User-defined outcomes of the Danish cardiovascular screening (DANCAVAS) trial: A post hoc analyses of a population-based, randomised controlled trial.

IF 15.8 1区 医学 Q1 Medicine
PLoS Medicine Pub Date : 2024-05-13 eCollection Date: 2024-05-01 DOI:10.1371/journal.pmed.1004403
Axel Cosmus Pyndt Diederichsen, Anna Mejldal, Rikke Søgaard, Jesper Hallas, Jess Lambrechtsen, Flemming Hald Steffensen, Lars Frost, Kenneth Egstrup, Martin Busk, Grazina Urbonaviciene, Marek Karon, Lars Melholt Rasmussen, Jes Sanddal Lindholt
{"title":"User-defined outcomes of the Danish cardiovascular screening (DANCAVAS) trial: A post hoc analyses of a population-based, randomised controlled trial.","authors":"Axel Cosmus Pyndt Diederichsen, Anna Mejldal, Rikke Søgaard, Jesper Hallas, Jess Lambrechtsen, Flemming Hald Steffensen, Lars Frost, Kenneth Egstrup, Martin Busk, Grazina Urbonaviciene, Marek Karon, Lars Melholt Rasmussen, Jes Sanddal Lindholt","doi":"10.1371/journal.pmed.1004403","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The Danish cardiovascular screening (DANCAVAS) trial, a nationwide trial designed to investigate the impact of cardiovascular screening in men, did not decrease all-cause mortality, an outcome decided by the investigators. However, the target group may have varied preferences. In this study, we aimed to evaluate whether men aged 65 to 74 years requested a CT-based cardiovascular screening examination and to assess its impact on outcomes determined by their preferences.</p><p><strong>Methods and findings: </strong>This is a post hoc study of the randomised DANCAVAS trial. All men 65 to 74 years of age residing in specific areas of Denmark were randomised (1:2) to invitation-to-screening (16,736 men, of which 10,471 underwent screening) or usual-care (29,790 men). The examination included among others a non-contrast CT scan (to assess the coronary artery calcium score and aortic aneurysms). Positive findings prompted preventive treatment with atorvastatin, aspirin, and surveillance/surgical evaluation. The usual-care group remained unaware of the trial and the assignments. The user-defined outcome was based on patient preferences and determined through a survey sent in January 2023 to a random sample of 9,095 men from the target group, with a 68.0% response rate (6,182 respondents). Safety outcomes included severe bleeding and mortality within 30 days after cardiovascular surgery. Analyses were performed on an intention-to-screen basis. Prevention of stroke and myocardial infarction was the primary motivation for participating in the screening examination. After a median follow-up of 6.4 years, 1,800 of 16,736 men (10.8%) in the invited-to-screening group and 3,420 of 29,790 (11.5%) in the usual-care group experienced an event (hazard ratio (HR), 0.93 (95% confidence interval (CI), 0.88 to 0.98; p = 0.010); number needed to invite at 6 years, 148 (95% CI, 80 to 986)). A total of 324 men (1.9%) in the invited-to-screening group and 491 (1.7%) in the usual-care group had an intracranial bleeding (HR, 1.17; 95% CI, 1.02 to 1.35; p = 0.029). Additionally, 994 (5.9%) in the invited-to-screening group and 1,722 (5.8%) in the usual-care group experienced severe gastrointestinal bleeding (HR, 1.02; 95% CI, 0.95 to 1.11; p = 0.583). No differences were found in mortality after cardiovascular surgery. The primary limitation of the study is that exclusive enrolment of men aged 65 to 74 renders the findings non-generalisable to women or men of other age groups.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>In this comprehensive population-based cardiovascular screening and intervention program, we observed a reduction in the user-defined outcome, stroke and myocardial infarction, but entail a small increased risk of intracranial bleeding.</p><p><strong>Trial registration: </strong>ISRCTN Registry number, ISRCTN12157806 https://www.isrctn.com/ISRCTN12157806.</p>","PeriodicalId":49008,"journal":{"name":"PLoS Medicine","volume":"21 5","pages":"e1004403"},"PeriodicalIF":15.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11132442/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"PLoS Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.1004403","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/5/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: The Danish cardiovascular screening (DANCAVAS) trial, a nationwide trial designed to investigate the impact of cardiovascular screening in men, did not decrease all-cause mortality, an outcome decided by the investigators. However, the target group may have varied preferences. In this study, we aimed to evaluate whether men aged 65 to 74 years requested a CT-based cardiovascular screening examination and to assess its impact on outcomes determined by their preferences.

Methods and findings: This is a post hoc study of the randomised DANCAVAS trial. All men 65 to 74 years of age residing in specific areas of Denmark were randomised (1:2) to invitation-to-screening (16,736 men, of which 10,471 underwent screening) or usual-care (29,790 men). The examination included among others a non-contrast CT scan (to assess the coronary artery calcium score and aortic aneurysms). Positive findings prompted preventive treatment with atorvastatin, aspirin, and surveillance/surgical evaluation. The usual-care group remained unaware of the trial and the assignments. The user-defined outcome was based on patient preferences and determined through a survey sent in January 2023 to a random sample of 9,095 men from the target group, with a 68.0% response rate (6,182 respondents). Safety outcomes included severe bleeding and mortality within 30 days after cardiovascular surgery. Analyses were performed on an intention-to-screen basis. Prevention of stroke and myocardial infarction was the primary motivation for participating in the screening examination. After a median follow-up of 6.4 years, 1,800 of 16,736 men (10.8%) in the invited-to-screening group and 3,420 of 29,790 (11.5%) in the usual-care group experienced an event (hazard ratio (HR), 0.93 (95% confidence interval (CI), 0.88 to 0.98; p = 0.010); number needed to invite at 6 years, 148 (95% CI, 80 to 986)). A total of 324 men (1.9%) in the invited-to-screening group and 491 (1.7%) in the usual-care group had an intracranial bleeding (HR, 1.17; 95% CI, 1.02 to 1.35; p = 0.029). Additionally, 994 (5.9%) in the invited-to-screening group and 1,722 (5.8%) in the usual-care group experienced severe gastrointestinal bleeding (HR, 1.02; 95% CI, 0.95 to 1.11; p = 0.583). No differences were found in mortality after cardiovascular surgery. The primary limitation of the study is that exclusive enrolment of men aged 65 to 74 renders the findings non-generalisable to women or men of other age groups.

Conclusion: In this comprehensive population-based cardiovascular screening and intervention program, we observed a reduction in the user-defined outcome, stroke and myocardial infarction, but entail a small increased risk of intracranial bleeding.

Trial registration: ISRCTN Registry number, ISRCTN12157806 https://www.isrctn.com/ISRCTN12157806.

丹麦心血管筛查(DANCAVAS)试验的用户定义结果:基于人口的随机对照试验的事后分析。
背景:丹麦心血管筛查(DANCAVAS)试验是一项全国性试验,旨在调查心血管筛查对男性的影响,该试验并未降低全因死亡率,这是由研究者决定的结果。然而,目标群体可能有不同的偏好。在这项研究中,我们旨在评估 65 至 74 岁的男性是否要求进行基于 CT 的心血管筛查,并评估其对由其偏好决定的结果的影响:这是对 DANCAVAS 随机试验的一项事后研究。居住在丹麦特定地区的所有 65 至 74 岁男性被随机(1:2)邀请接受筛查(16736 名男性,其中 10471 名接受了筛查)或常规护理(29790 名男性)。检查内容包括非对比 CT 扫描(评估冠状动脉钙化评分和主动脉瘤)。如果检查结果呈阳性,则需要使用阿托伐他汀、阿司匹林进行预防性治疗,并进行监测/手术评估。常规护理组对试验和任务分配一无所知。用户定义的结果基于患者的偏好,通过 2023 年 1 月向目标群体中的 9095 名男性随机抽样调查确定,回复率为 68.0%(6182 名受访者)。安全性结果包括严重出血和心血管手术后 30 天内的死亡率。分析以意向筛选为基础进行。预防中风和心肌梗死是参加筛查的主要动机。中位随访 6.4 年后,受邀筛查组的 16,736 名男性中有 1,800 名(10.8%)发生了心肌梗死事件,常规护理组的 29,790 名男性中有 3,420 名(11.5%)发生了心肌梗死事件(危险比 (HR),0.93(95% 置信区间 (CI),0.88 至 0.98;P = 0.010);6 年后需要邀请的人数为 148(95% CI,80 至 986))。受邀筛查组共有 324 名男性(1.9%)和常规护理组共有 491 名男性(1.7%)发生过颅内出血(HR,1.17;95% CI,1.02 至 1.35;P = 0.029)。此外,受邀筛查组中有994人(5.9%)和常规护理组中有1722人(5.8%)出现严重消化道出血(HR,1.02;95% CI,0.95至1.11;P = 0.583)。心血管手术后的死亡率没有差异。该研究的主要局限性在于,只招募了65至74岁的男性,因此研究结果不能推广到其他年龄段的女性或男性:结论:在这项全面的人群心血管筛查和干预计划中,我们观察到用户定义的结果、中风和心肌梗死有所减少,但颅内出血的风险略有增加:ISRCTN 注册号:ISRCTN12157806 https://www.isrctn.com/ISRCTN12157806。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
PLoS Medicine
PLoS Medicine MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL-
CiteScore
17.60
自引率
0.60%
发文量
227
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: PLOS Medicine is a prominent platform for discussing and researching global health challenges. The journal covers a wide range of topics, including biomedical, environmental, social, and political factors affecting health. It prioritizes articles that contribute to clinical practice, health policy, or a better understanding of pathophysiology, ultimately aiming to improve health outcomes across different settings. The journal is unwavering in its commitment to uphold the highest ethical standards in medical publishing. This includes actively managing and disclosing any conflicts of interest related to reporting, reviewing, and publishing. PLOS Medicine promotes transparency in the entire review and publication process. The journal also encourages data sharing and encourages the reuse of published work. Additionally, authors retain copyright for their work, and the publication is made accessible through Open Access with no restrictions on availability and dissemination. PLOS Medicine takes measures to avoid conflicts of interest associated with advertising drugs and medical devices or engaging in the exclusive sale of reprints.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信