Explore the vast range of titles available.

Four new oral anticoagulants compare favourably with warfarin for stroke prevention in patients with atrial fibrillation; however, the balance between efficacy and safety in subgroups needs better definition. We aimed to assess the relative benefit of new oral anticoagulants in key subgroups, and the effects on important secondary outcomes. We searched Medline from Jan 1, 2009, to Nov 19, 2013, limiting searches to phase 3, randomised trials of patients with atrial fibrillation who were randomised to receive new oral anticoagulants or warfarin, and trials in which both efficacy and safety outcomes were reported. We did a prespecified meta-analysis of all 71 683 participants included in the RE-LY, ROCKET AF, ARISTOTLE, and ENGAGE AF–TIMI 48 trials. The main outcomes were stroke and systemic embolic events, ischaemic stroke, haemorrhagic stroke, all-cause mortality, myocardial infarction, major bleeding, intracranial haemorrhage, and gastrointestinal bleeding. We calculated relative risks (RRs) and 95% CIs for each outcome. We did subgroup analyses to assess whether differences in patient and trial characteristics affected outcomes. We used a random-effects model to compare pooled outcomes and tested for heterogeneity. 42 411 participants received a new oral anticoagulant and 29 272 participants received warfarin. New oral anticoagulants significantly reduced stroke or systemic embolic events by 19% compared with warfarin (RR 0·81, 95% CI 0·73–0·91; p<0·0001), mainly driven by a reduction in haemorrhagic stroke (0·49, 0·38–0·64; p<0·0001). New oral anticoagulants also significantly reduced all-cause mortality (0·90, 0·85–0·95; p=0·0003) and intracranial haemorrhage (0·48, 0·39–0·59; p<0·0001), but increased gastrointestinal bleeding (1·25, 1·01–1·55; p=0·04). We noted no heterogeneity for stroke or systemic embolic events in important subgroups, but there was a greater relative reduction in major bleeding with new oral anticoagulants when the centre-based time in therapeutic range was less than 66% than when it was 66% or more (0·69, 0·59–0·81 vs 0·93, 0·76–1·13; p for interaction 0·022). Low-dose new oral anticoagulant regimens showed similar overall reductions in stroke or systemic embolic events to warfarin (1·03, 0·84–1·27; p=0·74), and a more favourable bleeding profile (0·65, 0·43–1·00; p=0·05), but significantly more ischaemic strokes (1·28, 1·02–1·60; p=0·045). This meta-analysis is the first to include data for all four new oral anticoagulants studied in the pivotal phase 3 clinical trials for stroke prevention or systemic embolic events in patients with atrial fibrillation. New oral anticoagulants had a favourable risk–benefit profile, with significant reductions in stroke, intracranial haemorrhage, and mortality, and with similar major bleeding as for warfarin, but increased gastrointestinal bleeding. The relative efficacy and safety of new oral anticoagulants was consistent across a wide range of patients. Our findings offer clinicians a more comprehensive picture of the new oral anticoagulants as a therapeutic option to reduce the risk of stroke in this patient population. None.

The benefit of oral anticoagulation in atrial fibrillation is based on a balance between reduction in ischaemic stroke and increase in major bleeding. We aimed to develop and validate a new biomarker-based risk score to improve the prognostication of major bleeding in patients with atrial fibrillation. We developed and internally validated a new biomarker-based risk score for major bleeding in 14 537 patients with atrial fibrillation randomised to apixaban versus warfarin in the ARISTOTLE trial and externally validated it in 8468 patients with atrial fibrillation randomised to dabigatran versus warfarin in the RE-LY trial. Plasma samples for determination of candidate biomarker concentrations were obtained at randomisation. Major bleeding events were centrally adjudicated. The predictive values of biomarkers and clinical variables were assessed with Cox regression models. The most important variables were included in the score with weights proportional to the model coefficients. The ARISTOTLE and RE-LY trials are registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, numbers NCT00412984 and NCT00262600, respectively. The most important predictors for major bleeding were the concentrations of the biomarkers growth differentiation factor-15 (GDF-15), high-sensitivity cardiac troponin T (cTnT-hs) and haemoglobin, age, and previous bleeding. The ABC-bleeding score (age, biomarkers [GDF-15, cTnT-hs, and haemoglobin], and clinical history [previous bleeding]) score yielded a higher c-index than the conventional HAS-BLED and the newer ORBIT scores for major bleeding in both the derivation cohort (0·68 [95% CI 0·66–0·70] vs 0·61 [0·59–0·63] vs 0·65 [0·62–0·67], respectively; ABC-bleeding vs HAS-BLED p<0·0001 and ABC-bleeding vs ORBIT p=0·0008). ABC-bleeding score also yielded a higher c-index score in the the external validation cohort (0·71 [95% CI 0·68–0·73] vs 0·62 [0·59–0·64] for HAS-BLED vs 0·68 [0·65–0·70] for ORBIT; ABC-bleeding vs HAS-BLED p<0·0001 and ABC-bleeding vs ORBIT p=0·0016). A modified ABC-bleeding score using alternative biomarkers (haematocrit, cTnI-hs, cystatin C, or creatinine clearance) also outperformed the HAS-BLED and ORBIT scores. The ABC-bleeding score, using age, history of bleeding, and three biomarkers (haemoglobin, cTn-hs, and GDF-15 or cystatin C/CKD-EPI) was internally and externally validated and calibrated in large cohorts of patients with atrial fibrillation receiving anticoagulation therapy. The ABC-bleeding score performed better than HAS-BLED and ORBIT scores and should be useful as decision support on anticoagulation treatment in patients with atrial fibrillation. BMS, Pfizer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Roche Diagnostics.

Effectiveness and safety of warfarin is associated with the time in therapeutic range (TTR) with an international normalised ratio (INR) of 2·0–3·0. In the Randomised Evaluation of Long-term Anticoagulation Therapy (RE-LY) trial, dabigatran versus warfarin reduced both stroke and haemorrhage. We aimed to investigate the primary and secondary outcomes of the RE-LY trial in relation to each centre's mean TTR (cTTR) in the warfarin population. In the RE-LY trial, 18 113 patients at 951 sites were randomly assigned to 110 mg or 150 mg dabigatran twice daily versus warfarin dose adjusted to INR 2·0–3·0. Median follow-up was 2·0 years. For 18 024 patients at 906 sites, the cTTR was estimated by averaging TTR for individual warfarin-treated patients calculated by the Rosendaal method. We compared the outcomes of RE-LY across the three treatment groups within four groups defined by the quartiles of cTTR. RE-LY is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00262600. The quartiles of cTTR for patients in the warfarin group were: less than 57·1%, 57·1–65·5%, 65·5–72·6%, and greater than 72·6%. There were no significant interactions between cTTR and prevention of stroke and systemic embolism with either 110 mg dabigatran (interaction p=0·89) or 150 mg dabigatran (interaction p=0·20) versus warfarin. Neither were any significant interactions recorded with cTTR with regards to intracranial bleeding with 110 mg dabigatran (interaction p=0·71) or 150 mg dabigatran (interaction p=0·89) versus warfarin. There was a significant interaction between cTTR and major bleeding when comparing 150 mg dabigatran with warfarin (interaction p=0·03), with less bleeding events at lower cTTR but similar events at higher cTTR, whereas rates of major bleeding were lower with 110 mg dabigatran than with warfarin irrespective of cTTR. There were significant interactions between cTTR and effects of both 110 mg and 150 mg dabigatran versus warfarin on the composite of all cardiovascular events (interaction p=0·036 and p=0·0006, respectively) and total mortality (interaction p=0·066 and p=0·052, respectively) with reduced event rates at low cTTR, and similar rates at high cTTR. The benefits of 150 mg dabigatran at reducing stroke, 110 mg dabigatran at reducing bleeding, and both doses at reducing intracranial bleeding versus warfarin were consistent irrespective of centres' quality of INR control. For all vascular events, non-haemorrhagic events, and mortality, advantages of dabigatran were greater at sites with poor INR control than at those with good INR control. Overall, these results show that local standards of care affect the benefits of use of new treatment alternatives. Boehringer Ingelheim.

In the Randomised Evaluation of Long-Term Anticoagulation Therapy (RE-LY) trial, dabigatran reduced occurrence of both stroke and haemorrhage compared with warfarin in patients who had atrial fibrillation and were at increased risk of stroke. We aimed to assess the effects of dabigatran compared with warfarin in the subgroup of patients with previous stroke or transient ischaemic attack. In the RE-LY trial, 18 113 patients from 967 centres in 44 countries were randomly assigned to 110 mg or 150 mg dabigatran twice daily or to warfarin dose adjusted to international normalised ratio 2·0 to 3·0. Median follow-up was 2·0 years (IQR 1·14–2·86), and the primary outcome was stroke or systemic embolism. The primary safety outcome was major haemorrhage. Patients and investigators were aware of whether patients received warfarin or dabigatran, but not of dabigatran dose, and event adjudicators were masked to treatment. In a predefined analysis, we investigated the outcomes of the RE-LY trial in subgroups of patients with or without previous stroke or transient ischaemic attack. RE-LY is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT00262600. Within the subgroup of patients with previous stroke or transient ischaemic attack, 1195 patients were from the 110 mg dabigatran group, 1233 from the 150 mg dabigatran group, and 1195 from the warfarin group. Stroke or systemic embolism occurred in 65 patients (2·78% per year) on warfarin compared with 55 (2·32% per year) on 110 mg dabigatran (relative risk 0·84, 95% CI 0·58–1·20) and 51 (2·07% per year) on 150 mg dabigatran (0·75, 0·52–1·08). The rate of major bleeding was significantly lower in patients on 110 mg dabigatran (RR 0·66, 95% CI 0·48–0·90) and similar in those on 150 mg dabigatran (RR 1·01; 95% CI 0·77–1·34) compared with those on warfarin. The effects of both doses of dabigatran compared with warfarin were not significantly different between patients with previous stroke or transient ischaemic attack and those without for any of the outcomes from RE-LY apart from vascular death (110 mg group compared with warfarin group, interaction p=0·038). The effects of 110 mg dabigatran and 150 mg dabigatran twice daily in patients with previous stroke or transient ischaemic attack are consistent with those of other patients in RE-LY, for whom, compared with warfarin, 150 mg dabigatran reduced stroke or systemic embolism and 110 mg dabigatran was non-inferior. Boehringer Ingelheim.

Inflammation has been associated with cardiovascular disease and the burden of atrial fibrillation (AF). In this study we evaluate inflammatory biomarkers and future cardiovascular events in AF patients in the RE-LY study. Interleukin-6 (IL-6), C-reactive protein (CRP) (n = 6,187), and fibrinogen (n = 4,893) were analyzed at randomization; outcomes were evaluated by Cox models and C-statistics. Adjusted for clinical risk factors IL-6 was independently associated with stroke or systemic embolism (P = .0041), major bleedings (P = .0001), vascular death (P < .0001), and a composite thromboembolic outcome (ischemic stroke, systemic embolism, myocardial infarction, pulmonary embolism and vascular death) (P < .0001). CRP was independently related to myocardial infarction (P = .0047), vascular death (P = .0004), and the composite thromboembolic outcome (P = .0001). When further adjusted for cardiac (troponin and N-terminal fragment B-type natriuretic peptide [NT-proBNP]) and renal (cystatin-C) biomarkers on top of clinical risk factors IL-6 remained significantly related to vascular death (P < .0001), major bleeding (P < .0170) and the composite thromboembolic outcome (P < .0001), and CRP to myocardial infarction (.0104). Fibrinogen was not associated with any outcome. C-index for stroke or systemic embolism increased from 0.615 to 0.642 (P = .0017) when adding IL-6 to the clinically used CHA2DS2-VASc risk score with net reclassification improvement of 28%. In patients with AF, IL-6 is related to higher risk of stroke and major bleeding, and both markers are related to higher risk of vascular death and the composite of thromboembolic events independent of clinical risk factors. Adjustment for cardiovascular biomarkers attenuated the prognostic value, although IL-6 remained related to mortality, the composite of thromboembolic events, and major bleeding, and CRP to myocardial infarction.

Warfarin reduces thromboembolic risks in atrial fibrillation (AF), but therapeutic durability remains a concern. We used clinical data from ORBIT-AF, a nationwide outpatient AF registry conducted at 176 sites with follow-up data at 6 and 12 months, to examine longitudinal patterns of warfarin discontinuation. We estimated associations between patient and provider characteristics and report of any warfarin discontinuation using discrete time proportional odds models. Of 10,132 AF patients enrolled in ORBIT-AF from June 2010 to August 2011, 6,110 (60.3%) were prescribed warfarin, had follow-up data, and were not switched to an alternative oral anticoagulant enrolled from June 2010 to August 2011. Over 1 year, 617 patients (10.1% of baseline warfarin users) discontinued warfarin therapy. Among incident warfarin users (starting therapy within 1 year of baseline survey), warfarin discontinuation rates rose to 17.1%. The most commonly reported reasons for warfarin discontinuation were physician preference (47.7%), patient refusal/preference (21.1%), bleeding event (20.2%), frequent falls/frailty (10.8%), high bleeding risk (9.8%), and patient inability to adhere to/monitor therapy (4.7%). In multivariable analysis, the factors most strongly associated with warfarin discontinuation were bleeding hospitalization during follow-up (odds ratio 10.91, 95% CI 7.91-15.03), prior catheter ablation (1.83, 1.37-2.45), noncardiovascular/nonbleeding hospitalization (1.77, 1.40-2.24), cardiovascular hospitalization (1.64, 1.33-2.03), and permanent AF (0.25, 0.17-0.36). Discontinuation of warfarin is common among patients with AF, particularly among incident users. Warfarin is most commonly discontinued because of physician preference, patient refusal, and bleeding events.

The detection of undiagnosed atrial tachycardia/atrial fibrillation (AT/AF) among patients with stroke risk factors could be useful for primary stroke prevention. We analyzed newly detected AT/AF (NDAF) using continuous monitoring in patients with stroke risk factors but without previous stroke or evidence of AT/AF. NDAF (AT/AF >5 minutes on any day) was determined in patients with implantable cardiac rhythm devices and ≥1 stroke risk factors (congestive heart failure, hypertension, age ≥75 years, or diabetes). All devices were capable of continuously monitoring the daily cumulative time in AT/AF. Of 1,368 eligible patients, NDAF was identified in 416 (30%) during a follow-up of 1.1 ± 0.7 years and was unrelated to the CHADS2 score (congestive heart failure, hypertension [blood pressure consistently >140/90 mm Hg or hypertension treated with medication], age ≥75 years, diabetes mellitus, previous stroke or transient ischemic attack). The presence of AT/AF >6 hours on ≥1 day increased significantly with increased CHADS2 scores and was present in 158 (54%) of 294 patients with NDAF and a CHADS2 score of ≥2. NDAF was sporadic, and 78% of patients with a CHADS2 score of ≥2 with NDAF experienced AT/AF on <10% of the follow-up days. The median interval to NDAF detection in these higher risk patients was 72 days (interquartile range 13 to 177). In conclusion, continuous monitoring identified NDAF in 30% of patients with stroke risk factors. In patients with NDAF, AT/AF occurred sporadically, highlighting the difficulty in detecting paroxysmal AT/AF using traditional monitoring methods. However, AT/AF also persisted for >6 hours on ≥1 days in most patients with NDAF and multiple stroke risk factors. Whether patients with CHADS2 risk factors but without a history of AF might benefit from implantable monitors for the selection and administration of anticoagulation for primary stroke prevention merits additional investigation.

Vitamin K antagonists (VKAs) are effective for stroke prevention in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) but are difficult to use. Dabigatran etexilate is a prodrug that is rapidly converted to the active direct thrombin inhibitor dabigatran. It is administered in a fixed dose without laboratory monitoring and is being compared with warfarin (international normalized ratio 2-3) in the RE-LY trial. Two doses of dabigatran (110 and 150 mg BID) are being evaluated. RE-LY is a phase 3, prospective, randomized, open-label multinational (44 countries) trial of patients with nonvalvular AF and at least 1 risk factor for stroke. Recruitment concluded with a total of 18,113 patients. Patients who were VKA-naive and experienced are included in balanced proportions. The primary outcome is stroke (including hemorrhagic) or systemic embolism. Safety outcomes are bleeding, liver function abnormalities, and other adverse events. Adjudication of end points is blinded to drug assignment. The trial is expected to accrue a minimum of 450 events with a minimum 1-year of follow-up. RE-LY is the largest AF stroke prevention trial yet undertaken. It is unique because it includes equal numbers of VKA-experienced and naive patients and evaluates 2 different dosages of dabigatran, which may allow tailoring of dosing to individual patient needs. The worldwide site distribution and broad range of stroke risk further increase the general applicability of the trial. Results are expected in 2009.

Oral anticoagulation (OAC) therapy reduces the risk of thromboembolic events associated with atrial fibrillation (AF), yet a substantial proportion of patients with AF are not prescribed OAC. The aim of this study is to describe the frequencies of and factors associated with OAC contraindications in contemporary clinical practice. We analyzed data from the ORBIT-AF study, a national, prospective, outpatient registry of incident and prevalent AF. Oral anticoagulation contraindications were uniformly collected at enrollment by site personnel using a predefined list. Baseline patient and provider characteristics were compared between participants with and without documented OAC contraindications. From June 2010 to August 2011, 10,130 patients 18 years or older with electrocardiographically documented AF were enrolled at 176 practices. Of these, 1,330 (13.1%) had contraindications documented at the baseline visit: prior bleed (27.7%), patient refusal/preference (27.5%), high bleeding risk (18.0%), frequent falls/frailty (17.6%), need for dual antiplatelet therapy (10.4%), unable to adhere/monitor warfarin (6.0%), comorbid illness (5.3%), prior intracranial hemorrhage (5.0%), allergy (2.4%), occupational risk (0.8%), pregnancy (0.2%), and other (12.6%). Among patients with reported contraindications, 30.3% were taking warfarin or dabigatran, as compared with 83.0% of those without reported contraindications. Besides “patient refusal/preference,” being labeled as having frequent falls or being frail was associated with the lowest OAC use among patients with high stroke risk. Contraindications to OAC therapy among patients with AF are common but subjective. Many patients with reported contraindications were receiving OAC, suggesting that the perceived benefit outweighed the potential harm posed by the relative contraindication.

To evaluate and validate the prognostic value of growth-differentiation factor 15 (GDF-15) beyond clinical characteristics and other biomarkers concerning bleeding and stroke outcomes in patients with atrial fibrillation in the RE-LY trial. GDF-15 was measured in samples collected at randomization in 8,474 patients with a median follow-up time of 1.9 years. Patients were stratified based on predefined GDF-15 cutoffs: group 1, <1,200 ng/L (the 90th percentile in healthy individuals); group 2, 1,200-1,800; and group 3, >1,800 ng/L (high-risk individuals). Efficacy and safety outcomes were compared across groups of GDF-15 in Cox models adjusted for baseline characteristics, cardiac (N-terminal pro–b-type natriuretic peptide, high-sensitive troponin T), inflammatory (interleukin 6, C-reactive protein) and coagulation (D-dimer) biomarkers, and randomized treatment. GDF-15 concentrations were <1,200 ng/L in 2,647 (31.2%), between 1,200 and 1,800 ng/L in 2,704 (31.9%), and >1,800 ng/L in 3,123 (36.9%) participants, respectively. Annual rates of stroke, major bleeding, and mortality increased with higher GDF-15 levels. The prognostic value of GDF-15 was independent of clinical characteristics for these outcomes. In models also adjusted for biomarkers, GDF-15 remained significantly associated with major bleeding (hazard ratio [95% CI] group 3 vs group 1 1.76 [1.28-2.42], P < .0005) and all-cause mortality (hazard ratio 1.72 [1.30-2.29], P < .0005). GDF-15 improved the c index of both the HAS-BLED (0.62-0.69) and ORBIT (0.68-0.71) bleeding risk scores. In patients with atrial fibrillation, GDF-15 is an independent risk indicator for major bleeding and all-cause mortality, but not for stroke. Therefore, GDF-15 seems useful as a specific marker of bleeding in patients with AF on oral anticoagulant treatment.