1 Current and Future Perspectives Current and Future Perspectives from Cordis Cardiology from Cordis Cardiology : : Building Upon the Standard of Care and Comparison Building Upon the Standard of Care and Comparison David E. Kandzari, MD, FACC, FSCAI David E. Kandzari, MD, FACC, FSCAI Chief Medical Officer Chief Medical Officer Cordis Corporation Cordis Corporation [email protected][email protected]Note: Presentation not intended as a promotion of off-label use of products
29
Embed
Current and Future Perspectives from Cordis Cardiology ... · Current and Future Perspectives Current and Future Perspectives from Cordis Cardiology: Building Upon the Standard of
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Transcript
1
Current and Future Perspectives Current and Future Perspectives from Cordis Cardiologyfrom Cordis Cardiology::
Building Upon the Standard of Care and ComparisonBuilding Upon the Standard of Care and Comparison
David E. Kandzari, MD, FACC, FSCAIDavid E. Kandzari, MD, FACC, FSCAIChief Medical OfficerChief Medical OfficerCordis CorporationCordis Corporation
Note: Presentation not intended as a promotion of off-label use of products
22
Finding the Path Through DES Trials is Becoming Increasingly Difficult
• Global medical community recognizes RCTs as highest level of evidence– ACC/AHA/ESC ‘Level A Evidence’
• Both RCTs and non-RCTs have purpose– RCT: balanced comparison of ≥2 therapies
• Limit: Restrictive inclusion criteria may apply– Registry: outcomes of therapy in ‘real world’ practice
• Limit: biases preclude accurate comparisons, despite propensity scores, adjustment; follow-up often less precise, especially in subgroups
• Rapid increase in single- and multi-center observational registries outnumbering RCTs– Probability alone enables variable and unexpected
results
33
The CYPHER® Stent Clinical Trials Program: A Higher Level of Evidence
• Most extensive (>45,000 pts) “real-world” clinical trial experience to support the safety, efficacy and durability of its use across a broad spectrum of patient and lesion types
– Unmatched compliance in 4-year follow-up of pivotal RCTs (94% to 98% in CYPHER® Stent vs. BMS RCTs through ≥4 years)
– Longest duration of follow-up (5 years) of any DES program
• Individual randomized, clinical trials (RCTs) and systematic overview of RCTs support the efficacy benefit and comparable safety of CYPHER® Stent vs. BMS, vs. other DES
– Cordis presentations of meta-analyses are limited to the highest level of evidence (i.e., ACC/AHA/ESC Level 1A Evidence)
• Extensive evaluation in broad range of patients further shows consistency in efficacy and safety results
The CYPHERThe CYPHER®® Stent is indicated for Stent is indicated for de novode novo lesions of length lesions of length ≤≤ 30 mm in native coronary arteries with a RVD 30 mm in native coronary arteries with a RVD ≥≥ 2.5 to 2.5 to ≤≤ 3.5 mm3.5 mm
4
TVF (%)
MACE (%)
TVR (%)
TLR (%)
Event
14.112.1
13.312.1
14.712.3
14.912.5
Control-Sirolimus@ 5 yrs
Control-Sirolimus@ 9 mos
SIRIUS – Changes in Clinical Events (Control-Sirolimus) @ 9 mos and 5 yrs
∆∆
∆∆
∆∆
∆∆
∆∆
∆∆
∆∆
∆∆
For all clinical endpoints, there is an increase For all clinical endpoints, there is an increase in the difference between control and sirolimus in the difference between control and sirolimus
event rates from 9 mos to 5 yrs! event rates from 9 mos to 5 yrs! Leon et al. ACC 2007
55 Pooled E-SIRIUS, C-SIRIUS, SIRIUS, RAVEL TrialsCumulative Incidence of Stent Thrombosis to Latest Follow-up (4-5 Years, 4 Trials)
SESSES1.2%1.2%
BMSBMS0.6%0.6%
pp--ValueValue0.2160.216
Data between 4 and 5 years and beyond are from the RAVEL and SIRData between 4 and 5 years and beyond are from the RAVEL and SIRIUS TrialsIUS Trials
ProtocolProtocol
BMSBMSSESSES
SESSES1.7%1.7%
BMSBMS1.9%1.9%
pp--ValueValue0.7030.703
SESSES4.1%4.1%
BMSBMS5.1%5.1%
pp--ValueValue0.7950.795
Definite or Definite or Probable ARCProbable ARC
Any ARCAny ARC
SESSES1.4%1.4%
BMSBMS1.0%1.0%
pp--ValueValue0.4960.496
Definite ARCDefinite ARC
••These studies were not individually or collectively powered to aThese studies were not individually or collectively powered to assess differences in the rates of rare events, such as stent thrssess differences in the rates of rare events, such as stent thrombosisombosis
6
Dedicated Trials with CYPHER® Stent in Specific Patient/Lesion Types
Single, De Novo
LongLesions
SmallVessels
DM
MVD
ISR
CTO
Bifurcations
AMI
LeftMain
DirectStenting
Stairway to Evidence-Based Medicine
RAVEL, SIRIUS, REALITY, ENDEAVOR III
DIRECT
TYPHOONSTRATEGYSESAMIMISSIONPROSIT
Park LLPark LL 2
SVELTE,SIRIUS 2.25SES-SMARTPache, et al.ISAR-SMART 3
PORTO IDECODESCORPIUSDIABETES, CARDIA*ISAR-DIABETES
ACROSS*PRISON II
TROPICALSISRRIBS IIISAR-DESIRE
ARTS-2
PRE-COMBAT*
SIRIUS-BIFNordic PCI
Differing Complexity
* Trials have not been presented/published
Randomized Controlled Trial (RCT) vs. BMS, Brachytherapy, or POBAProspective NON-RCTs RCTs VS. DES
SIRTAX, BASKET, and TAXi (All-Comers), Z
hang, et al.
E-SIRIUS,
C-SIRIUS
SCANDSTENT, CORPAL, Cervinka, et al. (high-ris
k)SVG
RRISC
17 RCTs:SES vs. BMS
N=5,602
13 RCTs SES vs. PES
n = 7,917
7
7
0.0%
0.2%
0.4%
0.6%
0.8%
1.0%
0 180 360 540 720
ARC Definite / ProbableARC Definite / Probable
30 Days 6 Mos. 1 Yr. 1.5 Yrs. 2 Yrs 30 Days 6 Mos. 1 Yr. 1.5 Yrs. 2 Yrs n of pts 0.36% 0.55% 0.62% 0.73% 0.73%n of pts 0.36% 0.55% 0.62% 0.73% 0.73%at risk 6816 6483 6057 5561 1745 1264at risk 6816 6483 6057 5561 1745 1264
FollowFollow--up interval ( Days)up interval ( Days)Slide used with permission from Dr. Takeshi Kimura
Stent Thrombosis in the JStent Thrombosis in the J--CYPHER RegistryCYPHER Registry
Cum
ulat
ive
Inci
denc
e R
ate(
%)
Cum
ulat
ive
Inci
denc
e R
ate(
%)
8
Type of Stent Thrombosis (KType of Stent Thrombosis (K--M)M)
Risk RatioRisk RatioFavours SESFavours SES Favours PESFavours PES
SIRPACT MetaSIRPACT Meta--analysis of CYPHER vs. Taxus RCTsanalysis of CYPHER vs. Taxus RCTsSignificantly Lower TLR with CYPHERSignificantly Lower TLR with CYPHER
WindeckerWindecker S., et al., TCT 2005; Poster Presentation.S., et al., TCT 2005; Poster Presentation.
1010
Source: A. Kastrati, FDA Panel Presentation, Washington, DC, December 2006
Kastrati, et al., MetaKastrati, et al., Meta--analysis of the CYPHERanalysis of the CYPHER®® Stent vs. the Stent vs. the Taxus Stent RCTsTaxus Stent RCTsSignificantly Lower MACE with the CYPHERSignificantly Lower MACE with the CYPHER®® StentStent
N=5,074. Mean follow-up 25.1 months
FDA has not made any determination as to the safety & efficacy of the CYPHER® Stent in people with diabetes, ISR, small vessels, long lesions
1111
A. Kastrati, FDA Panel Presentation, Washington, DC, December 2006N=5,074. Mean follow-up 25.1 months
Kastrati, et al., MetaKastrati, et al., Meta--analysis of the Cypheranalysis of the Cypher®® Stent vs. the Stent vs. the Taxus Stent RCTsTaxus Stent RCTs
FDA has not made any determination as to the safety & efficacy of the CYPHER® Stent in people with diabetes, ISR, small vessels, long lesions
Log rank p-valuesSES vs. BMS p=0.033SES vs. PES p=0.010PES vs. BMS p=0.52
2514844222730
2488840221190Group 0
BMS 2428SES 866PES 2835 2514
844222730
2488840221190Group 0
BMS 2428SES 866PES 2835
DaemenDaemen, , SerruysSerruys et al. Personal Communicationet al. Personal Communication
"Registry data alone do not provide a reliable basis for direct comparison among treatments. These registry data should be considered in conjunction with existing data from other registries and randomized controlled trials."
15
Unadjusted Cumulative Incidence of Death and MI (Single Stent)
Adapted from: Lagerqvist B., Wallentin L., FDA Panel Hearing, Dec 7 2006.
1616
SCAAR (Death/MI: One Stent)SCAAR (Death/MI: One Stent)Swedish Coronary Angiography and Angioplasty RegistrySwedish Coronary Angiography and Angioplasty Registry
Source: L. Wallentin, FDA Panel Presentation, Washington, DC, December 2006
* adjustment for baseline differences does not affect the trends: dotted vs. solid lines"Registry data alone do not provide a reliable basis for direct comparison among treatments. These registry data should be considered in conjunction with existing data from other registries and randomized controlled trials."
17
ARTS II - Death/CVA/MIs up to 3 years
Time (Months)
Sur
viva
l (%
)
1009590858075706560
- ARTS II
- ARTS I CABG
- ARTS I PCI
0 6 12 18 24 30 36
92.0%89.1%87.2%
P (log rank) =0.07 between ARTS II and ARTS I-CABG
P (log rank) =0.004 between ARTS II and ARTS I-PCI
Serruys et al. ACC 2007
Cordis and Conor Clinical Trials ProgramInnovate, Inform, Adapt
√√√OUSFIH C-Sirolimus
√√√US/OUSSIRIUS, 10 RCT, MATRIX Trial Extension
√*
√*
√
APT
EfficacySafetyProgram
√√√√OUSSymBio
US/OUS
OUS
US/OUS
US/Japan
OUS
Geography
√√√√√IIE (eg, ACROSS)
√√√√Corio
√√√√CoStar II
√*√√√*ELITE
√√√E-Select
Expanded Indications
LateEarlyLateEarly
*Includes PMS Registries
CYPHER® ELITE™ Stent
•CYPHER® Elite™Stent will feature a new stent design and advanced SDS
SDS
Stent Design
Stent Material
Drug
• Highly Deliverable Sonic SDS
– New design and technologies– Optimized for deliverability and
profile from tip through hub
• Redesigned Platform – New level of flexibility and conformability– Designed for uniform coverage at every
vessel size
• Stainless Steel– High Strength– Long record of Biocompatibility
• Proven Drug and Release Kinetics– Safe, effective Sirolimus – Moderate release profile
ELITE
~1750 Patients≤2 Vessel De novo Coronary Lesions ≥ 2.25mm to ≤ 4.0mm, Length ≤ 55 mm2:1 Randomization, Single Blind~70 Centers in United StatesTwo component, parallel approach
~1750 Patients≤2 Vessel De novo Coronary Lesions ≥ 2.25mm to ≤ 4.0mm, Length ≤ 55 mm2:1 Randomization, Single Blind~70 Centers in United StatesTwo component, parallel approach
Specifically Designed for Controlled Drug Delivery from a
Bioresorbable Polymer
Specifically Designed for Controlled Drug Delivery from a
Bioresorbable Polymer
Advanced DES Programs
Conor AMI, Diabetes, Heart Failure…Bioresorbable PLGA polymerMural sustained release of Sirolimus, Pro-healing therapies or otherLuminal burst release of Adenosine or other Reperfusion Injury drug
Conor AMI, Diabetes, Heart Failure…Bioresorbable PLGA polymerMural sustained release of Sirolimus, Pro-healing therapies or otherLuminal burst release of Adenosine or other Reperfusion Injury drug
25Driving Innovation and Advancing Patient Care:Driving Innovation and Advancing Patient Care:Cordis PipelineCordis Pipeline
New Entities Within CordisNew Entities Within CordisPartnering With and Enabling Interventional Cardiologists
Established as a center for
innovation to develop next generation
technology by partnering with physicians to
challenge today’s technology standards.
Established to provide clinical
resources to improve the training and procedural expertise of
physicians and health care providers
worldwide.
Conor Medsystems is the developer of next generation DES
and platform technologies that will provide new opportunities for cardiovascular
care and beyond.* Conor Medsystems,LLC is a part of the Johnson & Johnson Family of Companies and a separate legal entity within the company's cardiovascular franchise.
29
Cordis Clinical and Advanced Technology ProgramsLeveraging Expertise in Interventional Cardiology
• Clinical decision making regarding DES has become increasingly more reliant on availability of long-term outcomes data
• The CYPHER stent has demonstrated clinically meaningful, sustained benefit in reducing the need for repeat revascularizations in a wide array of clinical settings and lesion complexities
• Emerging evidence of differences in safety and efficacy between DES disprove notion of class effect
• Evolution of new DES technologies should ensure further improvement in patient safety and outcomes with potential for patient and lesion-specific DES (reservoir technology)
• Combination of new growth platforms, best in class product portfolio and developmental programs within Cordis intended to enable IC with most broadly based portfolio of cardiovascular solutions