Atrial Fibrillation: In Search for the Optimal Target for Rate Control
NCT ID: NCT07135258
Last Updated: 2025-08-22
Study Results
The study team has not published outcome measurements, participant flow, or safety data for this trial yet. Check back later for updates.
Basic Information
Get a concise snapshot of the trial, including recruitment status, study phase, enrollment targets, and key timeline milestones.
NOT_YET_RECRUITING
PHASE4
200 participants
INTERVENTIONAL
2025-10-01
2027-10-01
Brief Summary
Review the sponsor-provided synopsis that highlights what the study is about and why it is being conducted.
Current clinical guidelines recommend a resting target heart rate of 80 to 100-110 beats per min (bpm). Such recommendations were based largely on findings of the RACE II Trial, the only study of its kind, which demonstrated noninferiority of the lenient versus a strict rate control approach. Despite merits of the study, interpretation of RACE II has been limited by its noninferiority design and the apparently stricter-than-predefined heart rate control in the "lenient" arm, rendering any genuine difference of superiority in either arm unknown. Application values of the RACE II study to patients with heart failure were also limited, because the constituent sample comprised mainly patients without heart failure at baseline.
Despite years of medical advances, therapeutic armamentarium available for AF patients decided for the rate control strategy had remained limited. Betablockers, nondihydropyridine calcium-channel blockers, and digoxin constitute the mainstay of armamentarium available for achieving rate control in AF. However, studies revealed that up to 30% of patients treated with betablockers, with or without digitalis glycoside, failed to achieve adequate rate control. On the other hand, a stricter rate control strategy is more frequently associated with side effects of medications, commonly bradycardia and hypotension. Furthermore, digoxin, with a narrow therapeutic range and precluded for use in significant renal impairment, was inconsistently associated with increased mortality.
Ivabradine is a specific funny current inhibitor, which blocks Hyperpolarization-activated Cyclic Nucleotide-gated cation channels (HCN) intra-cellularly and results in delayed diastolic depolarization in a use-dependent manner. Prior-believed to be exclusively expressed within the sinoatrial node, HCN was recently revealed to be also expressed in the atrioventricular node and throughout the myocardium. These invite a key clinical question as whether effects of ivabradine may extend beyond its conventional use.
Through promoting atrioventricular node refractoriness, ivabradine harbors a potential role in the ventricular rate control of symptomatic persistent AF. Ivabradine owing to its specific effect on heart rate reduction, without depressing cardiac contractility, should render it better tolerated than conventional agents with reduced risk of hypotension. Its use-dependent property may in theory also confer a low risk of bradycardia.
Indeed, experimental studies in animal models of persistent AF showed that ivabradine caused rate-dependent slowing of atrioventricular conduction and resultant ventricular rate reduction, without affecting atrial dominant frequency, arterial blood pressure or contractility. Research interest for its therapeutic repurposing is growing. Clinically, a role of ivabradine in ventricular rate control has been reported in cases and series. A small randomized, double-blinded, placebo-controlled trial showed that ivabradine reduced ventricular rate in patients with non-paroxysmal AF.
Therefore, this randomized, double-blinded, controlled, superiority, Phase III, investigator-initiated clinical trial aims to compare ivabradine and the convertional rate control agents with the expectation to generate important data on the novel role of ivabradine in achieving strict rate control in patients with non-paroxysmal AF. It will also provide unprecedented superiority trial data on any clinical benefits of a strict versus lenient rate control approach in AF management, with the use of ivabradine.
Related Clinical Trials
Explore similar clinical trials based on study characteristics and research focus.
Rate Control Therapy Evaluation in Permanent Atrial Fibrillation (RATE-AF)
NCT02391337
Catheter Ablation Versus Medical Rate Control for Atrial Fibrillation in Patients With Heart Failure
NCT00878384
Atrial Fibrillation (AF) Ablation to Prevent Disease Progression of AF-induced Atrial Cardiomyopathy in Women and Men
NCT06200311
Cardiac Resynchronization in Atrial Fibrillation Trial - a Pilot Study
NCT01850277
Application of "I-Anticoagulation"in Patients With Atrial Fibrillation
NCT06137794
Detailed Description
Dive into the extended narrative that explains the scientific background, objectives, and procedures in greater depth.
Conditions
See the medical conditions and disease areas that this research is targeting or investigating.
Study Design
Understand how the trial is structured, including allocation methods, masking strategies, primary purpose, and other design elements.
RANDOMIZED
PARALLEL
TREATMENT
TRIPLE
Study Groups
Review each arm or cohort in the study, along with the interventions and objectives associated with them.
Ivabradine
Ivabradine 5mg
Ivabradine + Usual Care
For patients in the ivabradine arm targeting for strict rate control, ivabradine is started at 5mg BID, and titrated at follow-up visits if needed, up to 7.5mg BID to aim at the target heart rate \<80bpm. Uptitration of other existing or additional conventional rate control agents will considered after maximally tolerated dose of ivabradine. Conversely, if not tolerated, or if resting heart rate is persistently \<50bpm, ivabradine will be reduced to 2.5mg BID, followed by reassessment.
Placebo
Matching placebo
Placebo + usual care
For patients in the lenient rate control arm, medications will be adjusted, bidirectionally as appropriate, with a maximum heart rate that is tolerable by patient which is at \<110bpm. Routine heart rate control agents included betablockers, nondihydropyridine calcium channel blockers, or digoxin. All patients will be prescribed a matching placebo (morphologically identical to the comparison arm: ivabradine) that contains pharmacologically inactive cellulose.
Interventions
Learn about the drugs, procedures, or behavioral strategies being tested and how they are applied within this trial.
Ivabradine + Usual Care
For patients in the ivabradine arm targeting for strict rate control, ivabradine is started at 5mg BID, and titrated at follow-up visits if needed, up to 7.5mg BID to aim at the target heart rate \<80bpm. Uptitration of other existing or additional conventional rate control agents will considered after maximally tolerated dose of ivabradine. Conversely, if not tolerated, or if resting heart rate is persistently \<50bpm, ivabradine will be reduced to 2.5mg BID, followed by reassessment.
Placebo + usual care
For patients in the lenient rate control arm, medications will be adjusted, bidirectionally as appropriate, with a maximum heart rate that is tolerable by patient which is at \<110bpm. Routine heart rate control agents included betablockers, nondihydropyridine calcium channel blockers, or digoxin. All patients will be prescribed a matching placebo (morphologically identical to the comparison arm: ivabradine) that contains pharmacologically inactive cellulose.
Eligibility Criteria
Check the participation requirements, including inclusion and exclusion rules, age limits, and whether healthy volunteers are accepted.
Inclusion Criteria
2. History of persistent or permanent AF (valvular or non-valvular). Persistent AF refers to sustained AF beyond 7 days. Permanent AF is defined as uninterrupted AF with duration of \>1 year with nil plan of restoration of sinus rhythm
3. A 12-leads electrocardiogram (ECG) at baseline with documented heart rate \>/= 80 bpm
4. Acceptance of rate control as the main management strategy, taking into consideration of recent clinical evidence, patient conditions and preference, as decided by clinical assessment prior to randomization
5. Provision of informed consent
Exclusion Criteria
2. Patients who were pregnant
3. Those who were not in persistent or permanent AF
4. Baseline heart rate \<80bpm on ECG
5. Pre-existing high grade atrioventricular block, or medically unfit for heart rate reduction as assessed by attending clinician prior to randomization
6. Hemodynamic instability, including those who require electrical cardioversion
7. Known hypersensitivity to ivabradine or medication components
8. Patients who do not accept rate control as mainstay of treatment strategy
18 Years
ALL
No
Sponsors
Meet the organizations funding or collaborating on the study and learn about their roles.
The University of Hong Kong
OTHER
Responsible Party
Identify the individual or organization who holds primary responsibility for the study information submitted to regulators.
CHAN Yap Hang
Clinical Assistant Professor
Locations
Explore where the study is taking place and check the recruitment status at each participating site.
Queen Mary Hospital
Hong Kong, , Hong Kong
Countries
Review the countries where the study has at least one active or historical site.
Central Contacts
Reach out to these primary contacts for questions about participation or study logistics.
Facility Contacts
Find local site contact details for specific facilities participating in the trial.
Other Identifiers
Review additional registry numbers or institutional identifiers associated with this trial.
UW 23-155
Identifier Type: -
Identifier Source: org_study_id
More Related Trials
Additional clinical trials that may be relevant based on similarity analysis.