Results of a reevaluation of cardiovascular outcomes in the RECORD trial.

BACKGROUND The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) required a reevaluation of cardiovascular (CV) outcomes in the RECORD trial. This provided an opportunity to assess the implications of event adjudication by 2 groups and quantify the differences as well as to use new FDA end point definitions in development. METHODS Original data were used to systematically identify all potential deaths, myocardial infarctions (MIs), and strokes. Site investigators were approached for additional source documents and information about participants lost to follow-up. Suspected events were adjudicated using standard procedures, and the results were compared with the original trial outcomes. RESULTS Follow-up for mortality was 25,833 person-years, including an additional 328 person-years identified during the reevaluation effort. A total of 184 CV or unknown-cause deaths (88 rosiglitazone, 96 metformin/sulfonylurea), 128 participants with an MI (68 rosiglitazone, 60 metformin/sulfonylurea), and 113 participants with a stroke (50 rosiglitazone, 63 metformin/sulfonylurea) were included. The hazard ratio (HR) for rosiglitazone versus metformin/sulfonylurea for the end point of CV (or unknown cause) death, MI, or stroke was 0.95 (95% CI 0.78-1.17) compared with 0.93 (95% CI 0.74-1.15) for the original RECORD results. Treatment comparisons for MI (HR 1.13, 95% CI 0.80-1.59) and mortality (HR 0.86, 95% CI 0.68-1.08) were also the same compared with the original RECORD results. Sensitivity analyses were also consistent with the original RECORD results. Analyses using the FDA definitions showed similar results. CONCLUSIONS Only a modest number of additional person-years of follow-up were ascertained from this reevaluation of CV end points in RECORD. Observed HRs and CIs from these analyses using the original RECORD or new FDA end point definitions showed similar treatment effects of rosiglitazone compared with the original RECORD results.

[1]  R. Califf,et al.  Misreporting of myocardial infarction end points: results of adjudication by a central clinical events committee in the PARAGON-B trial. Second Platelet IIb/IIIa Antagonist for the Reduction of Acute Coronary Syndrome Events in a Global Organization Network Trial. , 2002, American heart journal.

[2]  C. Granger,et al.  Do we need to adjudicate major clinical events? , 2008, Clinical trials.

[3]  S. Nissen,et al.  Effect of rosiglitazone on the risk of myocardial infarction and death from cardiovascular causes. , 2007, The New England journal of medicine.

[4]  D. Cryer,et al.  Comparative outcomes study of metformin intervention versus conventional approach the COSMIC Approach Study. , 2005, Diabetes care.

[5]  F. Violi,et al.  Picotamide, a combined inhibitor of thromboxane A2 synthase and receptor, reduces 2-year mortality in diabetics with peripheral arterial disease: the DAVID study. , 2004, European heart journal.

[6]  John H Fuller,et al.  Primary prevention of cardiovascular disease with atorvastatin in type 2 diabetes in the Collaborative Atorvastatin Diabetes Study (CARDS): multicentre randomised placebo-controlled trial , 2004, The Lancet.

[7]  S. Nissen,et al.  Rosiglitazone revisited: an updated meta-analysis of risk for myocardial infarction and cardiovascular mortality. , 2010, Archives of internal medicine.

[8]  J. Ménard,et al.  Effects of low dose ramipril on cardiovascular and renal outcomes in patients with type 2 diabetes and raised excretion of urinary albumin: randomised, double blind, placebo controlled trial (the DIABHYCAR study) , 2004, BMJ : British Medical Journal.

[9]  R. Garrick A Trial of Darbepoetin Alfa in Type 2 Diabetes and Chronic Kidney Disease , 2010 .

[10]  D. Mikhailidis,et al.  Efficacy and Safety of Atorvastatin in the Prevention of Cardiovascular End Points in Subjects With Type 2 Diabetes: The Atorvastatin Study for Prevention of Coronary Heart Disease Endpoints in Non-Insulin-Dependent Diabetes Mellitus (ASPEN) , 2006, Diabetes Care.

[11]  Diederick Grobbee,et al.  Intensive blood glucose control and vascular outcomes in patients with type 2 diabetes. , 2008, The New England journal of medicine.

[12]  J. McMurray,et al.  A systematic review of event rates in clinical trials in diabetes mellitus: the importance of quantifying baseline cardiovascular disease history and proteinuria and implications for clinical trial design. , 2011, American heart journal.

[13]  Erland Erdmann,et al.  Secondary prevention of macrovascular events in patients with type 2 diabetes in the PROactive Study (PROspective pioglitAzone Clinical Trial In macroVascular Events): a randomised controlled trial , 2005, The Lancet.

[14]  S. Yusuf,et al.  Evaluating the benefit of event adjudication of cardiovascular outcomes in large simple RCTs , 2009, Clinical trials.

[15]  S. Schinner,et al.  Effects of Intensive Glucose Lowering in Type 2 Diabetes , 2009 .

[16]  T. Morimoto,et al.  Low-Dose Aspirin for Primary Prevention of Atherosclerotic Events in Patients With Type 2 Diabetes , 2012 .

[17]  R. Holman,et al.  Intensive blood-glucose control with sulphonylureas or insulin compared with conventional treatment and risk of complications in patients with type 2 diabetes (UKPDS 33). UK Prospective Diabetes Study (UKPDS) Group. , 1998 .

[18]  L. Ruilope,et al.  Olmesartan for the delay or prevention of microalbuminuria in type 2 diabetes. , 2011, The New England journal of medicine.

[19]  E. Barrett,et al.  Cardiac outcomes after screening for asymptomatic coronary artery disease in patients with type 2 diabetes: the DIAD study: a randomized controlled trial. , 2009, JAMA.

[20]  Maria Mori Brooks,et al.  A randomized trial of therapies for type 2 diabetes and coronary artery disease. , 2009, The New England journal of medicine.

[21]  R. Califf,et al.  Systematic adjudication of myocardial infarction end-points in an international clinical trial , 2001, Current controlled trials in cardiovascular medicine.

[22]  S. Yusuf,et al.  n-3 fatty acids and cardiovascular outcomes in patients with dysglycemia. , 2012, The New England journal of medicine.

[23]  Robert Bigelow,et al.  Methodology of a reevaluation of cardiovascular outcomes in the RECORD trial: study design and conduct. , 2013, American heart journal.

[24]  M. Hanefeld,et al.  Rosiglitazone evaluated for cardiovascular outcomes--an interim analysis. , 2007, The New England journal of medicine.

[25]  P Glasziou,et al.  Effects of long-term fenofibrate therapy on cardiovascular events in 9795 people with type 2 diabetes mellitus (the FIELD study): randomised controlled trial , 2005, The Lancet.

[26]  Michael E. Miller,et al.  ACTION TO CONTROL CARDIOVASCULAR RISK IN DIABETES STUDY GROUP. EFFECTS OF INTENSIVE GLUCOSE LOWERING IN TYPE 2 DIABETES , 2010 .

[27]  B. Brenner,et al.  Effects of losartan on renal and cardiovascular outcomes in patients with type 2 diabetes and nephropathy. , 2001, The New England journal of medicine.

[28]  M. Hanefeld,et al.  Rosiglitazone evaluated for cardiovascular outcomes in oral agent combination therapy for type 2 diabetes (RECORD): a multicentre, randomised, open-label trial , 2009, The Lancet.

[29]  S. Schinner,et al.  Intensive Blood Glucose Control and Vascular Outcomes in Patients with Type 2 Diabetes , 2009 .

[30]  Uk-Prospective-Diabetes-Study-Group Intensive blood-glucose control with sulphonylureas or insulin compared with conventional treatment and risk of complications in patients with type 2 diabetes (UKPDS 33) , 1998, The Lancet.

[31]  B. Zinman,et al.  Glycemic durability of rosiglitazone, metformin, or glyburide monotherapy. , 2006, The New England journal of medicine.

[32]  M. Hanefeld,et al.  Rosiglitazone Evaluated for Cardiac Outcomes and Regulation of Glycaemia in Diabetes (RECORD): study design and protocol , 2005, Diabetologia.