Pratt C M, Moye L A
Department of Internal Medicine, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, Texas.
Am J Cardiol. 1990 Jan 16;65(4):20B-29B. doi: 10.1016/0002-9149(90)91287-g.
The Cardiac Arrhythmia Suppression Trial (CAST) was designed to test the hypothesis that suppression of ventricular premature complexes (VPCs) in survivors of acute myocardial infarction would reduce arrhythmic death risk. Instead, a preliminary finding from the CAST was that the encainide and flecainide groups had a 3.6-fold increase in arrhythmic death compared with their placebo group. These unfortunate results were especially surprising in that the CAST population represented patients in whom the risk of arrhythmic death was only moderate and the risk of proarrhythmia was thought to be low. In contrast, the arrhythmic death rate of the CAST placebo group was unusually low, to the extent that it paralleled the arrhythmic death rate in previous clinical trials of patients surviving myocardial infarction with no ventricular arrhythmia. The excessive arrhythmic death rate in patients taking encainide and flecainide occurred over the duration of the CAST, implying a proarrhythmic effect that may be due to mechanisms that are unique in this population, and thus challenging traditional concepts of proarrhythmia. The existing knowledge regarding the proarrhythmic and negative inotropic effects of encainide and flecainide are reviewed. The previous pharmaceutical database experience with these 2 antiarrhythmic drugs exceeded 3,000 patients; however, there was no indication of this serious proarrhythmic effect. In contrast, the CAST population taking encainide and flecainide totaled only 725 patients who were followed for 10 months and had an extremely high proarrhythmic event rate. The reasons for this discrepancy are discussed. The results of the CAST emphasize the power of a randomized, placebo-controlled clinical trial to uncover previously unsuspected benefits or liabilities of traditional therapies.
心律失常抑制试验(CAST)旨在检验这样一个假设:抑制急性心肌梗死幸存者的室性早搏(VPC)可降低心律失常性死亡风险。然而,CAST的一项初步发现是,恩卡尼和氟卡尼组的心律失常性死亡较安慰剂组增加了3.6倍。这些令人遗憾的结果尤其令人惊讶,因为CAST研究人群代表的是心律失常性死亡风险仅为中度且促心律失常风险被认为较低的患者。相比之下,CAST安慰剂组的心律失常性死亡率异常低,低到与之前无室性心律失常的心肌梗死存活患者临床试验中的心律失常性死亡率相当。服用恩卡尼和氟卡尼患者的心律失常性死亡率过高现象在CAST研究期间一直存在,这意味着可能存在一种促心律失常效应,这种效应可能是由于该人群中特有的机制导致的,因此对传统的促心律失常概念提出了挑战。本文回顾了关于恩卡尼和氟卡尼促心律失常及负性肌力作用的现有知识。此前这两种抗心律失常药物的药学数据库经验涉及超过3000名患者;然而,并未显示出这种严重的促心律失常效应。相比之下,CAST中服用恩卡尼和氟卡尼的人群仅有725名患者,随访10个月,促心律失常事件发生率极高。本文讨论了这种差异的原因。CAST的结果强调了随机、安慰剂对照临床试验在揭示传统疗法先前未被怀疑的益处或危害方面的作用。