SORA

Advancing, promoting and sharing knowledge of health through excellence in teaching, clinical practice and research into the prevention and treatment of illness

Dronedarone vs Sotalol Among Patients With Atrial Fibrillation

Singh, JP; Wieloch, M; Reynolds, SL; Blomström-Lundqvist, C; Sandhu, AT; Camm, AJ; Kabadi, S; Pundi, K; Turakhia, MP; Boiron, R; et al. Singh, JP; Wieloch, M; Reynolds, SL; Blomström-Lundqvist, C; Sandhu, AT; Camm, AJ; Kabadi, S; Pundi, K; Turakhia, MP; Boiron, R; Din, N; Fan, J; Heller, CG; Leeming, RC; McKindley, DS; Sajedian, RM; Kowey, PR (2025) Dronedarone vs Sotalol Among Patients With Atrial Fibrillation. JACC: Clinical Electrophysiology, 11 (7). pp. 1531-1542. ISSN 2405-500X https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacep.2025.02.029
SGUL Authors: Camm, Alan John

[img] PDF Published Version
Available under License Creative Commons Attribution.

Download (825kB)
[img] Microsoft Word (.docx) (Supplemental Material) Supporting information
Download (465kB)

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Dronedarone and sotalol are antiarrhythmic drugs (AADs) recommended in similar populations per atrial fibrillation (AF) guidelines; however, comparative safety data are limited. OBJECTIVES: The goal of this study was to assess the safety of dronedarone vs sotalol for treatment of AF in AAD-naive patients. METHODS: This was a prespecified noninterventional meta-analysis of 4 retrospective observational cohort studies from 4 databases (Optum Clinformatics Data Mart, Merative MarketScan, Veterans Health Administration Electronic Health Record, and the Swedish National Patient Register) conducted by using one master protocol. Each analysis emulated the target trial using an active comparator (dronedarone vs sotalol), new user design with an as-treated approach. Primary outcomes were tested hierarchically for dronedarone vs sotalol: first for statistical significance of cardiovascular (CV) hospitalization, and then for statistical significance of ventricular arrhythmias. Propensity score matching (PSM) was used for confounding control, and negative control outcomes were used to assess residual confounding. Outcomes were evaluated by using Cox proportional hazards regression; meta-analysis was performed by using fixed effects models. RESULTS: The dronedarone and sotalol cohorts were well balanced within databases before and after PSM (after PSM mean age range: 62.5-70.9 years; mean CHA2DS2-VASc score range: 1.81-3.15). Negative control outcomes exhibited little-to-no evidence of residual confounding. Meta-analysis found significantly lower rates of CV hospitalization (pooled HR: 0.91; 95% CI: 0.85-0.97) and ventricular arrhythmias (pooled HR: 0.77; 95% CI: 0.69-0.85) with dronedarone vs sotalol. CONCLUSIONS: In this retrospective meta-analysis, dronedarone exhibited significantly lower rates of CV hospitalization and ventricular arrhythmias compared with sotalol. These findings provide real-world evidence to support selection of the most appropriate first-line AAD for rhythm control in patients with AF.

Item Type: Article
Additional Information: © 2025 The Authors. Published by Elsevier on behalf of the American College of Cardiology Foundation. This is an open access article under the CC BY license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Keywords: antiarrhythmic drugs, atrial fibrillation, dronedarone, meta-analysis, safety, sotalol, Humans, Anti-Arrhythmia Agents, Atrial Fibrillation, Databases, Factual, Dronedarone, Retrospective Studies, Sotalol, Treatment Outcome
SGUL Research Institute / Research Centre: Academic Structure > Cardiovascular & Genomics Research Institute
Academic Structure > Cardiovascular & Genomics Research Institute > Clinical Cardiology
Journal or Publication Title: JACC: Clinical Electrophysiology
ISSN: 2405-500X
Language: en
Media of Output: Print-Electronic
Related URLs:
Publisher License: Creative Commons: Attribution 4.0
Projects:
Project IDFunderFunder ID
UNSPECIFIEDSanofihttp://dx.doi.org/10.13039/100004339
PubMed ID: 40272320
Dates:
Date Event
2025-07-28 Published
2025-04-23 Published Online
2025-02-26 Accepted
Go to PubMed abstract
URI: https://openaccess.sgul.ac.uk/id/eprint/117809
Publisher's version: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacep.2025.02.029

Actions (login required)

Edit Item Edit Item