 |
Thursday, April 14 2005
Bad Outcomes Related to, But Not Caused by, Misdosing of Clotbusters in Heart Attack Patients
Duke University Medical Center News Office
DURHAM, N.C. – The death or clinical complication in heart attack patients
given potent drugs to re-open clogged arteries is more likely to
be due to individual patient characteristics than to modest misdosing
of the drugs, researchers from the Duke Clinical Research Institute
(DCRI) have determined. Thus, they said, physicians should not be
overly worried about the possibility of minor errors in dosing --
a concern that the Duke physicians said likely contributes to insufficient
prescribing of the drugs to treat heart attacks.
These findings
are important, the researchers said, because approximately one in
three patients rushed to emergency rooms with heart attack symptoms
do not receive these potentially life-saving drugs. One reason cited
for this under-usage is that many physicians may be overly – albeit
sometimes justifiably -- concerned about potential adverse events
due to incorrect dosing, the researchers said.
The drugs, known
as fibrinolytic agents, have been proven effective in clinical trials
in breaking apart blood clots in coronary arteries, restoring blood
flow to heart and saving heart muscle. The doses of some of the
drugs in this class are determined by a calculation that includes
body weight, which must often be estimated in emergency situations.
The amount of drug administered is crucial, the researchers said,
since too much can cause unwanted bleeding events, while too little
will not dissolve the blood clot.
Many
physicians have assumed that modest errors in dosing errors of these
fibrinolytic drugs can cause harm, which made them afraid to give
the drugs altogether," said Duke University Medical Center cardiologist
Christopher Granger, M.D., senior member of the research team that
published the results of their analysis in the April 13, 2005 issue
of the Journal of the American
Medical Association. The DCRI's Rajendra Mehta, M.D. was
the first author of the paper.
"We have found
that there does not appear to be a cause-and-effect relationship
between small dosing errors and worse outcomes for patients," Granger
continued. "These findings should be somewhat reassuring to busy
physicians in emergency rooms who can assume that as long as the
drugs are given carefully to the right patients, small misdosings
should not lead to bad outcomes. These are a class of drugs that
can save lives, but tend to be underused."
For their study,
the Duke team analyzed the results of the 16,949-patient clinical
trial concluded in 1998 known as ASSENT-2 (Assessment of the Safety
and Efficacy of a New Thrombolytic). The trial compared the effectiveness
of tissue plasminogen activator (t-PA) and TNK, a newer genetically
altered version of t-PA. t-PA works by dissolving blood clots and
is most effective when administered within hours of heart attack
symptoms.
Using the data
collected from ASSENT-2, the researchers analyzed to what extent
incorrect dosing – whether over or under – was responsible for death,
stroke or major bleeding within 30 days of treatment.
Like
previous studies, our analysis showed that about five percent of the
patients in ASSENT-2 received incorrect doses of t-PA," Mehta said.
"What is so fascinating is that we found the nearly same excess risk
of misdoses of placebo that we found in misdosing t-PA. This suggests
that most, if not all, of the associations between incorrect dosing
of t-PA and adverse events were due to other confounding factors."
When the researchers
adjusted the data for these confounding factors, they found that
the association was greatly reduced. The patient-specific factors
that appeared to bestow the greatest risks for adverse events included
advanced age, female gender, being African-American, shorter stature,
lower body weight, and lower blood pressure.
Specifically,
the 30-day mortality rate for those who received a t-PA overdose
was 9.8 percent, and 19.5 percent for those receiving an underdose.
Those receiving a correct dose had a mortality rate of 5.4 percent.
Conversely, those who received an overdose of placebo had a 10 percent
mortality rate, and 23.5 percent rate for underdose. Those who received
the correct dose of placebo also had a 5.4 percent mortality rate.
"These findings
are counterintuitive – when given the wrong dose of placebo, there
was much worse outcome," Granger said. "This is clearly a remarkable
finding, as well as a reason to pause – whenever we see a relationship
between a treatment and an outcome, we must be careful in ascribing
cause and effect. Other factors may also be involved, and additional
studies are needed to better understand what these factors may be."
Granger cited
as a similar example the issue of hormone replacement therapy (HRT)
for post-menopausal women. Earlier observational studies of thousands
of women indicated an association between HRT and a lowered risk
of heart attack.
"However, when
the randomized, scientific studies were done the opposite was proven
to be true, that there was in fact an increased risk of blood clots
and stroke," Granger said. "Another example is vitamin E. At first,
earlier studies appeared to show that vitamin E was associated with
better outcomes, but when the proper studies were conducted, it
turned out not to be the case."
While Granger
does not believe that the results of this analysis will change clinical
practice, he does believe that hospitals and physicians should not
withhold beneficial drugs because of concern over misdosing, as
long as the drugs are given carefully and errors minimized. Less
concern about minor misdosing could lead to an increased usage of
the drugs. Additionally, he said that the patients at the highest
risk for adverse outcomes should be closely monitored while they
are receiving fibrinolytic therapy.
Mehta believes
that the results of this study could also have an impact on medical
malpractice litigation, which is often driven by adverse outcomes.
"This study
finds that adverse outcomes following modest errors in fibrinolytic
dosing are often times not caused by the error, but by clinical
factors that may contribute to higher likelihood of the error occurring,"
Mehta said.
The ASSENT-2
trial was funded by Boehringer Ingelheim and Genentech, Inc. Granger's
analysis of the ASSENT-2 data was supported by the DCRI.
Other members
of the team, from the DCRI, were John Alexander, M.D., Karen Pieper,
Jyotsna Garg, and Robert Califf, M.D. Other colleagues were Frans
Van de Werf, M.D., University Hospital Lueven, Belgium, and Paul
Armstrong, M.D., University of Alberta, Edmonton.

John
Alexander, M.D. |

Karen
Pieper |

Rob
Califf, M.D. |
Not pictured:
Jyotsna Garg |
 |