preventing Atrial Fibrillation
August 29th 2023At this year’s American Society for Preventive Cardiology Congress on CVD Prevention, Emelia J. Benjamin, MD, ScM, delivered the Honorary Fellow Award Lecture, “The Imperative to Focus on the Prevention of Atrial Fibrillation,” as the recipient of this year’s Honorary Fellow of the American Society for Preventive Cardiology award.
Listen
Imetelstat Offers Benefits for Patients With MDS Who Are Red Blood Cell–Transfusion Dependent
December 5th 2023The past year has offered new hope for patients with lower-risk myelodysplastic syndromes. Besides imetelstat, which has an FDA deadline for action of June 2024, the agency approved luspatercept, which has a different mechanism of action.
Read More