Abelacimab versus Rivaroxaban in Patients with Atrial Fibrillation

Author(s): Christian T. Ruff, M.D., M.P.H., Siddharth M. Patel, M.D., M.P.H., Robert P. Giugliano, M.D., David A. Morrow, M.D., M.P.H., Bruce Hug, M.D., Ph.D., Julia F. Kuder, M.A., Erica L. Goodrich, M.S., Shih-Ann Chen, M.D., Shaun G. Goodman, M.D., Boyoung Joung, M.D., Robert G. Kiss, M.D., Jindrich Spinar, M.D., Ph.D., Wojciech Wojakowski, M.D., Ph.D., Jeffrey I. Weitz, M.D., Sabina A. Murphy, M.P.H., Stephen D. Wiviott, M.D., Sanobar Parkar, M.D., Daniel Bloomfield, M.D., and Marc S. Sabatine, M.D., M.P.H., for the AZALEA–TIMI 71 Investigators*

Source: DOI: 10.1056/NEJMoa2406674

Dr. Anjan Patel's Thoughts

This new subcutaneous anticoagulant, abelacimab, binds to the inactive form of FXI and blocks its activation by FXII. This drug seems significantly safer than DOAC’s in terms of bleeding risk. So much so that the study was stopped early due to a greater-than-expected reduction in bleeding events in the study arm. I hope this drug is also going to be studied for the treatment of VTE.

BACKGROUND

Abelacimab is a fully human monoclonal antibody that binds to the inactive form of factor XI and blocks its activation. The safety of abelacimab as compared with a direct oral anticoagulant in patients with atrial fibrillation is unknown.

METHODS

Patients with atrial fibrillation and a moderate-to-high risk of stroke were randomly assigned, in a 1:1:1 ratio, to receive subcutaneous injection of abelacimab (150 mg or 90 mg once monthly) administered in a blinded fashion or oral rivaroxaban (20 mg once daily) administered in an open-label fashion. The primary end point was major or clinically relevant nonmajor bleeding.

RESULTS

A total of 1287 patients underwent randomization; the median age was 74 years, and 44% were women. At 3 months, the median reduction in free factor XI levels with abelacimab at a dose of 150 mg was 99% (interquartile range, 98 to 99) and with abelacimab at a dose of 90 mg was 97% (interquartile range, 51 to 99). The trial was stopped early on the recommendation of the independent data monitoring committee because of a greater-than-anticipated reduction in bleeding events with abelacimab. The incidence rate of major or clinically relevant nonmajor bleeding was 3.2 events per 100 person-years with 150-mg abelacimab and 2.6 events per 100 person-years with 90-mg abelacimab, as compared with 8.4 events per 100 person-years with rivaroxaban (hazard ratio for 150-mg abelacimab vs. rivaroxaban, 0.38 [95% confidence interval {CI}, 0.24 to 0.60]; hazard ratio for 90-mg abelacimab vs. rivaroxaban, 0.31 [95% CI, 0.19 to 0.51]; P<0.001 for both comparisons). The incidence and severity of adverse events appeared to be similar in the three groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Among patients with atrial fibrillation who were at moderate-to-high risk for stroke, treatment with abelacimab resulted in markedly lower levels of free factor XI and fewer bleeding events than treatment with rivaroxaban. (Funded by Anthos Therapeutics; AZALEA–TIMI 71 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04755283.)

Author Affiliations

From the TIMI Study Group, Division of Cardiovascular Medicine, Brigham and Women’s Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston (C.T.R., S.M.P., R.P.G., D.A.M., J.F.K., E.L.G., S.A.M., S.D.W., M.S.S.); Anthos Therapeutics, Cambridge, MA (B.H., S.P., D.B.); the Heart Rhythm Center, Taipei Veterans General Hospital and Cardiovascular Center, Taipei, Taiwan (S.-A.C.); Taichung Veterans Hospital, Taichung, Taiwan (S.-A.C.); National Yang Ming Chiao Tung University, Hsinchu, Taiwan (S.-A.C.); National Chung Hsing University, Taichung, Taiwan (S.-A.C.); St. Michael’s Hospital, Unity Health Toronto, Peter Munk Cardiac Centre, University Health Network, University of Toronto, Toronto (S.G.G.); Canadian VIGOUR Centre, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Canada (S.G.G.); the Division of Cardiology, Severance Hospital, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, South Korea (B.J.); the Department of Cardiology, Central Hospital of Northern Pest–Military Hospital, Budapest, Hungary (R.G.K.); the Heart and Vascular Center, Semmelweis University, Budapest, Hungary (R.G.K.); the Internal Cardiology Department, St. Ann University Hospital and Masaryk University, Brno, Czech Republic (J.S.); the Department of Cardiology and Structural Heart Diseases, Medical University of Silesia, Katowice, Poland (W.W.); the Departments of Medicine and of Biochemistry and Biomedical Sciences, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada (J.W.); and the Thrombosis and Atherosclerosis Research Institute, Hamilton, ON, Canada (J.W.).

Association Between Systemic Anticancer Therapy Administration Near the End of Life With Health Care and Hospice Utilization in Older Adults: A SEER Medicare Analysis of End-of-Life Care Quality

Maybe I’m biased as chair of the VBC, but this study showed that all subtypes of SACT use were associated with markers of poorer-quality EOL care.

Postmastectomy Radiation Therapy: An ASTRO-ASCO-SSO Clinical Practice Guideline

Guidelines for post-mastectomy radiation include patients who received neoadjuvant therapy, with or without residual disease after treatment. A good topic to review.

Novel Systemic Anticancer Treatments and Health Services Use the End of Life Among Adults With Cancer

This study reviewed the effects of using novel agents (immunotherapy and targeted therapy) in patients at the end of life (EOL), based on the perception that these therapies may be less toxic than chemotherapy. Adjusted odds of high health service utilization and hospital death were more than twofold greater among patients receiving systemic anticancer therapy (SACT) at the EOL compared to those receiving none.

Mindfulness and Tai Chi for Cancer Health (MATCH) Study: Primary Outcomes of a Preference-Based Multisite Randomized Comparative Effectiveness Trial

The MATCH study was a large, pragmatic, preference-based, multisite RCT comparing Mindfulness-Based Cancer Recovery (MBCR) and Tai Chi/Qigong (TCQ) in distressed cancer survivors. Both MBCR and TCQ significantly improved mood disturbance (POMS TMD) compared to waitlist, with the largest effect size for MBCR vs waitlist (0.44) and a significant reduction for TCQ vs waitlist (estimate –5.13; 95% CI, –9.44 to –1.23; P = .01). MBCR had the greatest impact on tension, anger, and vigor, while TCQ was most effective for anger, depression, and vigor; subgroup analysis showed women benefited more from MBCR, and younger or advanced-stage patients benefited more from TCQ. In short, both MBCR and TCQ are viable, evidence-based options for improving mood in our cancer survivors, and it doesn’t seem to matter whether patients choose their intervention or are randomized—everyone does better than waitlist. These are probably underutilized in our communities and more widely available than appreciated.

Prescribing Changes After Accelerated vs Regular Approval of Oncology Therapies

This study analyzed prescribing patterns for oncology drugs granted FDA Accelerated Approval (AA) versus those later converted to Regular Approval (RA) using data from over 63,000 patients with advanced solid tumors. Prescribing of AA drugs increased sharply—by an average of 23 percentage points—immediately after AA, while conversion to RA led to only a minimal further increase. Off-label use of AA drugs, either in earlier lines of therapy or in biomarker-negative patients, was rare. The findings suggest that oncologists rapidly adopt AA drugs into practice, often without waiting for confirmatory evidence required for RA. In summary, AA status drives substantial and immediate uptake of oncology drugs, highlighting the importance of timely confirmatory trials to ensure clinical benefit.