Heart FailurePhase 4OPTIMISE-CRTNCT00489177
Optimal Programming to Improve Mechanical Indices, Symptoms and Exercise in Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy.
A Phase 4 study testing A and B in people with Heart Failure, run by University of Calgary at 1 site in Canada.
Trial summary
This international study is assessing if repeat adjustment of the timing between the three leads in a cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) defibrillator will increase the likelihood of benefit (symptoms and heart function) compared to usual device programming. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 18 years and older
- Conditions the study is for
- Heart Failure
- What is being tested?
- A and B
- Type of treatment
- Medical device
- Could I receive a placebo?
- Yes, some participants may receive a placebo
- How many people
- 461 participants
- Where
- 1 siteCanada
- Study dates
- Jun 2007to Nov 2012
- Phase
- Phase 4
- Are there results?
- None posted in the registry
Key requirements
Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.
- Ages 18 years and older
- All sexes
- No healthy volunteers
- Adult, Older adult
Who may be able to join
- CRT-D indications and be implanted with an SJM CRT-D device with VV timing and a compatible lead system.
- Able to complete a 6-minute hall walk with the only limiting factor to be fatigue or shortness of breath.
- Geographically stable and willing to comply with follow-up.
- Adequate echocardiographic images to measure LV end systolic volume.
Who cannot join
- Epicardial ventricular lead system.
- Ability to walk ≥ 450 meters in 6 minutes
- Limited intrinsic atrial activity (≤ 40 bpm).
- Persistent or permanent AF.
- 2° or 3° heart block.
- Life expectancy is less than 1 year.
- Patient is pregnant.
- Receiving IV inotropic agents.
Trial locations and contacts
1 site in 1 country.
About this study
This international study is assessing if repeat adjustment of the timing between the three leads in a cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) defibrillator will increase the likelihood of benefit (symptoms and heart function) compared to usual device programming. The hypothesis is that QuickOpt facilitated serial optimization of sensed atrioventricular (sAV), paced atrioventricular (pAV), and inter-ventricular (VV) timing in the initial 9 months following successful CRT will increase the rate of clinical response and structural remodeling at 12 months compared to usual care.
Read the detailed description
Cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) is primarily designed to synchronize the mechanical activity of the heart. While CRT is beneficial in average, a sizable proportion of patients do not clearly benefit from (respond to) CRT. Whether routinely optimizing the timing between the atria and ventricles (AV timing) and the timing between the left and right ventricles (VV timing) will significantly increase the likelihood of patients benefiting from (responding to) CRT is unknown.
The combination of simple and reliable measures of functional capacity (specific activity score [SAS] and 6-minute walk distance) with echocardiographic measures of left ventricular (LV) volume and ejection fraction (EF) is a practical way of defining response to CRT.
Based on surveys, most patients receiving CRT devices do not have formal optimization of AV and VV timing. This is largely because the usefulness of this is questionable and significant resources are required to perform detailed echo measurements.
A method for estimating optimal sensed AV (sAV), paced AV (pAV), and VV timing using intra-cardiac electrograms (I-EGM) has been developed (QuickOptTM) and offers a quick, simple and inexpensive means to optimize both CRT timing. However, the utility of QuickOptTM optimization is unproven.
Primary hypothesis. QuickOpt facilitated serial optimization of sAV, pAV, and VV timing in the initial 9 months following successful CRT will increase the rate of clinical response and structural remodeling at 12 months compared to usual care. Clinical response will be defined as a reduction in SAS of > 1 class or a 25% or larger improvement in 6 minute hall walk distance at 12 months versus baseline. Structural remodeling will be defined as a 15% or greater reduction in left LV end systolic volume or ≥ 5% absolute improvement in echo-derived LV EF at 12 months versus baseline.
Methods. Initially a sub-study of FREEDOM (NCT00418314). Now an independent trial. Double-blind randomized comparison of serial QuickOpt optimization of sAV, pAV, and VV timing (QuickOpt) versus usual care (Usual) in patients with highly symptomatic heart failure undergoing CRT implantation. Stratification by etiology of LV dysfunction will be undertaken. Serial optimization of sAV, pAV, and VV timing will be performed in the QuickOptTM group immediately post-randomization, and at 3, 6, and 9 months post-randomization. Final outcome will be assessed at 12 months post-randomization.
Statistical aspects. 450 patients (225 / group) will provide 85% power to detect a 15% absolute improvement in the rate of response to CRT with QuickOptTM versus usual care. The proportion of responders will be compared using a Mantel-Haenszel stratified analysis adjusted for lead position (anterior versus non-anterior) and using an intention-to-treat analysis.
Overview. Up to 50 sites in Canada, Europe, Asia and the United States will enroll patients over 36 months. Countries presently enrolling patients include: Canada, the United States, Switzerland, Italy, Belgium, Denmark, Austria, France, Spain, the United Kingdom, the Netherlands, China, Hong Kong and Japan.
- Conditions
- Heart Failure
- Being tested
- A, B
- Keywords
- cardiac resynchronization therapy, response, Defibrillators
- Medical subject headings
- Heart Failure
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
ADevice
QuickOpt intra-cardiac electrogram optimization
BDevice
Single optimization in initial month post-implant
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| A | Active comparator | QuickOpt Receives: Device: A |
| B | Placebo comparator | Usual care Receives: Device: B |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Clinical benefit (reduction in SAS of at least 1 class or a 25% or larger improvement in 6 minute hall walk distance) plus structural remodeling (15% or greater reduction in left LV end systolic volume or ≥ 5% absolute improvement in echo-derived LV EF)
Measured: 12 months
Secondary outcomes (3)
Rate of late (12-month) versus early (3 month) response to CRT
Measured: 3 and 12 months
Changes in BNP
Measured: 3 and 12 months
Inter-/intra-ventricular dysynchrony
Measured: 3 and 12 months
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted21 Jun 2007 (estimated)
- Study startJun 2007
- Primary completionNov 2012
- Study completionNov 2012
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Other trials for Heart FailureStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- What the trial phases meanHow a treatment moves from first tests in people to approval.
More details
For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.
Study design
- Study type
- Interventional
- Phase
- Phase 4
- Primary purpose
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- Triple blind
- Who is masked
- Participant, Care provider, Outcomes assessor
- Enrolment
- 461 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- University of Calgary
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Collaborators
- Abbott Medical Devices
- Responsible party
- Principal investigator, Dr. Derek Exner, University of Calgary
- Investigators
- Derek V Exner, MD, MPH, Principal investigator, University of Calgary
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT00489177
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- 73-1726
- Acronym
- OPTIMISE-CRT
- Status last verified
- Nov 2015
- First submitted
- 20 Jun 2007
- Last updated
- 18 Nov 2015
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- No
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 18 Nov 2015. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Optimal Programming to Improve Mechanical Indices, Symptoms and Exercise in Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy.
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT00489177
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- OPTIMISE-CRT / 73-1726
- Conditions
- Heart Failure
- Keywords
- cardiac resynchronization therapy, response, Defibrillators
- Phase
- Phase 4
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Completed
- Enrolment
- 461 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- University of CalgaryUniversity, hospital or other
- Collaborators
- Abbott Medical Devices
- Study start
- Jun 2007
- Primary completion
- Nov 2012 (actual)
- Study completion
- Nov 2012 (actual)
- First posted
- 21 Jun 2007 (estimated)
- Results
- Not posted in the source record
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
This international study is assessing if repeat adjustment of the timing between the three leads in a cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) defibrillator will increase the likelihood of benefit (symptoms and heart function) compared to usual device programming. The hypothesis is that QuickOpt facilitated serial optimization of sensed atrioventricular (sAV), paced atrioventricular (pAV), and inter-ventricular (VV) timing in the initial 9 months following successful CRT will increase the rate of clinical response and structural remodeling at 12 months compared to usual care.
Detailed description
Cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) is primarily designed to synchronize the mechanical activity of the heart. While CRT is beneficial in average, a sizable proportion of patients do not clearly benefit from (respond to) CRT. Whether routinely optimizing the timing between the atria and ventricles (AV timing) and the timing between the left and right ventricles (VV timing) will significantly increase the likelihood of patients benefiting from (responding to) CRT is unknown.
The combination of simple and reliable measures of functional capacity (specific activity score [SAS] and 6-minute walk distance) with echocardiographic measures of left ventricular (LV) volume and ejection fraction (EF) is a practical way of defining response to CRT.
Based on surveys, most patients receiving CRT devices do not have formal optimization of AV and VV timing. This is largely because the usefulness of this is questionable and significant resources are required to perform detailed echo measurements.
A method for estimating optimal sensed AV (sAV), paced AV (pAV), and VV timing using intra-cardiac electrograms (I-EGM) has been developed (QuickOptTM) and offers a quick, simple and inexpensive means to optimize both CRT timing. However, the utility of QuickOptTM optimization is unproven.
Primary hypothesis. QuickOpt facilitated serial optimization of sAV, pAV, and VV timing in the initial 9 months following successful CRT will increase the rate of clinical response and structural remodeling at 12 months compared to usual care. Clinical response will be defined as a reduction in SAS of > 1 class or a 25% or larger improvement in 6 minute hall walk distance at 12 months versus baseline. Structural remodeling will be defined as a 15% or greater reduction in left LV end systolic volume or ≥ 5% absolute improvement in echo-derived LV EF at 12 months versus baseline.
Methods. Initially a sub-study of FREEDOM (NCT00418314). Now an independent trial. Double-blind randomized comparison of serial QuickOpt optimization of sAV, pAV, and VV timing (QuickOpt) versus usual care (Usual) in patients with highly symptomatic heart failure undergoing CRT implantation. Stratification by etiology of LV dysfunction will be undertaken. Serial optimization of sAV, pAV, and VV timing will be performed in the QuickOptTM group immediately post-randomization, and at 3, 6, and 9 months post-randomization. Final outcome will be assessed at 12 months post-randomization.
Statistical aspects. 450 patients (225 / group) will provide 85% power to detect a 15% absolute improvement in the rate of response to CRT with QuickOptTM versus usual care. The proportion of responders will be compared using a Mantel-Haenszel stratified analysis adjusted for lead position (anterior versus non-anterior) and using an intention-to-treat analysis.
Overview. Up to 50 sites in Canada, Europe, Asia and the United States will enroll patients over 36 months. Countries presently enrolling patients include: Canada, the United States, Switzerland, Italy, Belgium, Denmark, Austria, France, Spain, the United Kingdom, the Netherlands, China, Hong Kong and Japan.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- Triple blind (participant, care provider, outcomes assessor)
- Number of arms
- 2
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| A | Active comparator | Device: AQuickOpt |
| B | Placebo comparator | Device: BUsual care |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 18 years and older
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Not accepted
- Age groups
- Adult, Older adult
Key inclusion criteria (4 listed)
- CRT-D indications and be implanted with an SJM CRT-D device with VV timing and a compatible lead system.
- Able to complete a 6-minute hall walk with the only limiting factor to be fatigue or shortness of breath.
- Geographically stable and willing to comply with follow-up.
- Adequate echocardiographic images to measure LV end systolic volume.
Key exclusion criteria (8 listed)
- Epicardial ventricular lead system.
- Ability to walk ≥ 450 meters in 6 minutes
- Limited intrinsic atrial activity (≤ 40 bpm).
- Persistent or permanent AF.
- 2° or 3° heart block.
Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening; this overview does not establish that a patient qualifies. Full inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Interventions
| Intervention | Type | Arms |
|---|---|---|
| AQuickOpt intra-cardiac electrogram optimization | Device | A |
| BSingle optimization in initial month post-implant | Device | B |
Primary outcome
Clinical benefit (reduction in SAS of at least 1 class or a 25% or larger improvement in 6 minute hall walk distance) plus structural remodeling (15% or greater reduction in left LV end systolic volume or ≥ 5% absolute improvement in echo-derived LV EF)
Time frame: 12 months
3 secondary outcomes
Rate of late (12-month) versus early (3 month) response to CRT
Time frame: 3 and 12 months
Changes in BNP
Time frame: 3 and 12 months
Inter-/intra-ventricular dysynchrony
Time frame: 3 and 12 months
Results and safety
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 18 Nov 2015.
- European Heart Journal ( 2012 ) 33 ( Abstract Supplement ), 538Link provided by the sponsor.
Related trials for Heart Failure
RecruitingPhase 2/3
Efficacy, Safety, and Pharmacokinetics of Vericiguat in Pediatric Participants With Heart Failure Due to Left Ventricular Systolic Dysfunction (MK-1242-036)
Heart Failure, Left Ventricular Systolic Dysfunction
RecruitingPhase 1/2
HS235 Study in Overweight and Obese Participants With Combined Pre and Post-Capillary Pulmonary Hypertension Due to Heart Failure With Preserved Ejection Fraction
Pulmonary Hypertension, Heart Failure With Preserved Ejection Fraction
Active, not recruiting
Heart Failure Patient Management and Interventions Using Continuous Patient Monitoring Outside Hospitals and Real-world Data
Chronic Heart Failure, Heart Transplant Recipient
Enrolling by invitationObservational study
Multi-Scale Analysis of Phenotypes in Heart Failure (MAP-HEART)
Heart Failure
Not yet recruitingObservational study
Real-world Effectiveness and Safety of Savagen (Sacubitril/Valsartan) in Malaysian HFrEF Patients
Heart Failure With Reduced Ejection Fraction (HFrEF), Heart Failure
Referral and contact
AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals. Contact the study team or a site listed below; they decide who can take part. This study is not recruiting at the moment.
Derek V Exner, MD, MPH principal investigator
University of Calgary
1 site in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A Phase 4 study testing A and B in people with Heart Failure, run by University of Calgary at 1 site in Canada.
The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.
Who may be eligible to take part?
The sponsor lists 4 inclusion and 8 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.
Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?
The record says: finished, as of the sponsor's last update on 18 Nov 2015. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
Where is the study taking place?
The record lists 1 site in Canada. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.
What are the possible benefits and risks?
They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. Some participants in this study may receive a placebo. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.
What does this phase mean?
Phase 4 studies take place after a treatment is approved, to learn more about its long-term benefits and risks in everyday use.
Not every study follows the same path, and some studies (observational studies, device studies) have no phase.
Are results available for this study?
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?
The record lists no contact. The official record names the sponsor, who can be asked directly. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
What does the primary outcome measure?
Clinical benefit (reduction in SAS of at least 1 class or a 25% or larger improvement in 6 minute hall walk distance) plus structural remodeling (15% or greater reduction in left LV end systolic volume or ≥ 5% absolute improvement in echo-derived LV EF) (time frame: 12 months). It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.
Where can I read the original study information?
Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?
No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.
How often is this information updated?
AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 18 Nov 2015.