FORCE-ACS: Future Optimal Research and Care Evaluation

Sponsor
J.M. ten Berg (Other)
Overall Status
Recruiting
CT.gov ID
NCT03823547
Collaborator
Vereniging Hart-Beter (Other), St. Antonius Hospital (Other), ZonMw: The Netherlands Organisation for Health Research and Development (Other), AstraZeneca (Industry)
99,999
4
425.9
24999.8
58.7

Study Details

Study Description

Brief Summary

Rationale: Acute coronary syndrome (ACS) is the leading cause of death worldwide. To improve cardiovascular care, research is needed. Current guidelines are mainly based on well controlled RCT's, though evaluation of the impact of such RCT's in the real world is missing. In order to evaluate the impact and to overcome certain limitations of RCT's, a more practical approach is required. In this sense the use of nonrandomized observational studies is an important tool for determining the effectiveness of a therapy in routine clinical practice. One way to gain insight in characteristics of patients presenting in daily clinical practice, is to simply register these characteristics in a prospective manner with adequate follow up.

Objective: To create an ongoing registry for evaluation of clinical long-term impact of diagnostics, various treatments and devices used for ACS, for research and evaluation of quality of care and to evaluate and improve regional quality of care and cooperation between PCI and non-PCI centers.

Condition or Disease Intervention/Treatment Phase

    Detailed Description

    Rationale:

    Acute coronary syndrome (ACS) is the leading cause of death worldwide. To improve cardiovascular care, research is needed. Current guidelines are mainly based on well controlled RCT's, though evaluation of the impact of such RCT's in the real world is missing. Different clinical settings, non-ideal therapy adherence and broader patient populations in the real world than those studied in traditional RCTs may however provide different results. Furthermore, RCTs are intrinsically limited to answer questions about a specific population of interest, require substantial resource investments and may have limitations in investigating certain issues for ethical reasons.

    In order to evaluate the impact and to overcome certain limitations of RCT's, a more practical approach is required. In this sense the use of nonrandomized observational studies is an important tool for determining the effectiveness of a therapy in routine clinical practice. One way to gain insight in characteristics of patients presenting in daily clinical practice, is to simply register these characteristics in a prospective manner with adequate follow up. These characteristics may include clinical parameters but also possibly genetic information. Such a detailed registry is now possible due to improvements in information technology, as electronic patient records permit more (semi-) automatic and uniform capture of clinical parameters and outcomes. While observational studies may often be limited in their ability to account for confounding and bias due to patient selection, recent evidence has shown that by careful use of advanced statistical analytical methods and open reporting paradigms the quality of the level of evidence is excellent.

    Objectives:
    1. To create a database for future research, especially in the view of personalized medicine, and quality of care.

    2. To evaluate clinical long-term impact of medication, devices and diagnostic tools used for patients with an ACS.

    3. To test the efficacy and safety of any new drug/device versus the current treatment and the results of any drug/device in daily practice versus in trials

    4. To evaluate routine follow-up and current health-care pathways in patients with acute coronary syndrome in the Dutch healthcare system in terms of mortality, recurrent ischemic events, recurrent hospital admissions and quality of life

    5. To evaluate the use of risk scores (e.g. PRECISE-DAPT score, DAPT-score) to define the optimal duration of antiplatelet drugs

    6. To evaluate follow-up of patients referred to general practitioners as compared to of patients continued to be treated by cardiologists

    7. To increase adherence to current guidelines, taking into account the ongoing improvements of modern patient care and future changes of treatment guidelines in patients with ACS in order to improve secondary prevention in terms of reducing recurrent ischemic events and preventing adverse outcomes, such as bleeding

    Study Design

    Study Type:
    Observational [Patient Registry]
    Anticipated Enrollment :
    99999 participants
    Observational Model:
    Cohort
    Time Perspective:
    Prospective
    Official Title:
    Future Optimal Research and Care Evaluation: On the Way to "Personalized Medicine" With an Ongoing Registry of Patients in Daily Clinical Practice (Hart Beter/ FORCE-ACS)
    Actual Study Start Date :
    Jan 1, 2015
    Anticipated Primary Completion Date :
    Jun 30, 2050
    Anticipated Study Completion Date :
    Jun 30, 2050

    Outcome Measures

    Primary Outcome Measures

    1. Number of participants with [3 years]

      All-cause mortality Myocardial infarction Stent thrombosis Stroke Revascularisation All bleeding requiring medical evaluation

    Secondary Outcome Measures

    1. Number of participants with [3 years]

      mortality classification into cause-of-death (i.e cardiovascular, cardiac, vascular, cerebrovascular, death due to bleeding) bleeding classification according to different bleeding criteria (i.e. TIMI, BARC, GUSTO, PLATO) cessation (and duration) of antiplatelet therapy after ACS patient related outcome measures, as reported in quality of life questionnaires (e.g. SF-12, Seattle Angina Questionnaires)

    Eligibility Criteria

    Criteria

    Ages Eligible for Study:
    18 Years and Older
    Sexes Eligible for Study:
    All
    Accepts Healthy Volunteers:
    No
    Inclusion Criteria:
    • All patients presenting with ACS

    • Age ≥ 18 years

    Exclusion Criteria:
    • No oral or signed informed consent available.

    Contacts and Locations

    Locations

    Site City State Country Postal Code
    1 Gelre Ziekenhuizem Apeldoorn Gelderland Netherlands 7334 DZ
    2 Rijnstate Arnhem Arnhem Gelderland Netherlands 6815 AD
    3 Gelderse Vallei Ede Gelderland Netherlands 6716 RP
    4 Ziekenhuis Rivierenland Tiel Gelderland Netherlands 4002 WP

    Sponsors and Collaborators

    • J.M. ten Berg
    • Vereniging Hart-Beter
    • St. Antonius Hospital
    • ZonMw: The Netherlands Organisation for Health Research and Development
    • AstraZeneca

    Investigators

    • Study Chair: Johan Dekker, Drs., St. Antonius Hospital

    Study Documents (Full-Text)

    None provided.

    More Information

    Publications

    None provided.
    Responsible Party:
    J.M. ten Berg, Principle investigator, St. Antonius Hospital
    ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier:
    NCT03823547
    Other Study ID Numbers:
    • Hart Beter/FORCE-ACS
    First Posted:
    Jan 30, 2019
    Last Update Posted:
    Jan 30, 2019
    Last Verified:
    Jan 1, 2019
    Individual Participant Data (IPD) Sharing Statement:
    Undecided
    Plan to Share IPD:
    Undecided
    Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated Drug Product:
    No
    Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated Device Product:
    No
    Keywords provided by J.M. ten Berg, Principle investigator, St. Antonius Hospital
    Additional relevant MeSH terms:

    Study Results

    No Results Posted as of Jan 30, 2019