Search

Background: The extent to which differences in results from Apixaban for Reduction in Stroke and Other Thromboembolic Events in Atrial Fibrillation (ARISTOTLE) and Rivaroxaban Once Daily Oral Direct Factor Xa Inhibition Compared with Vitamin K Antagonism for Prevention of Stroke and Embolism Trial (ROCKET) atrial fibrillation (AF)-the landmark trials for the approval of apixaban and rivaroxaban, respectively, for non-valvular AF-were influenced by differences in their protocols is debated. The potential influence of selection criteria on trial results was assessed by emulating these trials in data from the Global Anticoagulant Registry in the Field (GARFIELD)-AF registry., Methods: Vitamin K antagonist (VKA) and non-vitamin K oral antagonist (NOAC) users from GARFIELD-AF were selected according to eligibility for the original ARISTOTLE or ROCKET AF trials. A propensity score overlap weighted Cox model was used to emulate trial randomisation between treatment groups. Adjusted HRs for stroke or systemic embolism (SE) within 2 years of enrolment were calculated for each NOAC versus VKA., Results: Among patients on apixaban, rivaroxaban and VKA, 2570, 3560 and 8005 were eligible for ARISTOTLE, respectively, and 1612, 2005 and 4368, respectively, for ROCKET AF. When selecting for ARISTOTLE criteria, apixaban users had significantly lower stroke/SE risk versus VKA (HR 0.57; 95% CI 0.34 to 0.94) while no reduction was observed with rivaroxaban (HR 0.98; 95% CI 0.68 to 1.40). When selecting for ROCKET AF criteria, safety and efficacy versus VKA were similar across the NOACs., Conclusion: Apixaban and rivaroxaban showed similar results versus VKA in high-risk patients selected according to ROCKET AF criteria, whereas differences emerged when selecting for the more inclusive ARISTOTLE criteria. Our results highlight the importance of trial selection criteria in interpreting trial results and underline the problems faced in comparing treatments across rather than within clinical trials., Competing Interests: Competing interests: JC reports institutional grants and personal fees from Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Pfizer/BMS and Daiichi Sankyo and personal fees from Portola. KP has consultancies with Johnson & Johnson, Element Science, Artivion and Novartis. AO received a research grant from Pfizer and is Steering Committee Member and National Coordinator of the ENGAGE-AF (TIMI 48) study. BFJ received speaker honoraria from Boehringer, Sanofi, Aspen, Pfizer, Takeda and Astra Zeneca Jitendra Pal Singh Sawhney reports professional/advisory fees outside the submitted work from Pfizer, Astra Zeneca, Novartis, Sanofi, Torrent and Lupin. TWL has received research support from Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim and Pfizer. HG received honoraria from Bayer Australia, Eli Lilly Australia, Pfizer Australia and BMS Australia Shinya Goto was a recipient of quality personal fees from Jansen and Antos, and Phillips, fees from the American Heart Association as an Associate Editor for Circulation, and Steering Committee fees from Duke University. SH received personal fees from Bayer, BMS, Daiichi Sankyo, Pfizer, Sanofi. KAAF reports grants and personal fees from Bayer/Janssen and Astra Zeneca. PJ has served as a consultant or on an advisory board for Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, and Novartis. FV has received grants from Bayer Healthcare, and personal fees from Bayer Healthcare, BMS/Pfizer, Daiichi-Sankyo, and Boehringer-Ingelheim. AKK received personal fees and grants from Bayer AG, Sanofi S.A. and Anthos Therapeutics. JCLH, SV and REH report no conflicts of interest., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2024. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Background: Days alive out of hospital (DAOH) is an objective and patient-centered net benefit end point. There are no assessments of DAOH in clinical trials of interventions for atrial fibrillation (AF), and it is not known whether this end point is of clinical utility in these populations., Methods and Results: ROCKET AF (Rivaroxaban Once Daily Oral Direct Factor Xa Inhibition Compared With Vitamin K Antagonism for Prevention of Stroke and Embolism Trial in Atrial Fibrillation) was an international double-blind, double-dummy randomized clinical trial that compared rivaroxaban with warfarin in patients with atrial fibrillation at increased risk for stroke. We assessed DAOH using investigator-reported event data for up to 12 months after randomization in ROCKET AF. We assessed DAOH overall, by treatment group, and by subgroup, including age, sex, and comorbidities, using Poisson regression. The mean±SD number of days dead was 7.3±41.2, days hospitalized was 1.2±7.2, and mean DAOH was 350.7±56.2, with notable left skew. Patients with comorbidities had fewer DAOH overall. There were no differences in DAOH by treatment arm, with mean DAOH of 350.6±56.5 for those randomized to rivaroxaban and 350.7±55.8 for those randomized to warfarin ( P =0.86). A sensitivity analysis found no difference in DAOH not disabled with rivaroxaban versus warfarin (DAOH not disabled, 349.2±59.5 days and 349.1 days±59.3 days, respectively, P =0.88)., Conclusions: DAOH did not identify a treatment difference between patients randomized to rivaroxaban versus warfarin. This may be driven in part by the low overall event rates in atrial fibrillation anticoagulation trials, which leads to substantial left skew in measures of DAOH.

Background: Guidelines for patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) at high thromboembolic risk recommend oral anticoagulants (OACs) for preventing stroke and systemic embolism (SE). The reasons for guideline non-adherence are still unclear., Aim: The aim is to identify clinical, demographic and non-patient characteristics associated with withholding OAC in patients with AF at high stroke risk., Methods: Patients in the Global Anticoagulant Registry in the FIELD-AF, newly diagnosed with AF between March 2010 and August 2016, and with CHA 2 DS 2 -VASc Score≥2 (excluding sex), were grouped by OAC treatment at enrolment. Factors associated with OAC non-use were analysed by multivariable logistic regression., Results: Of 40 416 eligible patients, 12 126 (30.0%) did not receive OACs at baseline. Globally, OAC prescription increased over time, from 60.4% in 2010-2011 to 74.7% in 2015-2016. Country of enrolment was the major predictor for OAC withholding (χ 2 -df=2576). Clinical predictors of OAC non-use included type of AF (χ 2 -df=404), history of bleeding (χ 2 -df=263) and vascular disease (χ 2 -df=99). OACs were used most frequently around the age of 75 years and decreasingly with younger as well as older age beyond 75 years (χ 2 -df=148). Non-cardiologists (χ 2 -df=201) and emergency room physicians (χ 2 -df=14) were less likely to prescribe OACs. OAC prescription correlated positively with country health expenditure., Conclusions: Approximately one out of three AF patients did not receive OAC, while eligible according to the guidelines. Country of enrolment was the major determinant of anticoagulation strategy, while higher country health expenditure was associated with lower likelihood of withholding anticoagulation., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2023. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Background: Many patients with atrial fibrillation suffer from comorbid vascular disease. The comparative efficacy and safety of different types of oral anticoagulation (OAC) in this patient group have not been widely studied., Methods: Adults with newly diagnosed atrial fibrillation were recruited into the prospective observational registry, GARFIELD-AF, and followed for 24 months. Associations of vascular disease with clinical outcomes were analyzed using adjusted hazard ratios (HR) obtained via Cox proportional-hazard modeling. Outcomes of OAC vs no OAC, and of non-vitamin K antagonist OAC (NOAC) vs vitamin K antagonist (VKA) treatment, were compared by overlap propensity-weighted Cox proportional-hazard models., Results: Of 51,574 atrial fibrillation patients, 25.9% had vascular disease. Among eligible atrial fibrillation patients, those with vascular disease received OAC less frequently than those without (63% vs 73%). Over 2-year follow-up, patients with vascular disease showed a higher risk of all-cause mortality (HR 1.30; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.16-1.47) and cardiovascular mortality (HR 1.59; 95% CI, 1.28-1.97). OAC was associated with a significant decrease in all-cause mortality and non-hemorrhagic stroke, and increased risk of major bleeding in non-vascular disease. In vascular disease, similar but non-significant trends existed for stroke and major bleeding. A significantly lower risk of all-cause mortality (HR 0.74; 95% CI, 0.61-0.90) and major bleeding (HR 0.45; 95% CI, 0.29-0.70) was observed in vascular disease patients treated with NOACs, compared with VKAs., Conclusions: Atrial fibrillation patients with a history of vascular disease have worse long-term outcomes than those without. The association of NOACs vs VKA with clinical outcomes was more evident in atrial fibrillation patients with vascular disease., (Copyright © 2023 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: An unmet need exists to reliably predict the risk of intracranial hemorrhage (ICH) in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) treated with oral anticoagulants (OACs)., Hypothesis: An externally validated model improves ICH risk stratification., Methods: Independent factors associated with ICH were identified by Cox proportional hazard modeling, using pooled data from the GARFIELD-AF (Global Anticoagulant Registry in the FIELD-Atrial Fibrillation) and ORBIT-AF (Outcomes Registry for Better Informed Treatment of Atrial Fibrillation) registries. A predictive model was developed and validated by bootstrap sampling and by independent data from the Danish National Patient Register., Results: In the combined training data set, 284 of 53 878 anticoagulated patients had ICH over a 2-year period (0.31 per 100 person-years; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.28-0.35). Independent predictors of ICH included: older age, prior stroke or transient ischemic attack, concomitant antiplatelet (AP) use, and moderate-to-severe chronic kidney disease (CKD). Vitamin K antagonists (VKAs) were associated with a significantly higher risk of ICH compared with non-VKA oral anticoagulants (NOACs) (adjusted hazard ratio: 1.61; 95% CI: 1.25-2.08; p = .0002). The ability of the model to discriminate individuals in the training set with and without ICH was fair (optimism-corrected C-statistic: 0.68; 95% CI: 0.65-0.71) and outperformed three previously published methods. Calibration between predicted and observed ICH probabilities was good in both training and validation data sets., Conclusions: Age, prior ischemic events, concomitant AP therapy, and CKD were important risk factors for ICH in anticoagulated AF patients. Moreover, ICH was more frequent in patients receiving VKA compared to NOAC. The new validated model is a step toward mitigating this potentially lethal complication., (© 2023 The Authors. Clinical Cardiology published by Wiley Periodicals LLC.)

Aims: This study aims to describe both management and prognosis of patients with diabetes mellitus (DM) and newly diagnosed atrial fibrillation (AF), overall as well as by antidiabetic treatment, and to assess the influence of oral anticoagulation (OAC) on outcomes by DM status., Methods: The study population comprised 52 010 newly diagnosed patients with AF, 11 542 DM and 40 468 non-DM, enrolled in the GARFIELD-AF registry. Follow-up was truncated at 2 years after enrolment. Comparative effectiveness of OAC versus no OAC was assessed by DM status using a propensity score overlap weighting scheme and weights were applied to Cox models., Results: Patients with DM [39.3% oral antidiabetic drug (OAD), 13.4% insulin ± OAD, 47.2% on no antidiabetic drug] had higher risk profile, OAC use, and rates of clinical outcomes compared with patients without DM. OAC use was associated in patients without DM and patients with DM with lower risk of all-cause mortality [hazard ratio 0.75 (0.69-0.83), 0.74 (0.64-0.86), respectively] and stroke/systemic embolism (SE) [0.69 (0.58-0.83), 0.70 (0.53-0.93), respectively]. The risk of major bleeding with OAC was similarly increased in patients without DM and those with DM [1.40 (1.14-1.71), 1.37 (0.99-1.89), respectively]. Patients with insulin-requiring DM had a higher risk of all-cause mortality and stroke/SE [1.91 (1.63-2.24)], [1.57 (1.06-2.35), respectively] compared with patients without DM, and experienced significant risk reductions of all-cause mortality and stroke/SE with OAC [0.73 (0.53-0.99); 0.50 (0.26-0.97), respectively]., Conclusions: In both patients with DM and patients without DM with AF, OAC was associated with lower risk of all-cause mortality and stroke/SE. Patients with insulin-requiring DM derived significant benefit from OAC., (© 2023 The Authors. Diabetes, Obesity and Metabolism published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Background: There is uncertainty surrounding the use of direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) in patients with kidney dysfunction., Methods: Using the COMBINE AF (A Collaboration Between Multiple Institutions to Better Investigate Non-Vitamin K Antagonist Oral Anticoagulant Use in Atrial Fibrillation) database (data from RE-LY [Randomized Evaluation of Long-term Anticoagulation Therapy], ROCKET AF [Rivaroxaban Once Daily Oral Direct Factor Xa Inhibition Compared With Vitamin K Antagonism for Prevention of Stroke and Embolism Trial in Atrial Fibrillation], ARISTOTLE [Apixaban for Reduction in Stroke and Other Thromboembolic Events in Atrial Fibrillation], and ENGAGE AF-TIMI 48 [Effective Anticoagulation With Factor Xa Next Generation in Atrial Fibrillation-Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction 48]), we performed an individual patient-level network meta-analysis to evaluate the safety and efficacy of DOACs versus warfarin across continuous creatinine clearance (CrCl). A multivariable Cox model including treatment-by-CrCl interaction with random effects was fitted to estimate hazard ratios for paired treatment strategies (standard-dose DOAC, lower-dose DOAC, and warfarin). Outcomes included stroke and systemic embolism (S/SE), major bleeding, intracranial hemorrhage (ICH), and death., Results: Among 71 683 patients (mean age, 70.6±9.4 years; 37.3% female; median follow-up, 23.1 months), the mean CrCl was 75.5±30.5 mL/min. The incidence of S/SE, major bleeding, ICH, and death increased significantly with worsening kidney function. Across continuous CrCl values down to 25 mL/min, the hazard of major bleeding did not change for patients randomized to standard-dose DOACs compared with those randomized to warfarin ( P interaction =0.61). Compared with warfarin, standard-dose DOAC use resulted in a significantly lower hazard of ICH at CrCl values <122 mL/min, with a trend for increased safety with DOAC as CrCl decreased (6.2% decrease in hazard ratio per 10-mL/min decrease in CrCl; P interaction =0.08). Compared with warfarin, standard-dose DOAC use resulted in a significantly lower hazard of S/SE with CrCl <87 mL/min, with a significant treatment-by-CrCl effect (4.8% decrease in hazard ratio per 10-mL/min decrease in CrCl; P interaction =0.01). The hazard of death was significantly lower with standard-dose DOACs for patients with CrCl <77 mL/min, with a trend toward increasing benefit with lower CrCl (2.1% decrease in hazard ratio per 10-mL/min decrease in CrCl; P interaction =0.08). Use of lower-dose rather than standard-dose DOACs was not associated with a significant difference in incident bleeding or ICH in patients with reduced kidney function but was associated with a higher incidence4 of death and S/SE., Conclusions: Standard-dose DOACs are safer and more effective than warfarin down to a CrCl of at least 25 mL/min. Lower-dose DOACs do not significantly lower the incidence of bleeding or ICH compared with standard-dose DOACs but are associated with a higher incidence of S/SE and death. These findings support the use of standard-dose DOACs over warfarin in patients with kidney dysfunction., Competing Interests: Disclosures Drs Harrington and Carnicelli completed work for this while on T32 grant T32HL069749. Dr Hohnloser has received consulting fees from Abbott, Bayer Healthcare, Boehringer Ingelheim, Boston Scientific, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Cardiome, Gilead, Janssen, Johnson & Johnson, Pfizer, Portola, Sanofi Aventis, Servier, and Zoll, as well as lecture fees from Abbott, Bayer Healthcare, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Medtronic, Pfizer, Sanofi Aventis. Dr Fox has received grant support from Bayer and AstraZeneca and has served as a consultant for Bayer and Sanofi/Regeneron. Dr Hijazi receives research support from the Swedish Society for Medical Research (S17-0133), Hjärt-Lungfonden (the Swedish Heart-Lung Foundation [20200722]), and Uppsala University Hospital, Sweden, and reports lecture and consulting fees from Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Pfizer, and Roche Diagnostics. Dr Lopes has received research grants or contracts from Amgen, Bristol-Myers Squibb, GlaxoSmithKline, Medtronic, Pfizer, and Sanofi-Aventis; funding for educational activities or lectures from Pfizer and Daiichi Sankyo; and funding for consulting or other services from Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol-Myers Squibb, and Novo Nordisk. Dr Wallentin reports research support from Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Pfizer, and Roche Diagnostics. Dr Giugliano has received research support from Amgen, Anthos Therapeutics, Daiichi Sankyo, and Ionis; has received honoraria from Amgen, Centrix, Daiichi Sankyo, Dr. Reddy’s Laboratories, Medical Education Resources, Medscape, Menarini, Merck, Pfizer, SAJA Pharmaceuticals, Servier, Shanghai Medical Telescope, and Voxmedia; and has served as a consultant for Amarin, Amgen, Bayer, Boston Scientific, Caladrius, CryoLife, CSL Behring, CVS Caremark, Daiichi Sankyo, Esperion, Gilead, Hengrui, Inari, Janssen, Novartis, Paratek, Pfizer, PhaseBio Pharmaceuticals, and Samsung. K. Hua and Dr Hong report no conflicts.

Objective: There is a substantial incidence of stroke in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) not receiving anticoagulation. The reasons for not receiving anticoagulation are generally attributed to clinician's choice, however, a proportion of AF patients refuse anticoagulation. The aim of our study was to investigate factors associated with patient refusal of anticoagulation and the clinical outcomes in these patients., Methods: Our study population comprised patients in the Global Anticoagulant Registry in the FIELD (GARFIELD-AF) registry with CHA 2 DS 2 -VASc≥2. A logistic regression was developed with predictors of patient anticoagulation refusal identified by least absolute shrinkage and selection operator methodology. Patient demographics, medical and cardiovascular history, lifestyle factors, vital signs (body mass index, pulse, systolic and diastolic blood pressure), type of AF and care setting at diagnosis were considered as potential predictors. We also investigated 2-year outcomes of non-haemorrhagic stroke/systemic embolism (SE), major bleeding and all-cause mortality in patients who refused versus patients who received and patients who did not receive anticoagulation for other reasons., Results: Out of 43 154 AF patients, who were at high risk of stroke, 13 283 (30.8%) did not receive anticoagulation at baseline. The reason for not receiving anticoagulation was unavailable for 38.7% (5146/13 283); of the patients with a known reason for not receiving anticoagulation, 12.5% (1014/8137) refused anticoagulation. Diagnosis in primary care/general practitioner, Asian ethnicity and presence of vascular disease were strongly associated with a higher risk of patient refusal of anticoagulation. Patient refusal of anticoagulation was associated with a higher risk of non-haemorrhagic stroke/SE (adjusted HR (aHR) 1.16 (95% CI 0.77 to 1.76)) but lower all-cause mortality (aHR 0.59 (95% CI 0.43 to 0.80)) compared with patients who received anticoagulation. The GARFIELD-AF mortality score corroborated this result., Conclusion: The data suggest patient refusal of anticoagulation is a missed opportunity to prevent AF-related stroke. Further research is required to understand the patient profile and mortality outcome of patients who refuse anticoagulation., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2023. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Aims: To appraise all available antithrombotic treatments within or after 12 months following coronary revascularization and/or acute coronary syndrome in two network meta-analyses., Methods and Results: Forty-three (N = 189 261 patients) trials within 12 months and 19 (N = 139 086 patients) trials beyond 12 months were included for efficacy/safety endpoints appraisal. Within 12 months, ticagrelor 90 mg bis in die (b.i.d.) [hazard ratio (HR), 0.66; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.49-0.88], aspirin and ticagrelor 90 mg (HR, 0.85; 95% CI, 0.76-0.95), or aspirin, clopidogrel and rivaroxaban 2.5 mg b.i.d. (HR, 0.66; 95% CI, 0.51-0.86) were the only treatments associated with lower cardiovascular mortality, compared with aspirin and clopidogrel, without or with greater bleeding risk for the first and the other treatment options, respectively. Beyond 12 months, no strategy lowered mortality; compared with aspirin; the greatest reductions of myocardial infarction (MI) were found with aspirin and clopidogrel (HR, 0.68; 95% CI, 0.55-0.85) or P2Y12 inhibitor monotherapy (HR, 0.76; 95% CI: 0.61-0.95), especially ticagrelor 90 mg (HR, 0.54; 95% CI, 0.32-0.92), and of stroke with VKA (HR, 0.56; 95% CI, 0.44-0.76) or aspirin and rivaroxaban 2.5 mg (HR, 0.58; 95% CI, 0.44-0.76). All treatments increased bleeding except P2Y12 monotherapy, compared with aspirin., Conclusion: Within 12 months, ticagrelor 90 mg monotherapy was the only treatment associated with lower mortality, without bleeding risk trade-off compared with aspirin and clopidogrel. Beyond 12 months, P2Y12 monotherapy, especially ticagrelor 90 mg, was associated with lower MI without bleeding trade-off; aspirin and rivaroxaban 2.5 mg most effectively reduced stroke, with a more acceptable bleeding risk than VKA, compared with aspirin.Registration URL: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/; Unique identifiers: CRD42021243985 and CRD42021252398., (© The Author(s) 2023. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology.)

Aims: To describe outcomes of patients with chronic coronary artery disease (CAD) and/or peripheral artery disease (PAD) enrolled in the Cardiovascular Outcomes for People Using Anticoagulation Strategies (COMPASS) randomized trial who were treated with the combination of rivaroxaban 2.5 mg twice daily and aspirin 100 mg once daily during long-term open-label extension (LTOLE)., Methods and Results: Of the 27 395 patients enrolled in COMPASS, 12 964 (mean age at baseline 67.2 years) from 455 sites in 32 countries were enrolled in LTOLE and treated with the combination of rivaroxaban and aspirin for a median of 374 additional days (range 1-1191 days). During LTOLE, the incident events per 100 patient years were as follows: for the primary outcome [cardiovascular death, stroke, or myocardial infarction (MI)] 2.35 [95% confidence interval (CI) 2.11-2.61], mortality 1.87 (1.65-2.10), stroke 0.62 (0.50-0.76), and MI 1.02 (0.86-1.19), with CIs that overlapped those seen during the randomized treatment phase with the combination of rivaroxaban and aspirin. The incidence rates for major and minor bleeding were 1.01 (0.86-1.19) and 2.49 (2.24-2.75), compared with 1.67 (1.48-1.87) and 5.11 (95% CI 4.77-5.47), respectively, during the randomized treatment phase with the combination., Conclusion: In patients with chronic CAD and/or PAD, extended combination treatment for a median of 1 year and a maximum of 3 years was associated with incidence rates for efficacy and bleeding that were similar to or lower than those seen during the randomized treatment phase, without any new safety signals., (© The Author(s) 2022. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology.)

Importance: In the Cardiovascular Outcomes for People Using Anticoagulation Strategies (COMPASS) trial, there was a significant reduction in the adjudicated primary outcome among patients with stable atherosclerotic vascular disease randomized to dual pathway inhibition (rivaroxaban 2.5 mg twice daily plus aspirin 100 mg daily) vs aspirin monotherapy, but not with rivaroxaban 5 mg twice daily vs aspirin monotherapy. Whether the results are similar without adjudication is unknown., Objective: To examine the impact of dual pathway inhibition (with rivaroxaban plus aspirin) or rivaroxaban monotherapy compared with aspirin monotherapy on investigator-reported CV events and to understand the extent of concordance between investigator-reported and centrally adjudicated clinical events., Design, Setting, and Participants: This is a secondary analysis of the COMPASS trial, an international, double-blind, double-dummy, randomized clinical trial with a 3-by-2 partial factorial design that evaluated participants with stable atherosclerotic vascular disease receiving rivaroxaban plus aspirin, rivaroxaban monotherapy, or aspirin monotherapy. End points were collected by blinded site investigators and adjudicated by a blinded clinical end point committee. Data were analyzed from March 2013 through February 2017., Interventions: Participants received dual inhibition pathway (2.5 mg rivaroxaban twice daily plus 100 mg aspirin once daily), rivaroxaban monotherapy (5 mg twice daily), or aspirin monotherapy (100 mg once daily)., Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary efficacy outcome was a composite of cardiovascular (CV) death, stroke, or myocardial infarction (MI). Adjudicated and investigator-reported end points were compared., Results: A total of 27 395 patients (mean [SD] age, 68.2 [7.9] years; 78.0% men) were assessed, including 9152 patients randomized to dual pathway inhibition, 9117 patients randomized to rivaroxaban monotherapy, and 9126 patients randomized to aspirin monotherapy. Adjudication reduced the number of events by 10% to 15% for most end points. Among investigator-reported end points, dual pathway inhibition significantly reduced the rate of the primary efficacy outcome compared with aspirin alone (411 patients [4.5%] vs 542 patients [5.9%]; hazard ratio [HR], 0.75 [95% CI, 0.66-0.85]; P < .001), with similar reduction in adjudicated end points, (379 patients [4.1%] vs 496 patients [5.4%]; HR, 0.76 [95% CI, 0.66-0.86]; P < .001). Likewise, effects on ischemic end points were highly concordant (κ statistic = 0.94 [95% CI, 0.93-0.95] for the primary composite end point). Unlike with adjudicated outcomes, there was a significant reduction in the primary end point with rivaroxaban monotherapy vs aspirin monotherapy using investigator-reported events (477 patients [5.2%] vs 542 patients [5.9%]; HR, 0.88 [95% CI, 0.78-0.99]; P = .04) compared with adjudicated events (448 patients [4.9%] vs 496 patients [5.4%]; HR, 0.90 [95% CI, 0.79-1.03]; P = .12)., Conclusions and Relevance: This secondary analysis of the COMPASS trial found that whether assessed by blinded site investigators or adjudicators, dual pathway inhibition significantly reduced CV events among patients with stable atherosclerotic disease compared with aspirin plus placebo. These findings suggest that using investigator-reported events in blinded clinical trials may be a more efficient alternative to adjudication., Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01776424.

Aims: To determine whether the Global Anticoagulant Registry in the FIELD-Atrial Fibrillation (GARFIELD-AF) integrated risk tool predicts mortality, non-haemorrhagic stroke/systemic embolism, and major bleeding for up to 2 years after new-onset AF and to assess how this risk tool performs compared with CHA2DS2-VASc and HAS-BLED., Methods and Results: Potential predictors of events included demographic and clinical characteristics, choice of treatment, and lifestyle factors. A Cox proportional hazards model was identified for each outcome by least absolute shrinkage and selection operator methods. Indices were evaluated in comparison with CHA2DS2-VASc and HAS-BLED risk predictors. Models were validated internally and externally in ORBIT-AF and Danish nationwide registries. Among the 52 080 patients enrolled in GARFIELD-AF, 52 032 had follow-up data. The GARFIELD-AF risk tool outperformed CHA2DS2-VASc for all-cause mortality in all cohorts. The GARFIELD-AF risk score was superior to CHA2DS2-VASc for non-haemorrhagic stroke, and it outperformed HAS-BLED for major bleeding in internal validation and in the Danish AF cohort. In very low- to low-risk patients [CHA2DS2-VASc 0 or 1 (men) and 1 or 2 (women)], the GARFIELD-AF risk score offered strong discriminatory value for all the endpoints when compared to CHA2DS2-VASc and HAS-BLED. The GARFIELD-AF tool also included the effect of oral anticoagulation (OAC) therapy, thus allowing clinicians to compare the expected outcome of different anticoagulant treatment decisions [i.e. no OAC, non-vitamin K antagonist (VKA) oral anticoagulants, or VKAs]., Conclusions: The GARFIELD-AF risk tool outperformed CHA2DS2-VASc at predicting death and non-haemorrhagic stroke, and it outperformed HAS-BLED for major bleeding in overall as well as in very low- to low-risk group patients with AF., Clinical Trial Registration: URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier for GARFIELD-AF: NCT01090362, ORBIT-AF I: NCT01165710; ORBIT-AF II: NCT01701817., (© The Author(s) 2021. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology.)

Objective: In patients with newly diagnosed atrial fibrillation (AF), do baseline risk factors and stroke prevention strategies account for the geographically diverse outcomes., Design: Global Anticoagulant Registry in the FIELD-Atrial Fibrillation is a prospective multinational non-interventional registry of patients with newly diagnosed AF (n=52 018 patients)., Setting: Investigator sites (n=1317) were representative of the care settings/locations in each of the 35 participating countries. Treatment decisions were all determined by the local responsible clinicians., Participants: The patients (18 years and over) with newly diagnosed AF had at least 1 investigator-determined stroke risk factor and patients were not required to meet specific thresholds of risk score for anticoagulant treatment., Main Outcomes and Measures: Observed 1-year event rates and risk-standardised rates were derived., Results: Rates of death, non-haemorrhagic stroke/systemic embolism and major bleeding varied more than three-to-four fold across countries even after adjustment for baseline factors and antithrombotic treatments. Rates of anticoagulation and antithrombotic treatment varied widely. Patients from countries with the highest rates of cardiovascular mortality and stroke were among the least likely to receive oral anticoagulants. Beyond anticoagulant treatment, variations in the treatment of comorbidities and lifestyle factors may have contributed to the variations in outcomes. Countries with the lowest healthcare Access and Quality indices (India, Ukraine, Argentina, Brazil) had the highest risk-standardised mortality., Conclusion: The variability in outcomes across countries for patients with newly diagnosed AF is not accounted for by baseline characteristics and antithrombotic treatments. Residual mortality rates were correlated with Healthcare Access and Quality indices. The findings suggest the management of patients with AF needs to not only address guideline indicated and sustained anticoagulation, but also the treatment of comorbidities and lifestyle factors., Trial Registration Number: NCT01090362., Competing Interests: Competing interests: KAAF has received grants and personal fees from Bayer/Janssen and AstraZeneca and personal fees from Sanofi/Regeneron and Verseon. AJC: Institutional grants and personal fees from Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, BMS/Pfizer and Daichi Sankyo; SG has received Personal fees from Thrombosis Research Institute and the American Heart Association, grants from Sanofi, Pfizer, Ono, Bristol Myer Squibb, the Vehicle Racing Commemorative Foundation and Nakatani Foundation for Advancement of Measuring Technologies in Biomedical Engineering. SZG has received research support from Boehringer-Ingelheim, BMS, BTG EKOS, Daiichi, Janssen, NHLBI, and the Thrombosis Research Institute; has served as a consultant for Agile, Bayer, Boehringer-Ingelheim, BMS, Daiichi, Janssen and Zafgen. SH has received personal fees from Aspen, Bayer Healthcare, BMS/Pfizer, Daiichi-Sankyo, and Sanofi. YK: Research grant from Daiichi Sankyo and Boeringer Ingelheim. Personal fees from: Daiichi Sankyo, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bayer, Bristol Meyers and Pfizer; FM is a former employee of Bayer AG. SO: consultant/advisory board payments from Bayer Pharma AG, Bristol-Myers Squibb Korea, Boehringer-Ingelheim Korea, Pfizer Korea, Sanofi-Aventis, and St Jude Medical. JPSS: Personal fee from Pfizer, Astra Zeneca, Novartis, Sanofi & BMS; JPP: Reported grants for clinical research from Abbott, American Heart Association, Boston Scientific, Gilead, Janssen Pharmaceuticals, NHLBI, and Philips and serves as a consultant to Abbott, Allergan, ARCA Biopharma, Biotronik, Boston Scientific, Johnson & Johnson, LivaNova, Medtronic, Milestone, Oliver Wyman Health, Sanofi, Philips, and Up-to-Date. JS: Research grants from Bayer; personal fees from Amgen, Astra Zeneca, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, BMS/Pfizer, Novartis, Sanofi, Servier; Expert witness for Boehringer Ingelheim; AGGT has received personal fees from Bayer Healthcare, Janssen Pharmaceutical Research & Development, and Portola. FV has received grants from Bayer Healthcare; personal fees from Bayer Healthcare, BMS/Pfizer, DaiichiSankyo, and Boehringer-Ingelheim. AKK has received research support from Bayer AG and Sanofi; personal fees from Bayer AG, Pfizer, Janssen, Sanofi, Verseon and Anthos Therapeutics. All other authors have reported that they have no relationships relevant to the contents of this paper to disclose., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2022. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Background In event-driven clinical trials, study termination is based on accrual of a target number of primary efficacy events. For noninferiority trials in which superiority is conditionally examined, the ideal cohort in which to track event accrual is unclear. We used data from the ROCKET AF (Rivaroxaban Once Daily Oral Direct Factor Xa Inhibition Compared With Vitamin K Antagonism for Prevention of Stroke and Embolism Trial in Atrial Fibrillation) trial to determine the effect of primary efficacy-event tracking in the per-protocol cohort during the on-treatment period versus the intention-to-treat (ITT) cohort during the ITT period. Methods and Results ROCKET AF was terminated after accruing 429 primary efficacy events (stroke or systemic embolism) in the per-protocol cohort during the on-treatment period for noninferiority. We identified the date on which 429 events occurred in the ITT cohort during the ITT period. We performed noninferiority and superiority analyses based on hypothetical study termination on this date. ROCKET AF would have terminated 226 days earlier if events were tracked during the ITT period. Similar to the main trial findings, rivaroxaban would have met noninferiority versus warfarin for the primary efficacy end point (hazard ratio [HR], 0.77; 95% CI, 0.62-0.96; P <0.001). In contrast to the main trial findings, rivaroxaban would have met superiority for the primary efficacy end point (HR, 0.82; 95% CI, 0.68-0.99; P =0.038). In both termination scenarios, rivaroxaban was associated with a lower risk of intracranial hemorrhage and similar risk of other safety end points. Conclusions Clinical trial termination based on event accrual in the ITT cohort versus the per-protocol cohort may have important implications on trial results depending on rates of study drug discontinuation and event rates off treatment.

Background: Oral anticoagulation (OAC) in atrial fibrillation (AF) reduces the risk of stroke/systemic embolism (SE). The impact of OAC discontinuation is less well documented., Objective: Investigate outcomes of patients prospectively enrolled in the Global Anticoagulant Registry in the Field-Atrial Fibrillation study who discontinued OAC., Methods: Oral anticoagulation discontinuation was defined as cessation of treatment for ≥7 consecutive days. Adjusted outcome risks were assessed in 23 882 patients with 511 days of median follow-up after discontinuation., Results: Patients who discontinued (n = 3114, 13.0%) had a higher risk (hazard ratio [95% CI]) of all-cause death (1.62 [1.25-2.09]), stroke/systemic embolism (SE) (2.21 [1.42-3.44]) and myocardial infarction (MI) (1.85 [1.09-3.13]) than patients who did not, whether OAC was restarted or not. This higher risk of outcomes after discontinuation was similar for patients treated with vitamin K antagonists (VKAs) and direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) (p for interactions range = 0.145-0.778). Bleeding history (1.43 [1.14-1.80]), paroxysmal vs. persistent AF (1.15 [1.02-1.29]), emergency room care setting vs. office (1.37 [1.18-1.59]), major, clinically relevant nonmajor, and minor bleeding (10.02 [7.19-13.98], 2.70 [2.24-3.25] and 1.90 [1.61-2.23]), stroke/SE (4.09 [2.55-6.56]), MI (2.74 [1.69-4.43]), and left atrial appendage procedures (4.99 [1.82-13.70]) were predictors of discontinuation. Age (0.84 [0.81-0.88], per 10-year increase), history of stroke/transient ischemic attack (0.81 [0.71-0.93]), diabetes (0.88 [0.80-0.97]), weeks from AF onset to treatment (0.96 [0.93-0.99] per week), and permanent vs. persistent AF (0.73 [0.63-0.86]) were predictors of lower discontinuation rates., Conclusions: In GARFIELD-AF, the rate of discontinuation was 13.0%. Discontinuation for ≥7 consecutive days was associated with significantly higher all-cause mortality, stroke/SE, and MI risk. Caution should be exerted when considering any OAC discontinuation beyond 7 days., (© 2021 The Authors. Journal of Thrombosis and Haemostasis published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of International Society on Thrombosis and Haemostasis.)

Background The COMPASS (Cardiovascular Outcomes for People Using Anticoagulation Strategies) trial showed that rivaroxaban plus aspirin reduced major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) in patients with chronic coronary artery disease (CAD) and/or peripheral artery disease (PAD). We explored whether CHA 2 DS 2 -VASc or CHADS 2 scores, well-validated tools for assessing risk of thromboembolic events in atrial fibrillation, can identify vascular patients at highest risk of recurrent events who may derive greatest benefits of treatment. Methods Predictive accuracies of the CHA 2 DS 2 -VASc and CHADS 2 scores for MACE, were assessed in this analysis of the COMPASS trial. Kaplan-Meier estimates of cumulative risk were used to compare the effects of rivaroxaban plus aspirin (n = 9152) with aspirin alone (n = 9126) according to risk scores. Results High CHA 2 DS 2 -VASc (6-9) or CHADS 2 (3-6) scores were associated with over three times greater absolute risk of MACE compared with CHA 2 DS 2 -VASc score of 1-2 or CHADS 2 score of 0. The effects of rivaroxaban plus aspirin compared with aspirin alone were consistent across CHA 2 DS 2 -VASc and CHADS 2 score categories for MACE, bleeding and net clinical benefit, with greatest reduction in MACE observed in patients treated for 30 months with highest CHADS 2 score (3-6) (hazard ratio = 0.67, 95% CI: 0.53-0.86, p = 0.0012, 25 events per 1000 patients prevented). Conclusion The CHA 2 DS 2 -VASc and CHADS 2 scores can be used in patients with chronic CAD and/or PAD to identify patients who are at highest risk of MACE. Those identified at highest risk by CHADS 2 scores had greatest benefit from dual pathway inhibition with rivaroxaban plus aspirin. Clinical Trial Registration: NCT01776424., (Copyright © 2021. Published by Elsevier B.V.)

Background: ROCKET AF demonstrated the efficacy and safety of rivaroxaban compared with warfarin for the prevention of stroke and systemic embolism (SE) in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF). We examined baseline characteristics and outcomes in patients enrolled in Latin America compared with the rest of the world (ROW)., Methods: ROCKET AF enrolled 14,264 patients from 45 countries. Of these, 1,878 (13.2%) were from 7 Latin American countries. The clinical characteristics and outcomes (adjusted by baseline characteristics) of these patients were compared with 12,293 patients from the ROW. Treatment outcomes of rivaroxaban compared with warfarin were also stratified by region., Results: The annual rate of stroke/SE was similar in those from Latin American and ROW (P= .63), but all-cause and vascular death were significantly higher than in ROW (HR 1.40, 95% CI 1.20-1.64; HR 1.38, 95% CI 1.14-1.68; P< .001). Rates of major or nonmajor clinically relevant bleeding tended to be lower in Latin America (HR 0.89, 95% CI 0.80-1.0; P= .05). Rates of stroke and/or SE were similar with rivaroxaban and warfarin in patients from Latin America and ROW (HR 0.83, 95% CI 0.54-1.29 vs HR 0.89, 95% CI 0.75-1.07; interaction P= .77)., Conclusions: Patients with AF in Latin America had similar rates of stroke and/or SE, higher rates of vascular death, and lower rates of bleeding compared with patients in the ROW. The effect of rivaroxaban compared with warfarin in Latin America was similar to the ROW. Further studies analyzing patient- and country-specific determinants of these regional differences in Latin America are warranted., (Copyright © 2021. Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Aims: The COMPASS trial demonstrated that the combination of rivaroxaban 2.5 mg twice daily and aspirin 100 mg once daily compared with aspirin 100 mg once daily reduced major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) in patients with chronic coronary artery disease or peripheral artery disease by 24% during a mean follow-up of 23 months. We explored whether this effect varies by sex., Methods and Results: The effects were examined in women and men using log-rank tests and Kaplan-Meier curve. Hazard ratios (HRs) and corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were obtained from stratified Cox proportional hazards models to explore subgroup effects including subgroup of women and men according to baseline modified REACH risk score. Of 27 395 patients randomized, 18 278 were allocated to receive rivaroxaban plus aspirin (n = 9152) or aspirin alone (n = 9126), and of these, 22.1% were women. Women compared with men had similar incidence rates for MACE and major bleeding but borderline lower rates for myocardial infarction (1.7% vs. 2.2%, P = 0.05). The effect of combination therapy compared with aspirin in women and men was consistent for MACE (women: 3.8% vs. 5.2%, HR 0.72, 95% CI 0.54-0.97; men: 4.2% vs. 5.5%, HR 0.76, 95% CI 0.66-0.89; P interaction 0.75) and major bleeding (women: 3.1% vs. 1.4%, HR 2.22, 95% CI 1.42-3.46; men: 3.2% vs. 2.0%, HR 1.60, 95% CI 1.29-1.97; P interaction 0.19). There was no significant interaction between randomized treatment and baseline modified REACH score above or below the median for MACE or major bleeding., Conclusion: In patients with stable coronary artery disease or peripheral artery disease, the combination of rivaroxaban (2.5 mg twice daily) and aspirin compared with aspirin alone appears to produce consistent benefits in women and men, independent of baseline cardiovascular risk., (Published on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology. All rights reserved. © The Author(s) 2020. For permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

The Global Anticoagulant Registry in the Field-Atrial Fibrillation (GARFIELD-AF) examined real-world practice in a total of 57,149 (5069 retrospective, 52,080 prospective) patients with newly diagnosed AF at risk of stroke/systemic embolism, enrolled at over 1000 centers in 35 countries. It aimed to capture data on AF burden, patients' clinical profile, patterns of clinical practice and antithrombotic management, focusing on stroke/systemic embolism prevention, uptake of new oral anticoagulants, impact on death and bleeding. GARFIELD-AF set new standards for quality of data collection and analysis. A total of 36 peer-reviewed articles were already published and 73 abstracts presented at international congresses, covering treatment strategies, geographical variations in baseline risk and therapies, adverse outcomes and common comorbidities such as heart failure. A risk prediction tool as well as innovative observational studies and artificial intelligence methodologies are currently being developed by GARFIELD-AF researchers. Clinical Trial Registration: NCT01090362 (ClinicalTrials.gov).

Importance: Patients with symptomatic lower extremity peripheral artery disease (LE-PAD) experience an increased risk of major vascular events. There is limited information on what clinical features of symptomatic LE-PAD prognosticate major vascular events and whether patients at high risk have a greater absolute benefit from low-dose rivaroxaban and aspirin., Objective: To quantify the risk of major vascular events and investigate the response to treatment with low-dose rivaroxaban and aspirin among patients with symptomatic LE-PAD based on clinical presentation and comorbidities., Design, Setting, and Participants: This is a subanalysis of a previously reported subgroup of patients with symptomatic LE-PAD who were enrolled in a large, double-blind, placebo-controlled randomized clinical trial (Cardiovascular Outcomes for People Using Anticoagulation Strategies [COMPASS]) in 602 centers in 33 countries from March 2013 to January 2020. Data analysis was completed from May 2016 to June 2020., Interventions: A combination of low-dose rivaroxaban and aspirin compared with aspirin alone., Main Outcomes and Measures: Thirty-month incidence risk of myocardial infarction, stroke and cardiovascular death (MACE), major adverse limb events (MALE) including major vascular amputation, and bleeding., Results: The COMPASS trial enrolled 4129 patients with symptomatic LE-PAD (mean [SD] age, 66.8 [8.8] years; 2932 men [71.0%]). The 30-month Kaplan-Meier incidence risk of MACE or MALE, including major amputation, was 22.6% in those with prior amputation (this outcome was observed in 54 patients), 17.6% (n = 15) in those with Fontaine III or IV symptoms, and 11.8% (n = 142) in those with previous peripheral artery revascularization, classifying these features as high-risk limb presentations. The 30-month incidence risk of MACE or MALE, including major amputation, was 14.1% (n = 118) in those with kidney dysfunction, 13.5% (n = 67) in those with heart failure, 13.4% (n = 199) in those with diabetes, and 12.8% (n = 222) in those with polyvascular disease, classifying these features as high-risk comorbidities. Among patients with either high-risk limb presentations or high-risk comorbidities, treatment with rivaroxaban and aspirin compared with aspirin alone was associated with an estimated 4.2% (95% CI, 1.9%-6.2%) absolute risk reduction for MACE or MALE, including major amputation, at 30 months. Although the estimated absolute risk increase of major bleeding was higher with rivaroxaban and aspirin in combination than aspirin alone (2.0% [95% CI, 0.5%-3.9%]) for patients with either high-risk limb presentation or high-risk comorbidity, the estimated absolute risk increase of fatal or critical organ bleeding was low in this high-risk group (0.4% [95% CI, 0.2%-1.8%]), such that the net clinical benefit was estimated to be 3.2% (95% CI, 0.6%-5.3%)., Conclusions and Relevance: Patients with LE-PAD with high-risk limb presentations or high-risk comorbidities had a high incidence of major vascular events. For these patients, treatment with rivaroxaban and aspirin in combination compared with aspirin alone led to a large absolute reduction in vascular risk.

Aims: Prediction models for outcomes in atrial fibrillation (AF) are used to guide treatment. While regression models have been the analytic standard for prediction modelling, machine learning (ML) has been promoted as a potentially superior methodology. We compared the performance of ML and regression models in predicting outcomes in AF patients., Methods and Results: The Outcomes Registry for Better Informed Treatment of Atrial Fibrillation (ORBIT-AF) and Global Anticoagulant Registry in the FIELD (GARFIELD-AF) are population-based registries that include 74 792 AF patients. Models were generated from potential predictors using stepwise logistic regression (STEP), random forests (RF), gradient boosting (GB), and two neural networks (NNs). Discriminatory power was highest for death [STEP area under the curve (AUC) = 0.80 in ORBIT-AF, 0.75 in GARFIELD-AF] and lowest for stroke in all models (STEP AUC = 0.67 in ORBIT-AF, 0.66 in GARFIELD-AF). The discriminatory power of the ML models was similar or lower than the STEP models for most outcomes. The GB model had a higher AUC than STEP for death in GARFIELD-AF (0.76 vs. 0.75), but only nominally, and both performed similarly in ORBIT-AF. The multilayer NN had the lowest discriminatory power for all outcomes. The calibration of the STEP modelswere more aligned with the observed events for all outcomes. In the cross-registry models, the discriminatory power of the ML models was similar or lower than the STEP for most cases., Conclusion: When developed from two large, community-based AF registries, ML techniques did not improve prediction modelling of death, major bleeding, or stroke., (Published on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology. All rights reserved. © The Author(s) 2020. For permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Background and Purpose: Covert brain infarcts are associated with cognitive decline. It is not known whether therapies that prevent symptomatic stroke prevent covert infarcts. COMPASS compared rivaroxaban with and without aspirin with aspirin for the prevention of stroke, myocardial infarction, and vascular death in participants with stable vascular disease and was terminated early because of benefits of rivaroxaban 2.5 mg twice daily plus aspirin over aspirin. We obtained serial magnetic resonance imagings and cognitive tests in a consenting subgroup of COMPASS patients to examine treatment effects on infarcts, cerebral microbleeds, and white matter hyperintensities., Methods: Baseline and follow-up magnetic resonance imagings were completed in 1445 participants with a mean (SD) interval of 2.0 (0.7) years. Whole-brain T1, T2 fluid-attenuated inversion recovery, T2* sequences were centrally interpreted by blinded, trained readers. Participants had serial measurements of cognition and function. The primary end point was the proportion of participants with incident covert infarcts. Secondary end points were the composite of clinical stroke and covert brain infarcts, cerebral microbleeds, and white matter hyperintensities., Results: At baseline, 493 (34.1%) participants had infarcts. Incident covert infarcts occurred in 55 (3.8%) participants. In the overall trial rivaroxaban plus aspirin reduced ischemic stroke by 49% (0.7% versus 1.4%; hazard ratio [95% CI], 0.51 [0.38-0.68]). In the magnetic resonance imaging substudy the effects of rivaroxaban+aspirin versus aspirin were: covert infarcts: 2.7% versus 3.5% (odds ratio [95% CI], 0.77 [0.37-1.60]); Covert infarcts or ischemic stroke: 2.9% versus 5.3% (odds ratio [95% CI], 0.53 [0.27-1.03]). Incident microbleeds occurred in 6.6% of participants and 65.7% of participants had an increase in white matter hyperintensities volume with no effect of treatment for either end point. There was no effect on cognitive tests., Conclusions: Covert infarcts were not significantly reduced by treatment with rivaroxaban and aspirin but estimates for the combination of ischemic stroke and covert infarcts were consistent with the effect on ischemic stroke in the overall trial. Registration: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT01776424.

Background: The recommended doses for direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) to prevent stroke and systemic embolism (SE) in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) are described in specific regulatory authority approvals., Objectives: The impact of DOAC dosing, according to the recommended guidance on all-cause mortality, stroke/SE, and major bleeding, was assessed at 2-year follow-up in patients with newly diagnosed AF., Methods: Of a total of 34,926 patients enrolled (2013 to 2016) in the prospective GARFIELD-AF (Global Anticoagulant Registry in the FIELD-AF), 10,426 patients received a DOAC., Results: The majority of patients (72.9%) received recommended dosing, 23.2% were underdosed, and 3.8% were overdosed. Nonrecommended dosing (underdosage and overdosage combined) compared with recommended dosing was associated with a higher risk of all-cause mortality (hazard ratio [HR]: 1.24; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.04 to 1.48); HR: 1.25 (95% CI: 1.04 to 1.50) for underdosing, and HR: 1.19 (95% CI: 0.83 to 1.71) for overdosing. The excess deaths were cardiovascular including heart failure and myocardial infarction. The risks of stroke/SE and major bleeding were not significantly different irrespective of the level of dosing, although underdosed patients had a significantly lower risk of bleeding. A nonsignificant trend to higher risks of stroke/SE (HR: 1.51; 95% CI: 0.79 to 2.91) and major bleeding (HR: 1.29; 95% CI: 0.59 to 2.78) was observed in patients with overdosing., Conclusions: In GARFIELD-AF, most patients received the recommended DOAC doses according to country-specific guidelines. Prescription of nonrecommended doses was associated with an increased risk of death, mostly cardiovascular death, compared with patients on recommended doses, after adjusting for baseline factors. (Global Anticoagulant Registry in the Field-AF [GARFIELD-AF]; NCT01090362)., (Copyright © 2020 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Aims: Most clinical risk stratification models are based on measurement at a single time-point rather than serial measurements. Artificial intelligence (AI) is able to predict one-dimensional outcomes from multi-dimensional datasets. Using data from Global Anticoagulant Registry in the Field (GARFIELD)-AF registry, a new AI model was developed for predicting clinical outcomes in atrial fibrillation (AF) patients up to 1 year based on sequential measures of prothrombin time international normalized ratio (PT-INR) within 30 days of enrolment., Methods and Results: Patients with newly diagnosed AF who were treated with vitamin K antagonists (VKAs) and had at least three measurements of PT-INR taken over the first 30 days after prescription were analysed. The AI model was constructed with multilayer neural network including long short-term memory and one-dimensional convolution layers. The neural network was trained using PT-INR measurements within days 0-30 after starting treatment and clinical outcomes over days 31-365 in a derivation cohort (cohorts 1-3; n = 3185). Accuracy of the AI model at predicting major bleed, stroke/systemic embolism (SE), and death was assessed in a validation cohort (cohorts 4-5; n = 1523). The model's c-statistic for predicting major bleed, stroke/SE, and all-cause death was 0.75, 0.70, and 0.61, respectively., Conclusions: Using serial PT-INR values collected within 1 month after starting VKA, the new AI model performed better than time in therapeutic range at predicting clinical outcomes occurring up to 12 months thereafter. Serial PT-INR values contain important information that can be analysed by computer to help predict adverse clinical outcomes., (© The Author(s) 2019. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology.)

Rivaroxaban exposure and patient characteristics may affect the rivaroxaban benefit-risk balance. This study aimed to quantify associations between model-predicted rivaroxaban exposure and patient characteristics and efficacy and safety outcomes in patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF), using data from the phase 3 ROCKET AF trial (NCT00403767). In ROCKET AF, 14,264 patients with NVAF were randomized to rivaroxaban (20 mg once daily [OD], or 15 mg OD if creatinine clearance was 30-49 mL/min) or dose-adjusted warfarin (median follow-up: 707 days); rivaroxaban plasma concentration was measured in a subset of 161 patients. In this post hoc exposure-response analysis, a multivariate Cox model was used to correlate individual predicted rivaroxaban exposures and patient characteristics with time-to-event efficacy and safety outcomes in 7061 and 7111 patients, respectively. There was no significant association between model-predicted rivaroxaban trough plasma concentration (C trough ) and efficacy outcomes. Creatinine clearance and history of stroke were significantly associated with efficacy outcomes. C trough was significantly associated with the composite of major or non-major clinically relevant (NMCR) bleeding (hazard ratio [95th percentile vs. median]: 1.26 [95% confidence interval 1.13-1.40]) but not with major bleeding alone. The exposure-response relationship for major or NMCR bleeding was shallow with no clear threshold for an acceleration in risk. History of gastrointestinal bleeding had a greater influence on safety outcomes than C trough . These results support fixed rivaroxaban 15 mg and 20 mg OD dosages in NVAF. Therapeutic drug monitoring is unlikely to offer clinical benefits in this indication beyond evaluation of patient characteristics.

Background: It is not always possible to verify whether a patient complaining of symptoms consistent with transient ischemic attack has had an actual cerebrovascular event., Research Question: To characterize the risk of cardiovascular events associated with a history of stroke/transient ischemic attack in patients with atrial fibrillation., Study Design and Methods: This study investigated the clinical characteristics and outcomes of patients with a history of stroke/transient ischemic attack among 52,014 patients enrolled prospectively in GARFIELD-AF registry. The diagnosis of stroke or transient ischemic attack was not protocol defined but based on physicians' assessment. Patients' one-year risk of death, stroke/systemic embolism, and major bleeding was assessed by multivariable Cox regression., Results: At enrollment, 5617 (10.9%) patients were reported to have a history of stroke or transient ischemic attack. Patients with stroke or transient ischemic attack were older and had a greater burden of diabetes, moderate-to-severe kidney disease, and atherothrombosis and higher median CHA 2 DS 2 -VASc and HAS-BLED scores than those without history of stroke or transient ischemic attack. After adjustment, prior stroke/transient ischemic attack was associated with significantly higher risk for all-cause mortality (hazard ratio (HR), 1.26; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.12-1.42), cardiovascular death (HR, 1.22; 95% CI, 1.01-1.48), non-cardiovascular death (HR, 1.39; 95% CI, 1.15-1.68), and stroke/systemic embolism (HR, 2.17; 95% CI, 1.80-2.63) than patients without history of stroke/transient ischemic attack. In patients with a prior stroke alone higher risk was observed for all-cause mortality (HR, 1.29; 95% CI, 1.11-1.50), non-cardiovascular death (HR, 1.39; 95% CI, 1.10-1.77), and stroke/systemic embolism (HR, 2.29; 95% CI, 1.83-2.86). No significantly elevated risk of adverse events was seen for patients with history of transient ischemic attack alone., Interpretation: A history of prior stroke or transient ischemic attack is a strong independent risk factor for mortality and stroke/systemic embolism. This excess risk is mainly attributed to a history of stroke (with or without transient ischemic attack), whereas history of transient ischemic attack is a weaker predictor. Clinical trial registration: NCT01090362.

Objectives: To externally validate the accuracy of the Global Anticoagulant Registry in the FIELD-Atrial Fibrillation (GARFIELD-AF) model against existing risk scores for stroke and major bleeding risk in patients with non-valvular AF in a population-based cohort., Design: Retrospective cohort study., Setting: Danish nationwide registries., Participants: 90 693 patients with newly diagnosed non-valvular AF were included between 2010 and 2016, with follow-up censored at 1 year., Primary and Secondary Outcome Measures: External validation was performed using discrimination and calibration plots. C-statistics were compared with CHA 2 DS 2 VASc score for ischaemic stroke/systemic embolism (SE) and HAS-BLED score for major bleeding/haemorrhagic stroke outcomes., Results: Of the 90 693 included, 51 180 patients received oral anticoagulants (OAC). Overall median age (Q1, Q3) were 75 (66-83) years and 48 486 (53.5%) were male. At 1-year follow-up, a total of 2094 (2.3%) strokes/SE, 2642 (2.9%) major bleedings and 10 915 (12.0%) deaths occurred. The GARFIELD-AF model was well calibrated with the predicted risk for stroke/SE and major bleeding. The discriminatory value of GARFIELD-AF risk model was superior to CHA 2 DS 2 VASc for predicting stroke in the overall cohort (C-index: 0.71, 95% CI: 0.70 to 0.72 vs C-index: 0.67, 95% CI: 0.66 to 0.68, p<0.001) as well as in low-risk patients (C-index: 0.64, 95% CI: 0.59 to 0.69 vs C-index: 0.57, 95% CI: 0.53 to 0.61, p=0.007). The GARFIELD-AF model was comparable to HAS-BLED in predicting the risk of major bleeding in patients on OAC therapy (C-index: 0.64, 95% CI: 0.63 to 0.66 vs C-index: 0.64, 95% CI: 0.63 to 0.65, p=0.60)., Conclusion: In a nationwide Danish cohort with non-valvular AF, the GARFIELD-AF model adequately predicted the risk of ischaemic stroke/SE and major bleeding. Our external validation confirms that the GARFIELD-AF model was superior to CHA 2 DS 2 VASc in predicting stroke/SE and comparable with HAS-BLED for predicting major bleeding., Competing Interests: Competing interests: KF has received research grants Bayer/Janssen and AstraZeneca and Consulting/Fees Bayer, Sanofi/Regeneron and Verseon. FV has received honoraria for consulting and presentations from Bayer HealthCare, Boehringer Ibgelheimy, BMSPfizer and Daiichi-Sankyo. GHG has ownership of stocks in Novo Nordisk Pharmaceuticals and reports research grants from Pfizer, Bristol Myers Squibb, Boehringer Ingelheim and Bayer. CTP declares grants for studies from Bayer. Other authors have no conflicts of interest to declare., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2019. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Importance: Congestive heart failure (CHF) is commonly associated with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation (AF), and their combination may affect treatment strategies and outcomes., Objective: To assess the treatment strategies and 1-year clinical outcomes of antithrombotic and CHF therapies for patients with newly diagnosed AF with concomitant CHF stratified by etiology (ischemic cardiomyopathy [ICM] vs nonischemic cardiomyopathy [NICM])., Design, Setting, and Participants: The GARFIELD-AF registry is a prospective, noninterventional registry. A total of 52 014 patients with AF were enrolled between March 2010 and August 2016. A total of 11 738 patients 18 years and older with newly diagnosed AF (≤6 weeks' duration) and at least 1 investigator-determined stroke risk factor were included. Data were analyzed from December 2017 to September 2018., Exposures: One-year follow-up rates of death, stroke/systemic embolism, and major bleeding were assessed., Main Outcomes and Measures: Event rates per 100 person-years were estimated from the Poisson model and Cox hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals., Results: The median age of the population was 71.0 years, 22 987 of 52 013 were women (44.2%) and 31 958 of 52 014 were white (61.4%). Of 11 738 patients with CHF, 4717 (40.2%) had ICM and 7021 (59.8%) had NICM. Prescription of oral anticoagulant and antiplatelet drugs was not balanced between groups. Oral anticoagulants with or without antiplatelet drugs were used in 2753 patients with ICM (60.1%) and 5082 patients with NICM (73.7%). Antiplatelets were prescribed alone in 1576 patients with ICM (34.4%) and 1071 patients with NICM (15.5%). Compared with patients with NICM, use of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors/angiotensin receptor blockers (72.6% [3439] vs 60.3% [4236]) and of β blockers (63.3% [2988] vs 53.2% [3737]) was higher in patients with ICM. Rates of all-cause and cardiovascular death per 100 patient-years were significantly higher in the ICM group (all-cause death: ICM, 10.2; 95% CI, 9.2-11.1; NICM, 7.0; 95% CI, 6.4-7.6; cardiovascular death: ICM, 5.1; 95% CI, 4.5-5.9; NICM, 2.9; 95% CI, 2.5-3.4). Stroke/systemic embolism rates tended to be higher in ICM groups compared with NICM groups (ICM, 2.0; 95% CI, 1.6-2.5; NICM, 1.5; 95% CI, 1.3-1.9). Major bleeding rates were significantly higher in the ICM group (1.1; 95% CI, 0.8-1.4) compared with the NICM group (0.7; 95% CI, 0.5-0.9)., Conclusions and Relevance: Patients with ICM received oral anticoagulants with or without antiplatelet drugs less frequently and antiplatelets alone more frequently than patients with NICM, but they received angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors/angiotensin receptor blockers more often than patients with NICM. All-cause and cardiovascular death rates were higher in patients with ICM than patients with NICM., Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01090362.

Aims: The management of anticoagulation therapy in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) and cancer is challenging due to increased thrombotic and bleeding risks. We sought to determine the safety and efficacy of rivaroxaban in patients with AF and a history of cancer., Methods and Results: ROCKET AF randomized 14 264 patients with AF to rivaroxaban or warfarin with a median follow-up of 1.9 years. Cox regression models were used to assess the association between cancer history and clinical outcomes, and the relative treatment effect of rivaroxaban vs. warfarin in these patients. A total of 640 patients enrolled in ROCKET AF had a history of cancer, with the most common types being prostate (28.6%), colorectal (16.1%), and breast (14.7%) cancer. Patients with a history of cancer were older, more frequently male, more likely to have prior vitamin K antagonist (VKA) use and had higher rates of overall bleeding [hazard ratio (HR) 1.30, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.16-1.47; P < 0.0001] and non-cardiovascular death (HR 1.47, 95% CI 1.04-2.07; P = 0.031) compared with those with no cancer history. There were no significant associations between cancer history and stroke, venous thromboembolism, or myocardial infarction. The relative efficacy of rivaroxaban vs. warfarin for prevention of stroke/systemic embolism was similar in those with and without a history of cancer (interaction P-value = 0.21)., Conclusion: In ROCKET AF, a history of cancer was associated with a higher risk of bleeding and non-cardiovascular death, but not ischaemic events. The relative efficacy and safety of rivaroxaban compared with warfarin were not significantly different in patients with and without a history of cancer. The results of this study are exploratory and should be taken in context of the study population, which may not be generalizable to those with advanced malignancy. Further investigation is needed to understand optimal anticoagulation strategies in patients with AF and cancer.Clinical trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT00403767., (Published on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology. All rights reserved. © The Author(s) 2018. For permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Background: Covert vascular disease of the brain manifests as infarcts, white matter hyperintensities, and microbleeds on MRI. Their cumulative effect is often a decline in cognition, motor impairment, and psychiatric disorders. Preventive therapies for covert brain ischemia have not been established but represent a huge unmet clinical need., Aims: The MRI substudy examines the effects of the antithrombotic regimens in COMPASS on incident covert brain infarcts (the primary outcome), white matter hyperintensities, and cognitive and functional status in a sample of consenting COMPASS participants without contraindications to MRI., Methods: COMPASS is a randomized superiority trial testing rivaroxaban 2.5 mg bid plus acetylsalicylic acid 100 mg and rivaroxaban 5 mg bid against acetylsalicylic acid 100 mg per day for the combined endpoint of MI, stroke, and cardiovascular death in individuals with stable coronary artery disease or peripheral artery disease. T1-weighted, T2-weighted, T2*-weighted, and FLAIR images were obtained close to randomization and near the termination of assigned antithrombotic therapy; biomarker and genetic samples at randomization and one month, and cognitive and functional assessment at randomization, after two years and at the end of study., Results: Between March 2013 and May 2016, 1905 participants were recruited from 86 centers in 16 countries. Of these participants, 1760 underwent baseline MRI scans that were deemed technically adequate for interpretation. The mean age at entry of participants with interpretable MRI was 71 years and 23.5% were women. Coronary artery disease was present in 90.4% and 28.1% had peripheral artery disease. Brain infarcts were present in 34.8%, 29.3% had cerebral microbleeds, and 93.0% had white matter hyperintensities. The median Montreal Cognitive Assessment score was 26 (interquartile range 23-28)., Conclusions: The COMPASS MRI substudy will examine the effect of the antithrombotic interventions on MRI-determined covert brain infarcts and cognition. Demonstration of a therapeutic effect of the antithrombotic regimens on brain infarcts would have implications for prevention of cognitive decline and provide insight into the pathogenesis of vascular cognitive decline.

Background: Strokes were significantly reduced by the combination of rivaroxaban plus aspirin in comparison with aspirin in the COMPASS trial (Cardiovascular Outcomes for People Using Anticoagulation Strategies). We present detailed analyses of stroke by type, predictors, and antithrombotic effects in key subgroups., Methods: Participants had stable coronary artery or peripheral artery disease and were randomly assigned to receive aspirin 100 mg once daily (n=9126), rivaroxaban 5 mg twice daily (n=9117), or rivaroxaban 2.5 mg twice daily plus aspirin (n=9152). Patients who required anticoagulation or had a stroke within 1 month, previous lacunar stroke, or intracerebral hemorrhage were excluded., Results: During a mean follow-up of 23 months, fewer patients had strokes in the rivaroxaban plus aspirin group than in the aspirin group (83 [0.9% per year] versus 142 [1.6% per year]; hazard ratio [HR], 0.58; 95% CI, 0.44-0.76; P<0.0001). Ischemic/uncertain strokes were reduced by nearly half (68 [0.7% per year] versus 132 [1.4% per year]; HR, 0.51; 95% CI, 0.38-0.68; P<0.0001) by the combination in comparison with aspirin. No significant difference was noted in the occurrence of stroke in the rivaroxaban alone group in comparison with aspirin: annualized rate of 0.7% (HR, 0.82; 95% CI, 0.65-1.05). The occurrence of fatal and disabling stroke (modified Rankin Scale, 3-6) was decreased by the combination (32 [0.3% per year] versus 55 [0.6% per year]; HR, 0.58; 95% CI, 0.37-0.89; P=0.01). Independent predictors of stroke were prior stroke, hypertension, systolic blood pressure at baseline, age, diabetes mellitus, and Asian ethnicity. Prior stroke was the strongest predictor of incident stroke (HR, 3.63; 95% CI, 2.65-4.97; P<0.0001) and was associated with a 3.4% per year rate of stroke recurrence on aspirin. The effect of the combination in comparison with aspirin was consistent across subgroups with high stroke risk, including those with prior stroke., Conclusions: Low-dose rivaroxaban plus aspirin is an important new antithrombotic option for primary and secondary stroke prevention in patients with clinical atherosclerosis., Clinical Trial Registration: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov . Unique identifier: NCT01776424.

Background: Atrial fibrillation is associated with increased risks of death, stroke/systemic embolism, and bleeding (incurred by antithrombotic therapy), which may occur early after diagnosis., Methods: We assessed the risk of early events (death, stroke/systemic embolism, and major bleeding) over 12 months and their relation to the time after diagnosis of atrial fibrillation in 52 014 patients prospectively enrolled in the GARFIELD-AF registry (Global Anticoagulant Registry in the FIELD-Atrial Fibrillation) between March 2010 and August 2016., Results: Over 12 months, 2140 patients died (mortality rate, 4.3; 95% CI, 4.2-4.5 per 100 person-years), of whom 288 (13.5%) died in the first month (6.8; 95% CI, 6.1-7.6). Over 12 months, 657 patients had a stroke/systemic embolism (1.3; 95% CI, 1.2-1.4) and 411 had a major bleeding (0.8; 95% CI, 0.8-0.9). During the first month, the rates (per 100 person-years) of stroke/systemic embolism and major bleed were 2.3 (95% CI, 1.9-2.8) and 1.5 (95% CI, 1.2-1.9), respectively. The elevated 1-month mortality rate was mostly attributable to cardiovascular mortality (3.5; 95% CI, 3.0-4.1), in particular, heart failure, sudden death, and acute coronary syndromes (1.0 [95% CI, 0.8-1.4], 0.6 [95% CI, 0.4-0.8], and 0.5 [95% CI, 0.3-0.8], respectively). Age, heart failure, prior stroke, history of cirrhosis, vascular disease, moderate-to-severe kidney disease, diabetes mellitus, and living in North or Latin America were independent predictors of a higher risk of early death, whereas anticoagulation and living in Europe or Asia were independent predictors of a lower risk of early death. A predictive model developed for the 1-month risk of death had a C-statistic of 0.81 (95% CI, 0.78-0.83)., Conclusions: The increased hazard of early events, in particular, cardiovascular mortality, in newly diagnosed atrial fibrillation points to the importance of comprehensive care for such patients and should alert clinicians to detect warning signs of possible early mortality., Clinical Trial Registration: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov . Unique identifier: NCT01090362.

Background: Four non-vitamin-K-antagonist oral anticoagulants (NOACs) have been approved for use in various cardiovascular indications. The direct thrombin inhibitor dabigatran and the direct factor Xa inhibitors apixaban, edoxaban and rivaroxaban are now increasingly used in clinical practice. For some of these agents, available data from real-world studies support the efficacy and safety data in phase III clinical trials., Objectives: This review aims to summarize the current status of trials and observational studies of oral anticoagulant use over the spectrum of cardiovascular disorders (excluding venous thrombosis), provide a reference source beyond stroke prevention for atrial fibrillation (AF) and examine the potential for novel applications in the cardiovascular field., Methods: We searched the recent literature for data on completed and upcoming trials of oral anticoagulants with a particular focus on rivaroxaban., Results: Recent data in specific patient subgroups, such as patients with AF undergoing catheter ablation or cardioversion, have led to an extended approval for rivaroxaban, whereas the other NOACs have ongoing or recently completed trials in this setting. However, there are unmet medical needs for several arterial thromboembolic-related conditions, including patients with: AF and acute coronary syndrome, AF and coronary artery disease undergoing elective percutaneous coronary intervention, coronary artery disease and peripheral artery disease, implanted cardiac devices, and embolic stroke of unknown source., Conclusion: NOACs may provide alternative treatment options in areas of unmet need, and numerous studies are underway to assess their benefit-risk profiles in these settings.

Background: The tradeoff in safety versus efficacy in substituting a non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulant for a vitamin K antagonist (VKA) in the stented atrial fibrillation patient has not been quantitatively evaluated., Methods: Based on summary data from the PIONEER AF-PCI and RE-DUAL PCI trials, 4 antithrombotic regimens were compared with VKA-based triple therapy: (1) rivaroxaban (riva) 15 mg daily + P2Y 12 inhibitor, (2) riva 2.5 mg twice daily + P2Y 12 inhibitor + aspirin, (3) dabigatran (dabi) 110 mg twice daily + P2Y 12 inhibitor, and (4) dabi 150 mg twice daily + P2Y 12 inhibitor. A bivariate model with a noninferiority margin of 1.38 was used to simultaneously assess safety and efficacy. The safety end point was major or clinically relevant nonmajor bleeding by International Society on Thrombosis and Haemostasis definitions. The efficacy end point was a thromboembolic event (myocardial infarction, stroke, or systemic embolism), death, or urgent revascularization. The bivariate outcome, a measure of risk difference in the net clinical outcome, was compared between antithrombotic regimens., Results: All 4 non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulant regimens were superior in bleeding and noninferior in efficacy compared with triple therapy with VKA. Riva 15 mg daily and 2.5 mg twice daily were associated with bivariate combined risk reductions of 5.6% (2.3%-8.8%) and 5.5% (2.1%-8.7%), respectively, and dabi 110 mg twice daily and 150 mg twice daily reduced the bivariate risk by 3.8% (0.5%-7.0%) and 6.3% (2.4%-9.8%), respectively., Conclusions: A bivariate analysis that simultaneously characterizes both risk and benefit demonstrates that riva- and dabi-based regimens were both favorable over VKA plus dual antiplatelet therapy among patients with atrial fibrillation undergoing PCI., (Copyright © 2018 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background There is concern that selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors ( SSRI s) substantially increase bleeding risk in patients taking anticoagulants. Methods and Results We studied 737 patients taking SSRI s in the ROCKET AF (Rivaroxaban Once Daily Oral Direct Factor Xa Inhibition Compared With Vitamin K Antagonism for Prevention of Embolism and Stroke Trial in Atrial Fibrillation) trial of rivaroxaban compared with warfarin for the prevention of stroke/systemic embolism in patients with atrial fibrillation. These patients were propensity score matched 1:1 to 737 patients not taking SSRI s. The primary outcome measure was major and nonmajor clinically relevant bleeding events, the principal safety outcome in ROCKET AF . Over a mean 1.6 years of follow-up, the rate of major/ nonmajor clinically relevant bleeding was 18.57 events/100 patient-years for SSRI users versus 16.84 events/100 patient-years for matched comparators, adjusted hazard ratio ( aHR ) of 1.16 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.95-1.43). The aHR s were similar in patients taking rivaroxaban ( aHR 1.11 [95% CI, 0.82-1.51]) and those taking warfarin ( aHR 1.21 [95% CI, 0.91-1.60]). For the rarer outcome of major bleeding, the aHR for SSRI users versus those not taking SSRI s was 1.13 (95% CI, 0.62-2.06) for rivaroxaban; for warfarin, the aHR was higher, at 1.58 (95% CI , 0.96-2.60) but not statistically significantly elevated. Conclusions We found no significant increase in bleeding risk when SSRI s were combined with anticoagulant therapy, although there was a suggestion of increased bleeding risk with SSRI s added to warfarin. While physicians should be vigilant regarding bleeding risk, our results provide reassurance that SSRI s can be safely added to anticoagulants in patients with atrial fibrillation . Clinical Trial Registration URL : https://www.clinicaltrials.gov . Unique identifier: NCT 00403767.

Background: We investigated the impact of polyvascular disease in patients enrolled in ROCKET AF., Methods: Cox regression models were used to assess clinical outcomes and treatment effects of rivaroxaban compared with warfarin in patients with atrial fibrillation and coronary, peripheral, or carotid artery disease, or any combination of the 3., Results: A total of 655 (4.6%) patients had polyvascular disease (≥2 disease locations), and 3,391 (23.8%) had single-arterial bed disease. Patients with polyvascular disease had similar rates of stroke/systemic embolism but higher rates of cardiovascular and bleeding events when compared with those without vascular disease. Use of rivaroxaban compared with warfarin was associated with higher rates of stroke in patients with polyvascular disease (hazard ratio [HR] 2.41, 95% CI 1.05-5.54); however, this was not seen in patients with single-bed (HR 0.90, 95% CI 0.64-1.28) or no vascular disease (HR 0.85, 95% CI 0.69-1.04; interaction P = .058). There was a significant interaction for major or nonmajor clinically relevant bleeding in patients with polyvascular (HR 1.23, 95% CI 0.91-1.65) and single-bed vascular disease (HR 1.30, 95% CI 1.13-1.49) treated with rivaroxaban compared with warfarin when compared with those without vascular disease (HR 0.95, 95% CI 0.87-1.04; interaction P = .0006). Additional antiplatelet therapy in this population did not improve stroke or cardiovascular outcomes., Conclusion: The use of rivaroxaban compared with warfarin was associated with a higher risk of stroke and bleeding in patients with polyvascular disease enrolled in ROCKET AF. Further studies are needed to understand the optimal management of this high-risk population., (Copyright © 2018 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Aims: Retrospective and prospective observational studies are designed to reflect real-world evidence on clinical practice, but can yield conflicting results. The GARFIELD-AF Registry includes both methods of enrolment and allows analysis of differences in patient characteristics and outcomes that may result., Methods and Results: Patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) and ≥1 risk factor for stroke at diagnosis of AF were recruited either retrospectively (n = 5069) or prospectively (n = 5501) from 19 countries and then followed prospectively. The retrospectively enrolled cohort comprised patients with established AF (for a least 6, and up to 24 months before enrolment), who were identified retrospectively (and baseline and partial follow-up data were collected from the emedical records) and then followed prospectively between 0 and 18 months (such that the total time of follow-up was 24 months; data collection December 2009 and October 2010). In the prospectively enrolled cohort, patients with newly diagnosed AF (≤6 weeks after diagnosis) were recruited between March 2010 and October 2011 and were followed for 24 months after enrolment. Differences between the cohorts were observed in clinical characteristics, including type of AF, stroke prevention strategies, and event rates. More patients in the retrospectively identified cohort received vitamin K antagonists (62.1% vs. 53.2%) and fewer received non-vitamin K oral anticoagulants (1.8% vs. 4.2%). All-cause mortality rates per 100 person-years during the prospective follow-up (starting the first study visit up to 1 year) were significantly lower in the retrospective than prospectively identified cohort (3.04 [95% CI 2.51-3.67] vs. 4.05 [95% CI 3.53-4.63]; P = 0.016)., Conclusion: Interpretations of data from registries that aim to evaluate the characteristics and outcomes of patients with AF must take account of differences in registry design and the impact of recall bias and survivorship bias that is incurred with retrospective enrolment., Clinical Trial Registration: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier for GARFIELD-AF (NCT01090362)., (Published on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology. All rights reserved. © The Author 2017. For permissions please email: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

The aim of this review is to provide context for meta-analyses interpreting data from phase III stroke prevention studies of non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants (NOACs) in patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF). Differences between the four phase III NOAC stroke prevention studies in patients with NVAF (ROCKET AF, ARISTOTLE, RE-LY, and ENGAGE AF), their potential impact on outcomes, and inter-study differences were evaluated, as well as the potential role of real-world evidence in evaluating NOACs in this setting. Study design differences included blinding strategy, dose-reduction options, and transition from blinded treatment to standard of care. There were small but relevant variations in the definition of AF used (RE-LY used the least precise definition); patient risk profiles (ROCKET AF patients had the highest risk); the primary safety outcome (a composite of major bleeding and clinically relevant non-major bleeding events in ROCKET AF vs. major bleeding in the others); and the definitions of stroke, major bleeding, and clinically relevant non-major bleeding events. In real-world studies, methodological variations and biases are amplified, making cross-study comparisons and meta-analyses problematic. Because of these methodological differences, meta-analyses of phase III studies need to be robust, and if outcomes of the reference (warfarin-treated) arms differ significantly, the basis of the meta-analysis is not strong. These key issues need to be taken into consideration for direct comparisons across studies, and for the interpretation of meta-analytic data., (Published on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology. All rights reserved. © The Author 2017. For permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Background: Atrial fibrillation (AF) increases risk of stroke 5-fold. Carotid artery disease (CD) also augments the risk of stroke, yet there are limited data about the interplay of these 2 diseases and clinical outcomes in patients with comorbid AF and CD., Hypothesis: Among patients with both AF and CD, use of rivaroxaban when compared with warfarin is associated with a lower risk of stroke., Methods: This post hoc analysis from ROCKET AF aimed to determine absolute rates of stroke/systemic embolism (SE) and bleeding, and the efficacy and safety of rivaroxaban compared with warfarin in patients with AF and CD (defined as history of carotid occlusive disease or carotid revascularization [endarterectomy and/or stenting])., Results: A total of 593 (4.2%) patients had CD at enrollment. Patients with and without CD had similar rates of stroke or SE (adjusted hazard ratio [HR]: 0.99, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.66-1.48, P = 0.96), and there was no difference in major or nonmajor clinically relevant bleeding (adjusted HR: 1.04, 95% CI: 0.88-1.24, P = 0.62). The efficacy of rivaroxaban compared with warfarin for the prevention of stroke/SE was not statistically significant in patients with vs those without CD (interaction P = 0.25). The safety of rivaroxaban vs warfarin for major or nonmajor clinically relevant bleeding was similar in patients with and without CD (interaction P = 0.64)., Conclusions: Patients with CD in ROCKET AF had similar risk of stroke/SE compared with patients without CD. Additionally, there was no interaction between CD and the treatment effect of rivaroxaban or warfarin for stroke prevention or safety endpoints., (© 2018 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.)

Objectives: To provide an accurate, web-based tool for stratifying patients with atrial fibrillation to facilitate decisions on the potential benefits/risks of anticoagulation, based on mortality, stroke and bleeding risks., Design: The new tool was developed, using stepwise regression, for all and then applied to lower risk patients. C-statistics were compared with CHA 2 DS 2 -VASc using 30-fold cross-validation to control for overfitting. External validation was undertaken in an independent dataset, Outcome Registry for Better Informed Treatment of Atrial Fibrillation (ORBIT-AF)., Participants: Data from 39 898 patients enrolled in the prospective GARFIELD-AF registry provided the basis for deriving and validating an integrated risk tool to predict stroke risk, mortality and bleeding risk., Results: The discriminatory value of the GARFIELD-AF risk model was superior to CHA 2 DS 2 -VASc for patients with or without anticoagulation. C-statistics (95% CI) for all-cause mortality, ischaemic stroke/systemic embolism and haemorrhagic stroke/major bleeding (treated patients) were: 0.77 (0.76 to 0.78), 0.69 (0.67 to 0.71) and 0.66 (0.62 to 0.69), respectively, for the GARFIELD-AF risk models, and 0.66 (0.64-0.67), 0.64 (0.61-0.66) and 0.64 (0.61-0.68), respectively, for CHA 2 DS 2 -VASc (or HAS-BLED for bleeding). In very low to low risk patients (CHA 2 DS 2 -VASc 0 or 1 (men) and 1 or 2 (women)), the CHA 2 DS 2 -VASc and HAS-BLED (for bleeding) scores offered weak discriminatory value for mortality, stroke/systemic embolism and major bleeding. C-statistics for the GARFIELD-AF risk tool were 0.69 (0.64 to 0.75), 0.65 (0.56 to 0.73) and 0.60 (0.47 to 0.73) for each end point, respectively, versus 0.50 (0.45 to 0.55), 0.59 (0.50 to 0.67) and 0.55 (0.53 to 0.56) for CHA 2 DS 2 -VASc (or HAS-BLED for bleeding). Upon validation in the ORBIT-AF population, C-statistics showed that the GARFIELD-AF risk tool was effective for predicting 1-year all-cause mortality using the full and simplified model for all-cause mortality: C-statistics 0.75 (0.73 to 0.77) and 0.75 (0.73 to 0.77), respectively, and for predicting for any stroke or systemic embolism over 1 year, C-statistics 0.68 (0.62 to 0.74)., Conclusions: Performance of the GARFIELD-AF risk tool was superior to CHA 2 DS 2 -VASc in predicting stroke and mortality and superior to HAS-BLED for bleeding, overall and in lower risk patients. The GARFIELD-AF tool has the potential for incorporation in routine electronic systems, and for the first time, permits simultaneous evaluation of ischaemic stroke, mortality and bleeding risks., Clinical Trial Registration: URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier for GARFIELD-AF (NCT01090362) and for ORBIT-AF (NCT01165710)., Competing Interests: Competing interests: KAAF reports grants and personal fees from Bayer, and Johnson and Johnson, personal fees from Lilly, grants and personal fees from AstraZeneca and personal fees from Sanofi/Regeneron outside the submitted work. JEL and KSP have provided statistical support and thought leadership for the Thrombosis Research Institute, during the conduct of the study, and KSP has received personal fees from Bayer outside the submitted work. J-PB reports personal fees from Aspen outside the submitted work. AJC is an advisor to Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Pfizer/BMS and Daiichi Sankyo. DAF reports personal fees from Bayer outside the submitted work. SZG reports grants from BiO2 Medical, Boehringer-Ingelheim, Bristol Meyers Squibb, BTG EKOS, Daiichi Sankyo, National Heart Lung and Blood Institute of the National Institutes of Health, Janssen and Thrombosis Research Group and personal fees from Bayer, Boehringer-Ingelheim, Bristol Meyers Squibb, Daiichi Sankyo, Janssen and Portola outside the submitted work. SG reports personal fees from Bayer, grants from Sanofi, grants from Pfizer, personal fees from Daiichi-Sankyo, personal fees from AstraZeneca during the conduct of the study and grants from Bayer outside the submitted work. SH reports personal fees from Aspen, Bayer AG, BMS, Daiichi-Sankyo, Pfizer and Sanofi outside the submitted work. WH reports personal fees from Bayer during the conduct of the study. GK reports grants from Bayer during the conduct of the study. LGM reports grants and personal fees from Bayer AG during the conduct of the study, and grants from Boehringer Ingelheim, grants and personal fees from Pfizer and personal fees from Daiichi Sankyo outside the submitted work. FM reports grants and other from Bayer AG during the conduct of the study, and other from Bayer AG outside the submitted work. FM is an employee of Bayer AG. JP has nothing to disclose. AGGT reports consultant fees from Bayer AG during the conduct of the study. FWAV reports personal fees from Boehringer-Ingelheim, Bayer AG, BMS/Pfizer and Daiichi-Sankyo during the conduct of the study and personal fees from AstraZeneca outside the submitted work. AKK reports grants and personal fees from Bayer AG, Boehringer-Ingelheim Pharma, Daiichi Sankyo Europe, Sanofi SA and Janssen Pharma outside the submitted work., (© Article author(s) (or their employer(s) unless otherwise stated in the text of the article) 2017. All rights reserved. No commercial use is permitted unless otherwise expressly granted.)

Atrial fibrillation (AF) is the most common cardiac arrhythmia in the world. We aimed to provide comprehensive data on international patterns of AF stroke prevention treatment., Methods: Demographics, comorbidities, and stroke risk of the patients in the GARFIELD-AF (n=51,270), ORBIT-AF I (n=10,132), and ORBIT-AF II (n=11,602) registries were compared (overall N=73,004 from 35 countries). Stroke prevention therapies were assessed among patients with new-onset AF (≤6 weeks)., Results: Patients from GARFIELD-AF were less likely to be white (63% vs 89% for ORBIT-AF I and 86% for ORBIT-AF II) or have coronary artery disease (19% vs 36% and 27%), but had similar stroke risk (85% CHA 2 DS 2 -VASc ≥2 vs 91% and 85%) and lower bleeding risk (11% with HAS-BLED ≥3 vs 24% and 15%). Oral anticoagulant use was 46% and 57% for patients with a CHA 2 DS 2 -VASc=0 and 69% and 87% for CHA 2 DS 2 -VASc ≥2 in GARFIELD-AF and ORBIT-AF II, respectively, but with substantial geographic heterogeneity in use of oral anticoagulant (range: 31%-93% [GARFIELD-AF] and 66%-100% [ORBIT-AF II]). Among patients with new-onset AF, non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulant use increased over time to 43% in 2016 for GARFIELD-AF and 71% for ORBIT-AF II, whereas use of antiplatelet monotherapy decreased from 36% to 17% (GARFIELD-AF) and 18% to 8% (ORBIT-AF I and II)., Conclusions: Among new-onset AF patients, non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulant use has increased and antiplatelet monotherapy has decreased. However, anticoagulation is used frequently in low-risk patients and inconsistently in those at high risk of stroke. Significant geographic variability in anticoagulation persists and represents an opportunity for improvement., (Copyright © 2017 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

The safety of intravenous thrombolysis in patients taking rivaroxaban has not been well established. We retrospectively analyzed the outcomes of all patients who received thrombolytic therapy in the Rivaroxaban Once Daily Oral Direct Factor Xa Inhibition Compared With Vitamin K Antagonism for Prevention of Stroke and Embolism Trial in Atrial Fibrillation (ROCKET AF). A review of medical and adverse event records for patients receiving thrombolytic therapy while enrolled in ROCKET AF was performed to determine their baseline characteristics, indications for thrombolysis, and type of agent used. Safety end points were 30-day post-thrombolytic rates of stroke, bleeding, and mortality. A total of 28 patients in ROCKET AF received thrombolytic therapy, with 19 patients on rivaroxaban and 9 patients on warfarin. Ischemic stroke was the most common indication for thrombolysis (n = 10), and alteplase was the most commonly used fibrinolytic agent (n = 14). Of the 19 patients in the rivaroxaban group, there were 2 nonfatal bleeding events and 2 deaths, mostly occurring when thrombolytic therapy was administered within 48 hours of the last rivaroxaban dose. Of the 9 patients in the warfarin group, there was 1 nonfatal bleeding event and 3 deaths, most occurring when thrombolytic therapy was administered outside of 48 hours from the last warfarin dose. In conclusion, these observations suggest that careful assessment of the time since the last dose may be of clinical significance in patients on novel oral anticoagulants who require emergent thrombolysis., (Copyright © 2017 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Non-dihydropyridine calcium channel blockers (non-DHP CCBs) possess combined P-glycoprotein and moderate CYP3A4 inhibition, which may lead to increased exposure of medications that are substrates for these metabolic pathways, such as rivaroxaban. We evaluated the use and outcomes of non-DHP CCBs in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) in Rivaroxaban Once Daily Oral Direct Factor Xa Inhibition Compared with Vitamin K Antagonism for Prevention of Stroke and Embolism Trial in Atrial Fibrillation (ROCKET AF). We assessed clinical outcomes in patients who received non-DHP CCBs and the impact on the efficacy and safety of rivaroxaban compared with warfarin. Stroke or noncentral nervous system (CNS) systemic embolism (SE), major or nonmajor clinically relevant (NMCR) bleeding, all-cause death, and major bleeding were compared according to non-DHP CCB use. At randomization, 1,308 patients (9.2%) were taking a non-DHP CCB. They were more likely to be women, have diabetes and COPD, and less likely to have heart failure and had a lower mean CHADS 2 score (3.3 vs 3.5). Non-DHP CCB use was not associated with an increased risk of stroke/non-CNS SE (p = 0.11) or the composite outcome of NMCR or major bleeding (p = 0.087). Non-DHP CCB use was associated with an increased risk of major bleeding (adjusted hazard ratio 1.50, 95% CI 1.11 to 2.04) and intracranial hemorrhage (adjusted hazard ratio 2.84, 95% CI 1.53 to 5.29). No significant difference was observed in the primary efficacy (stroke or non-CNS SE; adjusted interaction p value = 0.38) or safety outcome (NMCR or major bleeding; adjusted interaction p value = 0.14) between rivaroxaban and warfarin with non-DHP CCB use. In conclusion, although the overall use of non-DHP CCBs was associated with an increased risk of major bleeding and intracranial hemorrhage, the use was not associated with a significant change in the safety or efficacy of rivaroxaban compared with warfarin observed in ROCKET AF., (Copyright © 2017 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

We investigated stroke outcomes in normal weight (body mass index [BMI] 18.50 to 24.99 kg/m 2 ), overweight (BMI 25.00 to 29.99 kg/m 2 ), and obese (BMI ≥30 kg/m 2 ) patients with atrial fibrillation treated with rivaroxaban and warfarin. We compared the incidence of stroke and systemic embolic events as well as bleeding events in normal weight (n = 3,289), overweight (n = 5,535), and obese (n = 5,206) patients in a post hoc analysis of the Rivaroxaban Once Daily Oral Direct Factor Xa Inhibition Compared with Vitamin K Antagonism for Prevention of Stroke and Embolism Trial in Atrial Fibrillation trial. Stroke and systemic embolic event rates per 100 patient-years were 2.93 in the normal weight group (reference group), 2.28 in the overweight group (adjusted hazard ratio [HR] 0.81, 95% CI 0.66 to 0.99, p = 0.04) and 1.88 in the obese group (adjusted HR 0.69, 95% CI 0.55 to 0.86, p <0.001). The risk of stroke was statistically significantly lower for obese patients with BMI ≥35 than that for normal weight patients in both the rivaroxaban and warfarin groups (rivaroxaban: HR 0.62, 95% CI 0.40 to 0.96, p = 0.033; warfarin: HR 0.48, 95% CI 0.31 to 0.74, p <0.001). In conclusion, in patients with atrial fibrillation treated with anticoagulant therapy, increased BMI was associated with decreased stroke risk. Warfarin and the novel anticoagulant rivaroxaban are effective in stroke prevention in all subgroups of obese patients., (Copyright © 2017 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Although implantation of cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIEDs) in patients receiving warfarin is well studied, limited data are available on the use of oral factor Xa inhibitors in this setting., Methods and Results: Using data from Rivaroxaban Once Daily Oral Direct Factor Xa Inhibition Compared with Vitamin K Antagonism for Prevention of Stroke and Embolism Trial in Atrial Fibrillation (ROCKET AF) (n=14 264), we compared baseline characteristics and clinical outcomes in patients with atrial fibrillation randomized to rivaroxaban versus warfarin who did and did not undergo CIED implantation or revision. In this post-hoc, postrandomization, on-treatment analysis, only the first intervention per patient was analyzed. During a median follow-up of 2.2 years, 453 patients (242 rivaroxaban group; 211 warfarin group) underwent de novo CIED implantation (64.2%) or revision procedures (35.8%). Patients who received CIEDs were older, more likely to be male, and more likely to have past myocardial infarction, but had similar stroke risk compared to patients who did not receive CIEDs. Most patients who received a device had study drug interrupted for the procedure and did not receive bridging anticoagulation. During the 30-day postprocedural period, 11 patients (4.55%) in the rivaroxaban group experienced bleeding complications compared with 15 (7.13%) in the warfarin group. Thromboembolic complications occurred in 3 patients (1.26%) in the rivaroxaban group and 1 (0.48%) in the warfarin group. Event rates were too low for formal hypothesis testing., Conclusions: Bleeding and thromboembolic events were low in both rivaroxaban- and warfarin-treated patients. Periprocedural use of oral factor Xa inhibitors in CIED implantation requires further study in prospective, randomized trials., Clinical Trial Registration: URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT00403767., (© 2017 The Authors, Bayer US LLC, and Janssen Research and Development. Published on behalf of the American Heart Association, Inc., by Wiley.)

Objective: Acute coronary syndrome (ACS) trials typically use a composite primary outcome (myocardial infarction [MI], stroke, or cardiovascular death), but differential patient characteristics, timing, and consequences associated with individual component end points as first events have not been well studied. We compared patient characteristics and prognostic significance associated with first cardiovascular events in the post-ACS setting for initially stabilized patients., Methods: We combined patient-level data from 4 trials of post-ACS antithrombotic therapies (PLATO, APPRAISE-2, TRACER, and TRILOGY ACS) to characterize the timing of and characteristics associated with first cardiovascular events (MI, stroke, or cardiovascular death). Landmark analysis at 7 days after index ACS presentation was used to focus on spontaneous, postdischarge events that were not confounded by in-hospital procedural complications. Using a competing risk framework, we tested for differential associations between prespecified covariates and the occurrence of nonfatal stroke vs MI as the first event, and we examined subsequent events after the first nonfatal event., Results: Among 46,694 patients with a median follow-up of 358 (25th, 75th percentiles 262, 486) days, a first ischemic event occurred in 4,307 patients (9.2%) as follows: MI in 5.8% (n = 2,690), stroke in 1.0% (n = 477), and cardiovascular death in 2.4% (n = 1,140). Older age, prior stroke/transient ischemic attack, prior atrial fibrillation, and higher diastolic blood pressure were associated with a significantly greater risk of stroke vs MI, whereas prior percutaneous coronary intervention was associated with a greater risk of MI vs stroke. Second events occurred in 32% of those with a first nonfatal stroke at a median of 13 (3, 59) days after the first event and in 32% of those with a first nonfatal MI at a median of 35 (5, 137) days after the first event. The most common second event was a recurrent MI among those with MI as the first event and cardiovascular death among those with stroke as the first event., Conclusions: Approximately 9% of patients experienced a first cardiovascular event in the post-ACS setting during a median follow-up of 1 year. Although the profile and prognostic implications of stroke vs MI as the first nonfatal event differ substantially, approximately one-third of these patients experienced a second event, typically soon after the first event. These findings have implications for improving post-ACS care and influencing the design of future cardiovascular trials., (Copyright © 2017 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Aims: Registries have the potential to capture treatment practices and outcomes in populations beyond the constraints of clinical trial settings. The value of data obtained depend critically upon robust quality standards (including source data verification [SDV] and training); features that are commonly absent from registries. This article outlines the quality standards developed for Global Anticoagulant Registry in the FIELD-Atrial Fibrillation (GARFIELD-AF)., Methods and Results: GARFIELD-AF comprises ∼57 000 patients prospectively recruited over 6.5 years in 35 countries in five successive cohorts. The registry employs a combination of remote and onsite monitoring to ascertain completeness and accuracy of records and by design, SDV is performed on 20% of cases (i.e. ∼11 400 patients). Four performance measures for ranking sites according to data quality and other performance indicators were evaluated (including data quality for 13 quantifiable variables, late data locking, number of missing critical variables, and history of poor data quality from the previous monitoring phase). These criteria facilitated the identification of sites with potentially suboptimal data quality for onsite monitoring. During early phases of the registry, critical variables for data checking were also identified. SDV using these variables (partial SDV in 902 patients) showed similar concordance to SDV of all fields (110 patients): 94.4% vs. 93.1%, respectively. This standard formed the baseline against which ongoing quality improvements were assessed, facilitating corrective action on data quality issues. In consequence, concordance was improved in the next monitoring phase (95.6%; n = 1172)., Conclusion: The quality standards in GARFIELD-AF have the potential to inform a future 'reference' for registries., (Published on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology. All rights reserved. © The Author 2016. For Permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Background: Several biomarkers have been shown to improve risk stratification in patients with non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndrome (NSTEACS); however, they have not been integrated into risk prediction tools., Methods: C-reactive-protein, N-terminal-pro-brain natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP), and haemoglobin A1C were measured in 6447 patients with NSTEACS who were enrolled in the Clopidogrel in Unstable Angina to Prevent Recurrent Events trial. A risk score to predict cardiovascular (CV) death, myocardial infarction (MI), or stroke at 1 year was developed by incorporating biomarkers that were independently predictive of events with traditional variables, electrocardiogram, and troponin-T. Model discrimination was evaluated using c-statistic, integrated discrimination improvement, and net reclassification index, and validated using bootstrap methods., Results: During 1 year of follow-up, 686 patients experienced a CV event. Each biomarker predicted CV death, MI, or stroke; however, only NT-proBNP and haemoglobin A1C improved model discrimination, increasing the c-statistic (0.66-0.71), integrated discrimination improvement to 3.4%, and net reclassification index to 17.5% (P < 0.0001 for all measures). A risk score ranging from 0 to 20 points including variables for age, prior MI/stroke, sex, ST-segment deviation, troponin-T, NT-proBNP, and haemoglobin A1C classified individuals into low-, intermediate-, and high-risk groups with rates of CV death, MI, stroke of 3.7%, 9.1%, 17.8%, respectively. The absolute benefit of dual antiplatelet therapy vs aspirin alone was 1.0%, 4.7%, and 3.0% in low-, intermediate-, and high-risk groups, respectively., Conclusions: The addition of NT-proBNP and haemoglobin A1C to 5 standard variables creates a 7-variable risk score that improves prediction of CV events at 1 year and aids in risk-based selection of patients with NSTEACS for dual antiplatelet therapy., (Copyright © 2016 Canadian Cardiovascular Society. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)