PubMed HealthSearch

Biomedical subjects

Brian Claggett

Publications and source records attributed to Brian Claggett.

3 recordsLinked to original sources

Enhancing Evidence Generation by Linking Randomized Clinical Trials to Real-World Data: The INVESTED-Medicare Linkage Study.

Real-world evidence (RWE) derived from real-world data (RWD) can complement randomized controlled trials (RCTs), yet the validity of RWD relative to RCT data remains insufficiently characterized. We obtained post hoc consent and linked individual participant data from the US-based INVESTED trial (2016-2019) with Medicare fee-for-service claims (2012-2020) to validate demographic factors, baseline characteristics (using 183-, 365-, and 730-day lookback periods) and outcomes, and to assess post-trial events. Among 5260 trial participants, 126 were enrolled and eligible for linkage. Among 115 participants with demographic information available from Medicare enrollment files, agreement between RCT- and RWD-based demographic factors was high: only one major age discrepancy, 100% agreement for sex, and an overall agreement of 0.89 for race. Participants with Medicare claims data (n = 65) were older and more likely to be White compared with the overall RCT population. For the 365-day lookback period, baseline comorbidities showed high sensitivity (median 0.80) and specificity (0.89), as did medication use (sensitivity 1.00, specificity 0.88). Lengthening the lookback period to 730 days increased sensitivity but decreased specificity, whereas shortening to 183 days decreased sensitivity but increased specificity. Clinical outcomes showed high specificity (0.88-0.94) but low sensitivity (0.18-0.50). Among those with Medicare coverage beyond the trial end date (n = 45), 22% experienced cardiopulmonary, 18% cardiovascular, and 7% heart failure (HF) hospitalizations, highlighting the value of RWD for extending RCT evidence. Proactive planning of future RCT-RWD linkage initiatives can improve the efficiency of linkage studies, leading to more actionable results.

Journal Article

AI echo INSIGHT study: A prospective blinded randomized trial of artificial intelligence echocardiogram interpretation.

BACKGROUND: Transthoracic echocardiography (TTE) is the most commonly performed cardiac imaging modality with over 30 million studies annually. Demand for timely expert interpretation continues to outpace capacity, creating diagnostic delays and inter-observer variability that impact patient care. Recent research has suggested computer vision artificial intelligence (AI) models can generate accurate preliminary comprehensive TTE reports, however, prospective evaluation is needed to determine whether AI-assisted TTE interpretation can improve clinician efficiency while preserving diagnostic accuracy. METHODS: AI ECHO INSIGHT is a prospective randomized blinded clinical trial conducted at Kaiser Permanente Northern California that will evaluate 1200 historical TTE studies (1000 consecutive unselected studies plus 200 with moderate or greater valvular disease) interpreted using three workflows: (1) AI-generated preliminary report finalized by a blinded cardiologist (AI-assisted); (2) cardiologist-generated preliminary report finalized by a blinded cardiologist (cardiologist-assisted); and (3) sonographer-generated preliminary report finalized by a blinded cardiologist (sonographer-assisted). The primary outcome is the rate of substantial change between preliminary and final reports, comparing the AI-assisted workflow to the pooled cardiologist-assisted and sonographer-assisted workflows. Secondary outcomes include cardiologist interpretation time for report finalization, superiority testing for diagnostic accuracy, and reporting consistency. CONCLUSION: AI ECHO INSIGHT is a prospective randomized blinded clinical trial evaluating the clinical impact of AI-assisted TTE interpretation on diagnostic accuracy, cardiologist efficiency, and reporting consistency in real-world echocardiography workflows. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov registration number NCT07229300.

Humans

Angiotensin-Neprilysin Inhibition and Left Ventricular Assist Device Therapy: Primary Results of the ENVAD-HF Trial.

BACKGROUND: The role of heart failure-specific therapies in left ventricular assist device (LVAD) recipients is unclear, and observational data suggest improved outcomes with neurohormonal blockers. OBJECTIVES: ENVAD-HF (Multicenter, Randomized, Open-Label, Parallel Group, Study to Evaluate the Use of Sacubitril/Valsartan in HeartMate 3 LVAD Recipients) sought to evaluate the safety and tolerability of the angiotensin-neprilysin inhibitor sacubitril/valsartan vs standard of care (SOC) for managing blood pressure (BP) in HeartMate 3 LVAD recipients. METHODS: ENVAD-HF was a prospective multicenter, randomized, open-label study of sacubitril/valsartan vs SOC for managing BP (mean arterial pressure goal: 75-90 mm Hg) in stable LVAD recipients with 12-month follow-up. The composite primary endpoint was time to death, deterioration in renal function, hyperkalemia, or symptomatic hypotension leading to drug withdrawal. Exploratory endpoints included clinical and biomarker assessments and patient-reported outcomes. RESULTS: In 60 randomized patients (30 in each arm), sacubitril/valsartan compared with SOC demonstrated an HR of 0.42 (95% CI: 0.08-2.18; P = 0.30) for the primary endpoint at 12 months. Two primary endpoints were reached in the sacubitril/valsartan group (1 death and 1 symptomatic hypotension event) compared with 5 in the SOC group (2 deaths, 2 worsening renal function events, and 1 symptomatic hypotension event). Numerical trends in favor of sacubitril/valsartan were noted for other exploratory endpoints, including a reduced number of BP medications (difference: -1.09 [95% CI: -1.52 to -0.66]; P < 0.0001) and a significantly better Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire-Overall Summary Score (improvement: +10.6 [95% CI: 2.6-18.7]; P = 0.011). CONCLUSIONS: ENVAD-HF, a prospective randomized controlled trial of angiotensin-neprilysin inhibition in stable HeartMate 3 LVAD recipients, demonstrated the safety and tolerability of this therapy in this unique population. The trial forms the basis for a pivotal trial to investigate the usefulness of HF-specific therapies in the LVAD population. (Sacubitril/Valsartan in Left Ventricular Assist Device Recipients [ENVAD-HF], NCT04103554; A multicENter, randomized, open-label, parallel group, pilot study to evaluate the use of sacubitril/valsartan in HeartMate 3 LVAD recipients, 2019-003888-22).

Humans