Evidence Hub

How does a clinical trial fit into the real world? The RELAX-AHF study population into the EAHFE registry

Ò. Miró, V. Gil, Christian E. Müller, A. Mebazaa, H. Bueno, F. J. Martín-Sánchez, P. Herrero, J. Jacob et al.

Clinical Research in Cardiology, 2015

3,205 participants · 30 citations

Abstract

ObjectiveTo test how accurate the recently published RELAX-AHF trial was in recruiting real-world patients with acute-decompensated heart failure (ADHF).Methods and resultsWe compared clinical and outcome data of patients receiving serelaxin in the RELAX-AHF trial (RELAX group, n = 581) with patients included in the EAHFE registry [5497 ADHF from 29 Spanish emergency departments (EDs)]. The EAHFE registry was split into two groups: EAHFE-non-RELAX (patients not fulfilling the RELAX-AHF inclusion criteria; n = 3205, 58.3 %) and EAHFE-RELAX A (patients fulfilling RELAX-AHF inclusion criteria; n = 2292, 41.7 %). The latter group was further refined by also applying exclusion criteria (EAHFE-RELAX B; n = 964, 17.4 %). Both EAHFE-RELAX groups differed from the EAHFE-non-RELAX group in multiple aspects, with the lower the proportion of patients with implantable cardiac defibrillator and with pulmonary diseases the greater the differences found. The RELAX group, compared with the EAHFE-RELAX groups, significantly included fewer females, younger patients, less in NYHA class I/II, less with implantable cardiac defibrillator and on beta-blocker treatment, and patients had lower systolic blood pressure and cardiac and respiratory rates at ED arrival. The EAHFE-RELAX groups had a significantly lower all-cause mortality than EAHFE-non-RELAX group, and qualitative analysis suggested that EAHFE-RELAX groups had a higher mortality than the RELAX group.ConclusionPatients included in the…

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free