Search

Importance: Data are limited regarding the risk of cerebrovascular ischemic events and major bleeding in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) and recent acute coronary syndrome (ACS) and/or percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI)., Objective: Determine the efficacy and safety of apixaban or vitamin K antagonists (VKA) and aspirin or placebo according to prior stroke, transient ischemic attack (TIA), or thromboembolism (TE)., Design, Setting, and Participants: In this prospective, multicenter, 2-by-2 factorial, randomized clinical trial, post hoc parallel analyses were performed to compare randomized treatment regimens according to presence or absence of prior stroke/TIA/TE using Cox proportional hazards models. Patients with AF, recent ACS or PCI, and planned use of P2Y12 inhibitors for 6 months or longer were included; 33 patients with missing data about prior stroke/TIA/TE were excluded., Interventions: Apixaban (5 mg or 2.5 mg twice daily) or VKA and aspirin or placebo., Main Outcomes and Measures: Major or clinically relevant nonmajor (CRNM) bleeding., Results: Of 4581 patients included, 633 (13.8%) had prior stroke/TIA/TE. Patients with vs without prior stroke/TIA/TE were older; had higher CHA2DS2-VASC and HAS-BLED scores; and more frequently had prior bleeding, heart failure, diabetes, and prior oral anticoagulant use. Apixaban was associated with lower rates of major or CRNM bleeding and death or hospitalization than VKA in patients with (hazard ratio [HR], 0.69; 95% CI, 0.46-1.03) and without (HR, 0.68; 95% CI, 0.57-0.82) prior stroke/TIA/TE. Patients without prior stroke/TIA/TE receiving aspirin vs placebo had higher rates of bleeding; this difference appeared less substantial among patients with prior stroke/TIA/TE (P = .01 for interaction). Aspirin was associated with numerically lower rates of death or ischemic events than placebo in patients with (HR, 0.71; 95% CI, 0.42-1.20) and without (HR, 0.93; 95% CI, 0.72-1.21) prior stroke/TIA/TE (not statistically significant)., Conclusions and Relevance: The safety and efficacy of apixaban compared with VKA was consistent with the AUGUSTUS findings, irrespective of prior stroke/TIA/TE. Aspirin increased major or CRNM bleeding, particularly in patients without prior stroke/TIA/TE. Although aspirin may have some benefit in patients with prior stroke, our findings support the use of apixaban and a P2Y12 inhibitor without aspirin for the majority of patients with AF and ACS and/or PCI, regardless of prior stroke/TIA/TE status., Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02415400.

Background and Purpose: Depression is common after stroke and is often treated with antidepressant medications (AD). ADs have also been hypothesised to improve stroke recovery, although recent randomised trials were neutral. We investigated the patterns of in-hospital AD initiation after ischaemic stroke and association with clinical and readmission outcomes., Methods: All Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries aged 65 or older hospitalised for ischaemic stroke in participating Get With The Guidelines-Stroke hospitals between April and December 2014 were eligible for this analysis. Outcome measures included days alive and not in a healthcare institution (home time), all-cause mortality and readmission within 1-year postdischarge. Propensity score (PS)-adjusted logistic regression models were used to evaluate the associations between AD use and each outcome measure. We also compared outcomes in patients prescribed selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) AD versus those prescribed non-SSRI ADs., Results: Of 21 805 AD naïve patients included in this analysis, 1835 (8.4%) were started on an AD at discharge. Patients started on an AD had higher rates of depression and prior ischaemic stroke, presented with higher admission National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale score and were less likely to be discharged home. Similarly, patients started on an SSRI had lower rates of discharge to home. Adjusting for stroke severity, patients started on an AD had worse all-cause mortality, all-cause readmission, major adverse cardiac events, readmission for depression and decreased home-time. However, AD use was also associated with an increased risk for the sepsis, a falsification endpoint, suggesting the presence of residual confounding., Conclusions: Patients with ischaemic stroke initiated on AD therapy are at increased risk of poor clinical outcomes and readmission even after PS adjustment, suggesting that poststroke depression requiring medication is a poor prognostic sign. Further research is needed to explore the reasons why depression is associated with worse outcome, and whether AD treatment modifies this risk or not., Competing Interests: Competing interests: DLB discloses the following relationships—Advisory Board: Cardax, CellProthera, Cereno Scientific, Elsevier Practice Update Cardiology, Level Ex, Medscape Cardiology, PhaseBio, PLx Pharma, Regado Biosciences; Board of Directors: Boston VA Research Institute, Society of Cardiovascular Patient Care, TobeSoft; Chair: American Heart Association Quality Oversight Committee; Data Monitoring Committees: Baim Institute for Clinical Research (formerly Harvard Clinical Research Institute, for the PORTICO trial, funded by St. Jude Medical, now Abbott), Cleveland Clinic (including for the ExCEED trial, funded by Edwards), Contego Medical (Chair, PERFORMANCE 2), Duke Clinical Research Institute, Mayo Clinic, Mount Sinai School of Medicine (for the ENVISAGE trial, funded by Daiichi Sankyo), Population Health Research Institute; Honoraria: American College of Cardiology (Senior Associate Editor, Clinical Trials and News, ACC.org; Vice-Chair, ACC Accreditation Committee), Baim Institute for Clinical Research (formerly Harvard Clinical Research Institute; RE-DUAL PCI clinical trial steering committee funded by Boehringer Ingelheim; AEGIS-II executive committee funded by CSL Behring), Belvoir Publications (Editor in Chief, Harvard Heart Letter), Duke Clinical Research Institute (clinical trial steering committees, including for the PRONOUNCE trial, funded by Ferring Pharmaceuticals), HMP Global (Editor in Chief, Journal of Invasive Cardiology), Journal of the American College of Cardiology (Guest Editor; Associate Editor), K2P (Co-Chair, interdisciplinary curriculum), Level Ex, Medtelligence/ReachMD (CME steering committees), MJH Life Sciences, Population Health Research Institute (for the COMPASS operations committee, publications committee, steering committee, and USA national co-leader, funded by Bayer), Slack Publications (Chief Medical Editor, Cardiology Today’s Intervention), Society of Cardiovascular Patient Care (Secretary/Treasurer), WebMD (CME steering committees); Other: Clinical Cardiology (Deputy Editor), NCDR-ACTION Registry Steering Committee (Chair), VA CART Research and Publications Committee (Chair); Research Funding: Abbott, Afimmune, Amarin, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Cardax, Chiesi, CSL Behring, Eisai, Ethicon, Ferring Pharmaceuticals, Forest Laboratories, Fractyl, Idorsia, Ironwood, Ischemix, Lexicon, Lilly, Medtronic, Pfizer, PhaseBio, PLx Pharma, Regeneron, Roche, Sanofi Aventis, Synaptic, The Medicines Company; Royalties: Elsevier (Editor, Cardiovascular Intervention: A Companion to Braunwald’s Heart Disease); Site Coinvestigator: Biotronik, Boston Scientific, CSI, St. Jude Medical (now Abbott), Svelte; Trustee: American College of Cardiology; Unfunded Research: FlowCo, Merck, Novo Nordisk, Takeda., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2021. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

To address literature gaps on treatment with real-world evidence, this study compared effectiveness, safety, and cost outcomes in NVAF patients with coronary or peripheral artery disease (CAD, PAD) prescribed apixaban versus other oral anticoagulants. NVAF patients aged ≥65 years co-diagnosed with CAD/PAD initiating warfarin, apixaban, dabigatran, or rivaroxaban were selected from the US Medicare population (January 1, 2013 to September 30, 2015). Propensity score matching was used to match apixaban versus warfarin, dabigatran, and rivaroxaban cohorts. Cox models were used to evaluate the risk of stroke/systemic embolism (SE), major bleeding (MB), all-cause mortality, and a composite of stroke/myocardial infarction/all-cause mortality. Generalized linear and two-part models were used to compare stroke/SE, MB, and all-cause costs between cohorts. A total of 33,269 warfarin-apixaban, 9,335 dabigatran-apixaban, and 33,633 rivaroxaban-apixaban pairs were identified after matching. Compared with apixaban, stroke/SE risk was higher in warfarin (hazard ratio [HR]: 1.93; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.61 to 2.31), dabigatran (HR: 1.69; 95% CI: 1.18 to 2.43), and rivaroxaban (HR: 1.24; 95% CI: 1.01 to 1.51) patients. MB risk was higher in warfarin (HR: 1.67; 95% CI: 1.52 to 1.83), dabigatran (HR: 1.37; 95% CI: 1.13 to 1.68), and rivaroxaban (HR: 1.87; 95% CI: 1.71 to 2.05) patients vs apixaban. Stroke/SE- and MB-related medical costs per-patient per-month were higher in warfarin, dabigatran, and rivaroxaban patients versus apixaban. Total all-cause health care costs were higher in warfarin and rivaroxaban patients compared with apixaban patients. In conclusion, compared with apixaban, patients on dabigatran, rivaroxaban, or warfarin had a higher risk of stroke/SE, MB, and event-related costs., (Copyright © 2021 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

While oral anticoagulation is a cornerstone of stroke prevention therapy in atrial fibrillation (AF), few studies have evaluated comparative discontinuation rates in clinical practice. The objective of this study is to evaluate discontinuation rates among patients on warfarin and direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) in clinical practice., Methods: The ORBIT-AF II Registry enrolled 10,005 total AF patients with a CHA 2 DS 2 VASc score of ≥2 on warfarin or DOACs from 235 clinical practices across the US from February 13, 2013 and July 12, 2017. Descriptive statistics and multivariable Cox regression modeling were used to describe baseline characteristics and predictors of discontinuation. Unadjusted and adjusted discontinuation rates and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated using Cox proportional hazards models and propensity score adjustment, respectively., Results: At baseline, 16.4% (N = 1642/10,005) were treated with warfarin, 83.6% (N = 8363/10,005) with DOACs and 1498/10,005 patients (15.0%) discontinued therapy [warfarin = 236/1642 (14.4%) vs DOACs = 1262/8363 (15.1%)]. At 6 and 12 months respectively, among 7049 patients with a new diagnosis of AF within 6 months, adjusted discontinuation rates for warfarin versus DOACs were as follows: [6 months: 7.9%, 95%CI (6.8%-9.0%) vs 9.6% (8.4%-10.7%), P = .16]; [12 months: 12.7% (11.0%-14.3%) vs 15.3% (13.6%-16.9%), P = .02)]. Patients who discontinued therapy with warfarin or DOACs had higher risk of adverse clinical outcomes including: all-cause mortality and cardiovascular death (CV) than those who continued treatment., Conclusion: In a community based AF cohort, adjusted rates of discontinuation at 12-months were higher in DOAC-treated versus VKA-treated patients. Discontinuation of oral anticoagulation was associated with increased absolute risk of all-cause mortality and CV death., Clinical Trial Registration: URL:https://clinicaltrials.gov. Unique Identifier: NCT01701817., (Copyright © 2020 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Atrial fibrillation (AF) is common in patients with end-stage renal disease (ESRD). The impact of oral anticoagulation (OAC) in ESRD patients is uncertain., Objectives: The purpose of this study was to describe patterns of OAC use in ESRD patients with AF and their associations with cardiovascular outcomes., Methods: Using Medicare fee-for-service 5% claims data from 2007 to 2013, we analyzed treatment and outcomes in a cohort of patients with ESRD and AF. Prescription drug benefit information was used to determine the timing of OAC therapy. Cox proportional hazards modeling was used to compare outcomes including death, all-cause stroke, ischemic stroke, hemorrhagic stroke, and bleeding hospitalizations in ESRD patients treated with or without OAC., Results: The cohort included 8,410 patients with AF and ESRD. A total of 3,043 (36.2%) patients were treated with OAC at some time during the study period. Propensity scores used to match 1,519 patients with AF and ESRD on OAC with 3,018 ESRD patients without OAC. Treatment with OAC was not associated with hospitalization for stroke (hazard ratio [HR]: 1.00; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.23 to 1.35; p = 0.97) or death (HR: 1.02; 95% CI: 0.94 to 1.10; p = 0.62). OAC was associated with an increased risk of hospitalization for bleeding (HR: 1.26; 95% CI: 1.09 to 1.46; p = 0.0017) and intracranial hemorrhage (HR: 1.30; 95% CI: 1.07 to 1.59; p = 0.0094)., Conclusions: OAC utilization was low in patients with AF and ESRD. We found no association between OAC use and reduced risk of stroke or death. OAC use was associated with increased risks of hospitalization for bleeding or intracranial hemorrhage. Alternative stroke prevention strategies are needed in patients with ESRD and AF., (Copyright © 2020 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background Patient satisfaction with therapy is an important metric of care quality and has been associated with greater medication persistence. We evaluated the association of patient satisfaction with warfarin therapy to other metrics of anticoagulation care quality and clinical outcomes among patients with atrial fibrillation ( AF ). Methods and Results Using data from the ORBIT - AF (Outcomes Registry for Better Informed Treatment of Atrial Fibrillation) registry, patients were identified with AF who were taking warfarin and had completed an Anti-Clot Treatment Scale ( ACTS ) questionnaire, a validated metric of patient-reported burden and benefit of oral anticoagulation. Multivariate regressions were used to determine association of ACTS burden and benefit scores with time in therapeutic international normalized ratio range ( TTR ; both ≥75% and ≥60%), warfarin discontinuation, and clinical outcomes (death, stroke, major bleed, and all-cause hospitalization). Among 1514 patients with AF on warfarin therapy (75±10 years; 42% women; CHA 2 DS 2 - VAS c 3.9±1.7), those most burdened with warfarin therapy were younger and more likely to be women, have paroxysmal AF , and to be treated with antiarrhythmic drugs. After adjustment for covariates, ACTS burden scores were independent of TTR ( TTR ≥75%: odds ratio, 1.01 [95% CI , 0.99-1.03]; TTR ≥60%: odds ratio, 1.01 [95% CI , 0.98-1.05]), warfarin discontinuation (odds ratio, 0.99; 95% CI , 0.97-1.01), or clinical outcomes. ACTS benefit scores were also not associated with TTR , warfarin discontinuation, or clinical outcomes. Conclusions In a large registry of patients with AF taking warfarin, ACTS scores provided independent information beyond other traditional metrics of oral anticoagulation care quality and identified patient groups at high risk for dissatisfaction with warfarin therapy.

Background Current American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association guidelines suggest that for patients with atrial fibrillation who are at low risk for stroke (CHA 2 DS 2 VASc=1) (or women with CHA 2 DS 2 VASc=2) a variety of treatment strategies may be considered. However, in clinical practice, patterns of treatment in these "low-risk" patients are not well described. The objective of this analysis is to define thromboembolic event rates and to describe treatment patterns in patients with low-risk CHA 2 DS 2 VASc scores. Methods and Results We compared characteristics, treatment strategies, and outcomes among patients with a CHA 2 DS 2 VASc=0, CHA 2 DS 2 VASc=1, females with a CHA 2 DS 2 VASc=2, and CHA 2 DS 2 VASc ≥2 in ORBIT-AF (Outcomes Registry for Better Informed Treatment of Atrial Fibrillation) I & II. Compared with CHA 2 DS 2 VASc ≥2 patients (84.2%), those with a CHA 2 DS 2 VASc=0 (60.3%), 1 (69.9%), and females with a CHA 2 DS 2 VASc score=2 (72.4%) were significantly less often treated with oral anticoagulation ( P<0.0001). Stroke rates were low overall and ranged from 0 per 100 patient-years in those with CHA 2 DS 2 VASc=0, 0.8 (95% confidence interval [CI] [0.5-1.2]) in those with CHA 2 DS 2 VASc=1, 0.8 (95% CI [0.4-1.6]) in females with a CHA 2 DS 2 VASc score=2, and 1.7 (95% CI [1.6-1.9]) in CHA 2 DS 2 VASc ≥2. All-cause mortality (per 100 patient-years) was highest in females with a CHA 2 DS 2 VASc score=2 (1.4) (95% CI [0.8-2.3]), compared with patients with a CHA 2 DS 2 VASc=0 (0.2) (95% CI [0.1-1.0]), and CHA 2 DS 2 VASc=1 (1.0) (95% CI [0.7-1.4]), but lower than patients with a CHA 2 DS 2 VASc ≥2 (5.7) (95% CI [5.4-6.0]). Conclusion The majority of CHA 2 DS 2 VASc=0-1 patients are treated with oral anticoagulation. In addition, the absolute risks of death and stroke/transient ischemic attack were low among both male and females CHA 2 DS 2 VASc=0-1 as well as among females with a CHA 2 DS 2 VASc score=2. Clinical Trial Registration URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov . Unique identifier: NCT01701817.

Background: Mineralocorticoid receptor antagonist (MRA) therapy may be beneficial to patients with atrial fibrillation (AF), but little is known about their use in patients with AF and subsequent outcomes., Methods and Results: In order to better understand MRA use and subsequent outcomes, we performed a retrospective cohort study of the contemporary ORBIT-AF (Outcomes Registry for Better Informed Treatment of Atrial Fibrillation) registry. AF progression and cardiovascular outcomes were compared using propensity-matched Cox proportional hazards modeling according to MRA use at baseline and new MRA use at follow-up versus patients with no MRA use. Among 7012 patients with nonpermanent AF, 320 patients were taking MRA at enrollment, and 416 patients initiated MRA use during follow-up. The mean patient age was 72.5 years, 56.3% were men, and 70.4% had paroxysmal AF. Among all patients taking MRAs, 434 (59.0%) had heart failure, 655 (89.0%) had hypertension, and 380 (51.6%) had both. After adjustment, new MRA use was not associated with reduced AF progression (hazard ratio, 1.18; 95% confidence interval, 0.88-1.58; P =0.27) but showed a trend towards lower risk of stroke, transient ischemic attack, or systemic embolism (hazard ratio, 0.17; 95% confidence interval, 0.02-1.23; P =0.08). Results were similar for a comparison of new MRA users and baseline MRA users compared with nonusers., Conclusions: In community-based outpatients with AF, the majority of MRA use was for heart failure and hypertension. MRA use also trended towards lower adjusted stroke risk. Future studies should test the hypothesis that MRA use may decrease the risk of stroke in patients with AF., (© 2018 The Authors. Published on behalf of the American Heart Association, Inc., by Wiley.)

Background: Non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants (NOACs) are indicated for stroke prevention in atrial fibrillation (AF) but require lower doses in certain patients. We sought to describe the frequency, appropriateness (according to Food and Drug Administration labeling), and outcomes of patients prescribed reduced doses of NOACs in community practice., Methods and Results: We analyzed data from the ORBIT-AF II (The Outcomes Registry for Better Informed Treatment of Atrial Fibrillation II) registry, a prospective, national, observational registry of AF patients. Among 7925 AF patients receiving NOACs, we assessed patterns of use of reduced NOAC doses and associated cardiovascular and bleeding outcomes at median follow-up of 1 year. Overall, 6636 patients (84%) received a NOAC at standard dose, which was consistent with US Food and Drug Administration labeling in 6376 (96%). Reduced NOAC dose was prescribed to 1289 (16% overall), which was consistent with Food and Drug Administration labeling in only 555 patients (43%). Compared with those whose NOAC dose was appropriately reduced, patients receiving inappropriate dose reductions were younger (median age 79 versus 84, P <0.0001) and had lower ORBIT bleeding risk scores (26% ≥4 versus 45%, P <0.0001). Compared with those appropriately receiving standard dosing, patients receiving inappropriately reduced-dose NOACs had higher unadjusted rates of thromboembolic events (2.11 versus 1.35 events per 100 patient years, hazard ratio 1.56, 95% confidence interval 0.92-2.67) and death (6.77 versus 2.60, hazard ratio 2.61, 95% confidence interval 1.86-3.67). After adjustment, outcomes were not significantly different but tended to favor patients dosed appropriately., Conclusions: The majority of dose reductions of NOACs in AF are inconsistent with US Food and Drug Administration recommendations. There appear to be opportunities to improve current NOAC dosing in community practice., Clinical Trial Registration: URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT01701817., (© 2018 The Authors. Published on behalf of the American Heart Association, Inc., by Wiley.)

Background: The presence of valvular heart disease (VHD) may affect the risk of stroke and mortality in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF). Community-based estimates of prevalence and outcomes of specific forms of VHD in patients with AF are lacking., Methods and Results: We examined the prevalence of VHD, anticoagulation use, mortality, stroke/transient ischemic attack, and bleeding among a community cohort of patients with AF. Significant VHD was defined as follows: (1) moderate/severe mitral stenosis or mechanical valve; (2) bioprosthetic valve, surgical repair, or balloon valvuloplasty; and (3) moderate/severe aortic regurgitation or stenosis, mitral regurgitation, or tricuspid regurgitation. Proportional hazards models were performed to test the association between VHD groups and outcomes. Among 9748 patients with AF, 2705 (27.7%) had significant VHD. Anticoagulation use was highest among patients with mitral stenosis/mechanical valve (91.8%). Compared with individuals with no significant VHD, individuals with aortic regurgitation/aortic stenosis, mitral regurgitation, or tricuspid regurgitation (hazard ratio, 1.23; 95% confidence interval, 1.07-1.42) had the highest risk of death. There were no differences in stroke or transient ischemic attack and major bleeding among individuals with and without significant VHD. Patients with AF and aortic stenosis had the highest risk of death (hazard ratio, 1.32; 95% confidence interval, 1.08-1.62)., Conclusions: Significant VHD is common among patients with AF in community practice. In a community cohort of patients with AF and CHA 2 DS 2 -VASc score ≥2, most were anticoagulated. Individuals with AF and moderate-to-severe biological VHD have more comorbidities and a higher mortality risk; however, stroke and major bleeding are similar among those with and without significant VHD., (© 2017 The Authors. Published on behalf of the American Heart Association, Inc., by Wiley.)

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.)

Background: Cancer is associated with a prothrombotic state and increases the risk of thrombotic events in patients with atrial fibrillation. We described the clinical characteristics and outcomes and assessed the safety and efficacy of apixaban versus warfarin in patients with atrial fibrillation and cancer in the Apixaban for Reduction in Stroke and Other Thromboembolic Events in Atrial Fibrillation (ARISTOTLE) trial., Methods: The association between cancer and clinical outcomes was assessed using Cox regression models. At baseline, 1236 patients (6.8%) had a history of cancer; 12.7% had active cancer, and 87.3% had remote cancer., Results: There were no significant associations between history of cancer and stroke/systemic embolism, major bleeding, or death. The effect of apixaban versus warfarin for the prevention of stroke/systemic embolism was consistent among patients with a history of cancer (event/100 patient-years = 1.4 vs 1.2; hazard ratio [HR], 1.09; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.53-2.26) and no cancer (1.3 vs 1.6; HR, 0.77; 95% CI, 0.64-0.93) (P interaction = .37). The safety and efficacy of apixaban versus warfarin were preserved among patients with and without active cancer. Apixaban was associated with a greater benefit for the composite of stroke/systemic embolism, myocardial infarction, and death in active cancer (HR, 0.30; 95% CI, 0.11-0.83) versus without cancer (HR, 0.86; 95% CI, 0.78-0.95), but not in remote cancer (HR, 1.46; 95% CI, 1.01-2.10) (interaction P = .0028)., Conclusions: Cancer was not associated with a higher risk of stroke. The superior efficacy and safety of apixaban versus warfarin were consistent in patients with and without cancer. Our positive findings regarding apixaban use in patients with atrial fibrillation and cancer are exploratory and promising, but warrant further evaluation., (Copyright © 2017 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background and Purpose: Rehabilitation is recommended after a stroke to enhance recovery and improve outcomes, but hospital's use of inpatient rehabilitation facilities (IRFs) or skilled nursing facility (SNF) and the factors associated with referral are unknown., Methods: We analyzed clinical registry and claims data for 31 775 Medicare beneficiaries presenting with acute ischemic stroke from 918 Get With The Guidelines-Stroke hospitals who were discharged to either IRF or SNF between 2006 and 2008. Using a multilevel logistic regression model, we evaluated patient and hospital characteristics, as well as geographic availability, in relation to discharge to either IRF or SNF. After accounting for observed factors, the median odds ratio was reported to quantify hospital-level variation in the use of IRF versus SNF., Results: Of 31 775 patients, 17 662 (55.6%) were discharged to IRF and 14 113 (44.4%) were discharged to SNF. Compared with SNF patients, IRF patients were younger, more were men, had less health-service use 6 months prestroke, and had fewer comorbid conditions and in-hospital complications. Use of IRF or SNF varied significantly across hospitals (median IRF use, 55.8%; interquartile range, 34.8%-75.0%; unadjusted median odds ratio, 2.59; 95% confidence interval, 2.44-2.77). Hospital-level variation in discharge rates to IRF or SNF persisted after adjustment for patient, clinical, and geographic variables (adjusted median odds ratio, 2.87; 95% confidence interval, 2.68-3.11)., Conclusions: There is marked unexplained variation among hospitals in their use of IRF versus SNF poststroke even after accounting for clinical characteristics and geographic availability., Clinical Trial Registration: URL: https://clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT02284165., (© 2017 American Heart Association, Inc.)

Aims: The presence of cancer can complicate treatment choices for patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) increasing both the risk of thrombotic and bleeding events., Methods and Results: Using data from Outcomes Registry for Better Informed Treatment of Atrial Fibrillation, we aimed to characterize AF patients with cancer, to describe their management and to assess the association between cancer and cardiovascular (CV) outcomes. Among 9749 patients, 23.8% had history of cancer (57% solid malignancy, 1.3% leukaemia, 3.3% lymphoma, 40% other type, and 2.2% metastatic cancer). Patients with history of cancer were older, more likely to have CV disease, CV risk factors, and prior gastrointestinal bleeding. No difference in antiarrhythmic and antithrombotic therapy was observed between those with and without cancer. Patients with history of cancer had a significantly higher risk of death (7.8 vs. 4.9 deaths per 100 patient-years follow-up, P = 0.0003) mainly driven by non-CV death (4.2 vs. 2.4 per 100 patient-years follow-up; P = 0.0004) and higher risk of major bleeding (5.1 vs. 3.5 per 100 patient-years follow-up; P = 0.02) compared with non-cancer patients; no differences were observed in risks of strokes/non-central nervous system embolism (1.96 vs. 1.48, P = 0.74) and CV death (2.89 vs. 2.07, P = 0.35) between the two groups., Conclusion: A history of cancer is common among AF patients with up to one in four patients having both. Antithrombotic therapy, rates of cerebrovascular accident, other thrombotic events and cardiac death were similar in AF patients with or without a history of cancer. Patients with cancer, however, were at higher risk of major bleeding and non-CV death., (Published on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology. All rights reserved. © The Author 2017. For permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

The degree to which clinical outcomes are worsened in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) with heart failure (HF) compared with those without HF is not well described. This study aimed to determine the impact of HF on clinical outcomes in patients with AF. We analyzed data from Outcomes Registry for Better Informed Treatment of Atrial Fibrillation, a national registry of 10,135 patients with AF to determine associations between HF and left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) and outcomes, including stroke, mortality, and hospitalization using Cox multivariable modeling. Atrial Fibrillation Effect on Quality-of-Life Questionnaire (AFEQT) scores between groups were also compared. Overall, 33% (n = 3,203) of patients had HF; of these 33% (n = 985) had LVEF ≤40%. Oral anticoagulation was prescribed more commonly in patients with HF (81% vs 74%). Compared with patients without HF, those with HF had similar rate of stroke (1.28 vs 0.88 per 100-patient years, hazard ratio [HR] 1.11, confidence interval [CI] 0.83 to 1.48, p = 0.47) but higher mortality (HR 1.69, CI 1.49 to 1.92, p <0.001) and hospitalization (HR 1.31, CI 1.23 to 1.39, p <0.0001). Patients with LVEF ≤40% had similar stroke risk (HR 1.06, CI 0.67 to 1.67) but higher mortality (HR 2.06, CI 1.74 to 2.44) and hospitalization (HR 1.38, CI 1.25 to 1.51). AFEQT overall score was significantly lower (76.9 vs 83.3, p <0.0001) in patients with HF. In conclusion, HF was associated with increased risk of death and hospitalization and worse quality of life, but similar rates of thromboembolism regardless of LVEF among patients with AF. These findings highlight the need to develop therapeutic strategies targeting functional status and survival for patients with HF and AF., (Copyright © 2017 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants (NOACs) are effective at preventing stroke in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF). However, little is known about the management of bleeding in contemporary, clinical use of NOACs. We aimed to assess the frequency, management, and outcomes of major bleeding in the setting of community use of NOACs. Using the Outcomes Registry for Better Informed Treatment of Atrial Fibrillation II registry, we analyzed rates of International Society on Thrombosis and Haemostasis major bleeding and subsequent outcomes in patients treated with NOACs versus warfarin. Outcomes of interest included acute and chronic bleeding management, recurrent bleeding, thromboembolic events, and death. In total, 344 patients with atrial fibrillation experienced major bleeding events over a median follow-up of 360 days follow-up: n = 273 on NOAC (3.3 per 100 patient-years) and n = 71 on warfarin (3.5 per 100 patient-years). Intracranial bleeding was uncommon but similar (0.34 per 100 patient-years for NOAC vs 0.44 for warfarin, p = 0.5), as was gastrointestinal bleeding (1.8 for NOAC vs 1.3 for warfarin, p = 0.1). Blood products and correction agents were less commonly used in NOAC patients with major bleeds compared with warfarin-treated patients (53% vs 76%, p = 0.0004 for blood products; 0% vs 1.5% for recombinant factor; p = 0.0499); no patients received pharmacologic hemostatic agents (aminocaproic acid, tranexamic acid, desmopressin, aprotinin). Within 30 days, 23 NOAC-treated patients (8.4%) died versus 5 (7.0%) on warfarin (p = 0.7). At follow-up, 126 NOAC-treated (46%) and 29 warfarin-treated patients (41%) were not receiving any anticoagulation. In conclusion, rates of major bleeding are similar in warfarin and NOAC-treated patients in clinical practice. However, NOAC-related bleeds require less blood product administration and rarely require factor replacement., (Copyright © 2017 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) are prone to cardiovascular events and anticoagulation-related bleeding complications. We hypothesized that patients with anemia are at increased risk for these outcomes., Methods: We performed a post hoc analysis of the ARISTOTLE trial, which included >18,000 patients with AF randomized to warfarin (target international normalized ratio, 2.0-3.0) or apixaban 5 mg twice daily. Multivariable Cox regression analysis was used to determine if anemia (defined as hemoglobin <13.0 in men and <12.0 g/dL in women) was associated with future stroke, major bleeding, or mortality., Results: Anemia was present at baseline in 12.6% of the ARISTOTLE population. Patients with anemia were older, had higher mean CHADS 2 and HAS-BLED scores, and were more likely to have experienced previous bleeding events. Anemia was associated with major bleeding (adjusted hazard ratio [HR], 1.92; 95% CI, 1.62-2.28; P<.0001) and all-cause mortality (adjusted HR, 1.68; 95% CI, 1.46-1.93; P<.0001) but not stroke or systemic embolism (adjusted HR, 0.92; 95% CI, 0.70-1.21). The benefits of apixaban compared with warfarin on the rates of stroke, mortality, and bleeding events were consistent in patients with and without anemia., Conclusions: Chronic anemia is associated with a higher incidence of bleeding complications and mortality, but not of stroke, in anticoagulated patients with AF. Apixaban is an attractive anticoagulant for stroke prevention in patients with AF with or without anemia., (Copyright © 2016 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: We studied (1) the rates of stroke or systemic embolism and bleeding in patients with atrial fibrillation and peripheral artery disease (PAD) and (2) the efficacy and safety of apixaban versus warfarin in patients with atrial fibrillation with and without PAD., Methods and Results: The Apixaban for Reduction in Stroke and Other Thromboembolic Events in Atrial Fibrillation (ARISTOTLE) trial randomized 18 201 patients with atrial fibrillation to apixaban or warfarin for stroke/systemic embolism prevention; 884 (4.9%) patients had PAD at baseline. Patients with PAD had higher unadjusted rates of stroke and systemic embolism (hazard ratio [HR] 1.73, 95% CI 1.22-2.45; P=0.002) and major bleeding (HR 1.34, 95% CI 1.00-1.81; P=0.05), but after adjustment, no differences existed in rates of stroke and systemic embolism (HR 1.32, 95% CI 0.93-1.88; P=0.12) and major bleeding (HR 1.03, 95% CI 0.76-1.40; P=0.83) compared with patients without PAD. The risk of stroke or systemic embolism was similar in patients assigned to apixaban and warfarin with PAD (HR 0.63, 95% CI 0.32-1.25) and without PAD (HR 0.80, 95% CI 0.66-0.96; interaction P=0.52). Patients with PAD did not have a statistically significant reduction in major or clinically relevant nonmajor bleeding with apixaban compared with warfarin (HR 1.05, 95% CI 0.69-1.58), whereas those without PAD had a statistically significant reduction (HR 0.65, 95% CI 0.58-0.73; interaction P=0.03)., Conclusions: Patients with PAD in ARISTOTLE had a higher crude risk of stroke or systemic embolism compared with patients without PAD that was not present after adjustment. The benefits of apixaban versus warfarin for stroke and systemic embolism were similar in patients with and without PAD. These findings highlight the need to optimize the treatment of patients with atrial fibrillation and PAD., Clinical Trial Registration: URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT00412984., (© 2017 The Authors. Published on behalf of the American Heart Association, Inc., by Wiley Blackwell.)

Background: Evidence supporting use of antithrombotic therapy in atrial fibrillation (AF) is based mainly on data from patients with permanent, persistent, or paroxysmal AF. Less is known about the risk following a new diagnosis of AF and the efficacy and safety of apixaban in these patients., Methods: Using data from ARISTOTLE, we assessed the relationship between timing of AF diagnosis and clinical outcomes and the efficacy and safety of apixaban versus warfarin in these patients. Recently diagnosed AF was defined as a new diagnosis of AF within 30days prior to enrollment. Cox proportional hazards models were used to determine the association between recently diagnosed AF and clinical outcomes. We also assessed the efficacy and safety of apixaban versus warfarin according to time since AF diagnosis., Results: In ARISTOTLE, 1899 (10.5%) patients had recently diagnosed AF. After adjustment, patients with recently versus remotely diagnosed AF had a similar risk of stroke/systemic embolism (HR=1.07, 95% CI=0.80-1.42; p=0.67), but higher mortality was seen in patients with recently diagnosed AF (adjusted HR=1.21, 95% CI=1.02-1.43; p=0.03). The beneficial effects of apixaban, compared with warfarin, on clinical outcomes were consistent, irrespective of timing of AF diagnosis (all interaction p-values >0.12)., Conclusion: Patients with recently diagnosed AF had a similar risk of stroke but higher mortality than patients with remotely diagnosed AF, suggesting that they are not at "low risk" and warrant stroke prevention strategies. The benefits of apixaban over warfarin were preserved, irrespective of timing of AF diagnosis., (Copyright © 2016 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: Functional status is a key patient-centric outcome, but there are little data on whether functional recovery post-stroke varies among hospitals. This study examined the distribution of functional status 3 months after stroke, determined whether these outcomes vary among hospitals, and identified hospital characteristics associated with better (or worse) functional outcomes., Methods and Results: Observational analysis of the AVAIL study (Adherence Evaluation After Ischemic Stroke-Longitudinal) included 2083 ischemic stroke patients enrolled from 82 US hospitals participating in Get With The Guidelines-Stroke and AVAIL. The primary outcome was dependence or death at 3 months (modified Rankin Scale [mRS] score of 3-6). Secondary outcomes included functional dependence (mRS score of 3-5), disabled (mRS score of 2-5), and mRS evaluated as a continuous score. By 3 months post-discharge, 36.5% of patients were functionally dependent or dead. Rates of dependence or death varied widely by discharging hospitals (range: 0%-67%). After risk adjustment, patients had lower rates of 3-month dependence or death when treated at teaching hospitals (odds ratio, 0.72; 95% confidence interval, 0.54-0.96) and certified primary stroke centers (odds ratio, 0.69; 95% confidence interval, 0.53-0.91). In contrast, a composite measure of hospital-level adherence to acute stroke care performance metrics, stroke volume, and bed size was not associated with downstream patient functional status. Findings were robust across mRS end points and sensitivity analyses., Conclusions: One third of acute ischemic stroke patients were functionally dependent or dead 3 months postacute stroke; functional recovery rates varied considerably among hospitals, supporting the need to better determine which care processes can maximize functional outcomes., (© 2017 American Heart Association, Inc.)

Background: Although non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants (NOACs) do not require frequent laboratory monitoring, each compound requires dose adjustments on the basis of certain clinical criteria., Objectives: This study assessed the frequency of off-label NOAC doses among AF patients and the associations between off-label dose therapy and clinical outcomes in community practice., Methods: We evaluated 5,738 patients treated with a NOAC at 242 ORBIT-AF II (Outcomes Registry for Better Informed Treatment of Atrial Fibrillation phase II) sites. NOAC doses were classified as either underdosed or overdosed, consistent with Food and Drug Administration labeling. Longitudinal outcomes (median follow-up: 0.99 years) included stroke or systemic embolism, myocardial infarction, major bleeding (International Society of Thrombosis and Haemostasis criteria), cause-specific hospitalization, and all-cause mortality., Results: Overall, 541 NOAC-treated patients (9.4%) were underdosed, 197 were overdosed (3.4%), and 5,000 were dosed according to U.S. labeling (87%). Compared with patients receiving the recommended dose, those who were receiving off-label doses were older (median: 79 and 80 years of age vs. 70 years of age, respectively; p < 0.0001), more likely female (48% and 67% vs. 40%, respectively; p < 0.0001), less likely to be treated by an electrophysiologist (18% and 19% vs. 27%, respectively; p < 0.0001), and had higher CHA 2 DS 2 -VASc scores (96% and 97% ≥2 vs. 86%, respectively; p < 0.0001) and higher ORBIT bleeding scores (25% and 31% >4 vs. 11%, respectively; p < 0.0001). After dose adjustment, NOAC overdosing was associated with increased all-cause mortality compared with recommended doses (adjusted hazard ratio: 1.91; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.02 to 3.60; p = 0.04). Underdosing was associated with increased cardiovascular hospitalization (adjusted hazard ratio: 1.26; 95% CI: 1.07 to 1.50; p = 0.007)., Conclusions: A significant minority (almost 1 in 8) of U.S. patients in the community received NOAC doses inconsistent with labeling. NOAC over- and underdosing are associated with increased risk for adverse events. (Outcomes Registry for Better Informed Treatment of Atrial Fibrillation II [ORBIT-AF II]; NCT01701817)., (Copyright © 2016 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Assessments of stroke and bleeding risks are essential to selecting oral anticoagulation in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF). We aimed to assess outcomes according to physician assessed risk, with comparison to empirical risk scores., Methods: This was a prospective, observational study of 9,715 outpatients with AF enrolled in ORBIT-AF, a US national registry. Stroke and bleeding risks were quantified by physician assignment, CHADS 2 and CHA 2 DS 2 -VASc stroke scores, and ATRIA and HAS-BLED bleeding scores. Outcomes were stroke or systemic embolism and major bleeding during a median follow-up of 28 months., Results: Physician-assigned risk was associated with thromboembolic events: low risk (0.71 per 100 patient-years [95% CI 0.56-0.91], n=3,991), intermediate risk (0.98 [95% CI 0.79-1.20], n=4,148), and high risk (1.84 [95% CI 1.43-2.37], n=1,576, P<.0001), and major bleeding: low (3.43 [95% CI 3.07-3.82], n=4,250), intermediate (4.55 [95% CI 4.03-5.15], n=2,702), and high (5.76 [95% CI 4.42-7.50], n=468; P<.0001). Discrimination of stroke risk was similar with CHADS 2 (c=0.59, 95% CI 0.57-0.61) vs physician assessment (c=0.58, 95% CI 0.55-0.62). Among patients on oral anticoagulation, bleeding risk discrimination was higher with ATRIA (c=0.63, 95% CI 0.61-0.65) and HAS-BLED (c=0.60, 95% CI 0.59-0.62) than with physician assessment (0.55, 95% CI 0.53-0.57). Physician-assessed risk categories did not add significantly to empirical risk scores, in Cox models for outcomes (P adjusted >.05 for all physician assessments vs P adjusted <.05 for empirical scores)., Conclusion: Physician-assigned risk showed a graded relationship with outcomes, and both physician-based and empirical scores yielded only moderate discrimination. Although empirical scores provided valuable risk stratification information (with or without physician judgment), physician assessment added little to existing scores. These data support the use of empirical scores for stroke and bleeding risk stratification, and the need for novel approaches to risk stratification in this population., (Copyright © 2016 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: The role of triple antithrombotic therapy vs dual antithrombotic therapy in patients with both atrial fibrillation and coronary artery disease remains unclear. This study explores the differences in treatment practices and outcomes between triple antithrombotic therapy and dual antithrombotic therapy in patients with atrial fibrillation and coronary artery disease., Methods: Using the Outcomes Registry for Better Informed Treatment of Atrial Fibrillation (n = 10,135), we analyzed outcomes in patients with coronary artery disease (n = 1827) according to treatment with triple antithrombotic therapy (defined as concurrent therapy with an oral anticoagulant, a thienopyridine, and aspirin) or dual antithrombotic therapy (comprising either an oral anticoagulant and one antiplatelet agent [OAC plus AA] or 2 antiplatelet drugs and no anticoagulant [DAP])., Results: The use of triple antithrombotic therapy, OAC plus AA, and DAP at baseline was 8.5% (n = 155), 80.4% (n = 1468), and 11.2% (n = 204), respectively. Among patients treated with OAC plus AA, aspirin was the most common antiplatelet agent used (90%), followed by clopidogrel (10%) and prasugrel (0.1%). The use of triple antithrombotic therapy was not affected by patient risk of either stroke or bleeding. Patients treated with triple antithrombotic therapy at baseline were hospitalized for all causes (including cardiovascular) more often than patients on OAC plus AA (adjusted hazard ratio 1.75; 95% confidence interval, 1.35-2.26; P <.0001) or DAP (hazard ratio 1.82; 95% confidence interval, 1.25-2.65; P = .0018). Rates of major bleeding or a combined cardiovascular outcome were not significantly different by treatment group., Conclusions: Choice of antithrombotic therapy in patients with atrial fibrillation and coronary artery disease was not affected by patient stroke or bleeding risks. Triple antithrombotic therapy-treated patients were more likely to be hospitalized for all causes than those on OAC plus AA or on DAP., (Copyright © 2016 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Whereas insurance status has been previously associated with care patterns, little is currently known about the association between Medicaid insurance and the clinical characteristics, treatment, or outcomes of patients with atrial fibrillation (AF)., Methods and Results: We used data from adults with AF enrolled in the Outcomes Registry for Better Informed Treatment of AF (ORBIT-AF), a national outpatient registry conducted at 176 community, multispecialty sites. The primary outcome of interest was the proportion of patients prescribed any oral anticoagulation (OAC; warfarin or novel oral anticoagulants [NOAC]). Secondary outcomes of interest included the proportion of patients prescribed NOACs (dabigatran or rivaroxaban); time in therapeutic range (TTR) for warfarin users, all-cause mortality, stroke/systemic embolism, and major bleed. Of 10 133 patients, N=470 (4.6%) had Medicaid insurance. Medicaid patients were similarly likely to receive OAC at baseline (72.8% vs 76.3%; unadjusted P=0.079), but less likely to receive NOAC at baseline or follow-up (12.1% vs 16.3%; unadjusted P=0.019). After risk adjustment, Medicaid status was associated with lower use of OAC at baseline among patients with high stroke risk (odds ratio [OR]=0.68; 95% CI=0.49, 0.94), but was not associated with OAC use overall (OR=0.82; 95% CI=0.61, 1.09). Among warfarin users, median TTR was lower among Medicaid patients (60% vs 68%; P<0.0001; adjusted TTR difference, -2.9; 95% CI=-5.7, -0.2; P=0.04). Use of an NOAC over 2 years of follow-up was not statistically different by insurance. Compared with non-Medicaid patients, Medicaid patients had higher unadjusted rates of mortality, stroke/systemic embolism, and major bleeding; however, these differences were attenuated following adjustment for clinical characteristics., Conclusions: In a contemporary AF cohort, use of OAC overall and use of NOACs were not significantly lower among Medicaid patients relative to others. However, among warfarin users, Medicaid patients spent less time in therapeutic range compared with those with other forms of insurance., (© 2016 The Authors. Published on behalf of the American Heart Association, Inc., by Wiley Blackwell.)

Background and Purpose: Stroke survivors have identified home-time as a meaningful outcome. We evaluated home-time as a patient-centered outcome in Medicare beneficiaries with ischemic stroke in comparison with modified Rankin Scale (mRS) score at 90 days and at 1 year post event., Methods: Patients enrolled in Get With The Guidelines-Stroke (GWTG-Stroke) and Adherence Evaluation After Ischemic Stroke-Longitudinal (AVAIL) registries were linked to Medicare claims to ascertain home-time, defined as time spent alive and out of a hospital, inpatient rehabilitation, or skilled nursing facilities, at 90 days and at 1 year after admission. The correlation of home-time with mRS at 90 days and at 1 year was evaluated by Pearson correlation coefficients, and the ability of home-time to discriminate mRS (0-2) was assessed by c-index., Results: There were 815 patients with ischemic stroke (age median, 76 years [interquartile range {IQR}, 70-82]; 46% women; National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale median, 4 [IQR, 2-7]) from 88 hospitals. The 90-day and 1-year median home-times were 79 (IQR, 52-86) days and 349 (IQR, 303-360) days and median mRS were 2 (IQR, 1-4) and 2 (IQR, 1-4). Greater home-time within 90 days was significantly correlated with lower 90-day mRS (Pearson correlation coefficient, -0.731; P<0.0001) and showed strong ability to discriminate functional independence with mRS 0 to 2 (c-index, 0.837). Similar findings were observed at 1 year., Conclusions: In a population of older patients with ischemic stroke, home-time was readily available from administrative data and associated with mRS at 90 days and 1 year. Home-time represents a novel, easily measured, patient-centered, outcome measure for an episode of stroke care., (© 2016 American Heart Association, Inc.)

Importance: Intravenous tissue plasminogen activator (tPA) is known to improve outcomes in ischemic stroke; however, many patients may have been receiving antiplatelet therapy before acute ischemic stroke and could face an increased risk for bleeding when treated with tPA., Objective: To assess the risks and benefits associated with prestroke antiplatelet therapy among patients with ischemic stroke who receive intravenous tPA., Design, Setting, and Participants: This observational study used data from the American Heart Association and American Stroke Association Get With the Guidelines-Stroke registry, which included 85 072 adult patients with ischemic stroke who received intravenous tPA in 1545 registry hospitals from January 1, 2009, through March 31, 2015. Data were analyzed during the same period., Exposures: Prestroke antiplatelet therapy before tPA administration for acute ischemic stroke., Main Outcomes and Measures: Symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage (sICH), in-hospital mortality, discharge ambulatory status, and modified Rankin Scale score (range, 0 [no symptoms] to 6 [death])., Results: Of the 85 072 registry patients, 38 844 (45.7%) were receiving antiplatelet therapy before admission; 46 228 patients (54.3%) were not. Patients receiving antiplatelet therapy were older (median [25th-75th percentile] age, 76 [65-84] vs 68 [56-80] years) and had a higher prevalence of cardiovascular risk factors. The unadjusted rate of sICH was higher in patients receiving antiplatelet therapy (5.0% vs 3.7%). After risk adjustment, prior use of antiplatelet agents remained associated with higher odds of sICH compared with no use (adjusted odds ratio [AOR], 1.18 [95% CI, 1.10-1.28]; absolute difference, +0.68% [95% CI, 0.36%-1.01%]; number needed to harm [NNH], 147). Among patients enrolled on October 1, 2012, or later, the highest odds (95% CIs) of sICH were found in 15 116 patients receiving aspirin alone (AOR, 1.19 [1.06- 1.34]; absolute difference [95% CI], +0.68% [0.21%-1.20%]; NNH, 147) and 2397 patients receiving dual antiplatelet treatment of aspirin and clopidogrel (AOR, 1.47 [1.16-1.86]; absolute difference, +1.67% [0.58%-3.00%]; NNH, 60). The risk for in-hospital mortality was similar between those who were and were not receiving antiplatelet therapy after adjustment (8.0% vs 6.6%; AOR, 1.00 [0.94-1.06]; nonsignificant absolute difference, -0.01% [-0.37% to 0.36%]). However, patients receiving antiplatelet therapy had a greater risk-adjusted likelihood of independent ambulation (42.1% vs 46.6%; AOR, 1.13 [1.08-1.17]; absolute difference, +2.23% [1.55%-2.92%]; number needed to treat, 43) and better functional outcomes (modified Rankin Scale score, 0-1) at discharge (24.1% vs 27.8%; AOR, 1.14; 1.07-1.22; absolute difference, +1.99% [0.78%-3.22%]; number needed to treat, 50)., Conclusions and Relevance: Among patients with an acute ischemic stroke treated with intravenous tPA, those receiving antiplatelet therapy before the stroke had a higher risk for sICH but better functional outcomes than those who were not receiving antiplatelet therapy.

Background: Patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) and hypertension are at high risk for stroke. Previous studies have shown elevated risk of stroke in patients with AF who have a history of hypertension (regardless of blood pressure [BP] control) and in patients with elevated BP. We assessed the association of hypertension and BP control on clinical outcomes., Methods and Results: In ARISTOTLE (n=18 201), BP was evaluated as history of hypertension requiring treatment and elevated BP (systolic ≥140 and/or diastolic ≥90 mm Hg) at study entry and any point during the trial. Hazard ratios (HRs) were derived from Cox proportional hazards models including BP as a time-dependent covariate. A total of 15 916 (87.5%) patients had a history of hypertension requiring treatment. In patients with elevated BP measurement at any point during the trial, the rate of stroke or systemic embolism was significantly higher (HR, 1.53; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.25-1.86), as was hemorrhagic stroke (HR 1.85; 95% CI, 1.26-2.72) and ischemic stroke (HR, 1.50; 95% CI, 1.18-1.90). Rates of major bleeding were lower in patients with a history of hypertension (HR, 0.80; 95% CI, 0.66-0.98) and nonsignificantly lower in patients with elevated BP at study entry (HR, 0.89; 95% CI, 0.77-1.03). The benefit of apixaban versus warfarin on preventing stroke or systemic embolism was consistent among patients with and without a history of hypertension (P interaction=0.27), BP control at baseline (P interaction=0.43), and BP control during the trial (P interaction=0.97)., Conclusions: High BP measurement at any point during the trial was independently associated with a substantially higher risk of stroke or systemic embolism. These results strongly support efforts to treat elevated BP as an important strategy to optimally lower risk of stroke in patients with AF., Clinical Trial Registration: URL: https://ClinicalTrials.gov/. Unique identifier: NCT00412984., (© 2015 The Authors. Published on behalf of the American Heart Association, Inc., by Wiley Blackwell.)

Background: Time in therapeutic range (TTR) of international normalized ratio (INR) of 2.0 to 3.0 is important for the safety and effectiveness of warfarin anticoagulation. There are few data on TTR among patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) in community-based clinical practice., Methods: Using the US Outcomes Registry for Better Informed Treatment of Atrial Fibrillation (ORBIT-AF), we examined TTR (using a modified Rosendaal method) among 5,210 patients with AF on warfarin and treated at 155 sites. Patients were grouped into quartiles based on TTR data. Multivariable logistic regression modeling with generalized estimating equations was used to determine patient and provider factors associated with the lowest (worst) TTR., Results: Overall, 59% of the measured INR values were between 2.0 and 3.0, with an overall mean and median TTR of 65% ± 20% and 68% (interquartile range [IQR] 53%-79%). The median times below and above the therapeutic range were 17% (IQR 8%-29%) and 10% (IQR 3%-19%), respectively. Patients with renal dysfunction, advanced heart failure, frailty, prior valve surgery, and higher risk for bleeding (ATRIA score) or stroke (CHA2DS2-VASc score) had significantly lower TTR (P < .0001 for all). Patients treated at anticoagulation clinics had only slightly higher median TTR (69%) than those not (66%) (P < .0001)., Conclusions: Among patients with AF in US clinical practices, TTR on warfarin is suboptimal, and those at highest predicted risks for stroke and bleeding were least likely to be in therapeutic range., (Copyright © 2015 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Aim: In the Apixaban for Reduction in Stroke and Other Thromboembolic Events in Atrial Fibrillation (ARISTOTLE) trial, apixaban compared with warfarin reduced the risk of stroke, major bleed, and death in patients with atrial fibrillation. In this ancillary study, we evaluated clinical consequences of major bleeds, as well as management and treatment effects of warfarin vs. apixaban., Methods and Results: Major International Society on Thrombosis and Haemostasis bleeding was defined as overt bleeding accompanied by a decrease in haemoglobin (Hb) of ≥2 g/dL or transfusion of ≥2 units of packed red cells, occurring at a critical site or resulting in death. Time to event [death, ischaemic stroke, or myocardial infarction (MI)] was evaluated by Cox regression models. The excess risk associated with bleeding was evaluated by separate time-dependent indicators for intracranial (ICH) and non-intracranial haemorrhage. Major bleeding occurred in 848 individuals (4.7%), of whom 126 (14.9%) died within 30 days. Of 176 patients with an ICH, 76 (43.2%) died, and of the 695 patients with major non-ICH, 64 (9.2%) died within 30 days of the bleeding. The risk of death, ischaemic stroke, or MI was increased roughly 12-fold after a major non-ICH bleeding event within 30 days. Corresponding risk of death following an ICH was markedly increased, with HR 121.5 (95% CI 91.3-161.8) as was stroke or MI with HR 21.95 (95% CI 9.88-48.81), respectively. Among patients with major bleeds, 20.8% received vitamin K and/or related medications (fresh frozen plasma, coagulation factors, factor VIIa) to stop bleeding within 3 days, and 37% received blood transfusion. There was no interaction between apixaban and warfarin and major bleeding on the risk of death, stroke, or MI., Conclusion: Major bleeding was associated with substantially increased risk of death, ischaemic stroke, or MI, especially following ICH, and this risk was similarly elevated regardless of treatment with apixaban or warfarin. These results underscore the importance of preventing bleeding in anti-coagulated patients. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT00412984., (Published on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology. All rights reserved. © The Author 2014. For permissions please email: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Using data from ARISTOTLE, we describe the periprocedural management of anticoagulation and rates of subsequent clinical outcomes among patients chronically anticoagulated with warfarin or apixaban. We recorded whether (and for how long) anticoagulant therapy was interrupted preprocedure, whether bridging therapy was used, and the proportion of patients who experienced important clinical outcomes during the 30 days postprocedure. Of 10 674 procedures performed during follow-up in 5924 patients, 9260 were included in this analysis. Anticoagulant treatment was not interrupted preprocedure 37.5% of the time. During the 30 days postprocedure, stroke or systemic embolism occurred after 16/4624 (0.35%) procedures among apixaban-treated patients and 26/4530 (0.57%) procedures among warfarin-treated patients (odds ratio [OR] 0.601; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.322-1.120). Major bleeding occurred in 74/4560 (1.62%) procedures in the apixaban arm and 86/4454 (1.93%) in the warfarin arm (OR 0.846; 95% CI 0.614-1.166). The risk of death was similar with apixaban (54/4624 [1.17%]) and warfarin (49/4530 [1.08%]) (OR 1.082; 95% CI 0.733-1.598). Among patients in ARISTOTLE, the 30-day postprocedure stroke, death, and major bleeding rates were low and similar in apixaban- and warfarin-treated patients, regardless of whether anticoagulation was stopped beforehand. Our findings suggest that many patients on chronic anticoagulation can safely undergo procedures; some will not require a preprocedure interruption of anticoagulation. ARISTOTLE was registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov as #NCT00412984., (© 2014 by The American Society of Hematology.)

Aims: The risk of stroke in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) increases with age. In the ARISTOTLE trial, apixaban when compared with warfarin reduced the rate of stroke, death, and bleeding. We evaluated these outcomes in relation to patient age., Methods and Results: A total of 18 201 patients with AF and a raised risk of stroke were randomized to warfarin or apixaban 5 mg b.d. with dose reduction to 2.5 mg b.d. or placebo in 831 patients with ≥2 of the following criteria: age ≥80 years, body weight ≤60 kg, or creatinine ≥133 μmol/L. We used Cox models to compare outcomes in relation to patient age during 1.8 years median follow-up. Of the trial population, 30% were <65 years, 39% were 65 to <75, and 31% were ≥75 years. The rates of stroke, all-cause death, and major bleeding were higher in the older age groups (P < 0.001 for all). Apixaban was more effective than warfarin in preventing stroke and reducing mortality across all age groups, and associated with less major bleeding, less total bleeding, and less intracranial haemorrhage regardless of age (P interaction >0.11 for all). Results were also consistent for the 13% of patients ≥80 years. No significant interaction with apixaban dose was found with respect to treatment effect on major outcomes., Conclusion: The benefits of apixaban vs. warfarin were consistent in patients with AF regardless of age. Owing to the higher risk at older age, the absolute benefits of apixaban were greater in the elderly., (© The Author 2014. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology.)

Objectives: This study sought to characterize major bleeding on the basis of the components of the major bleeding definition, to explore major bleeding by location, to define 30-day mortality after a major bleeding event, and to identify factors associated with major bleeding., Background: Apixaban was shown to reduce the risk of major hemorrhage among patients with atrial fibrillation in the ARISTOTLE (Apixaban for Reduction in Stroke and Other Thromboembolic Events in Atrial Fibrillation) trial., Methods: All patients who received at least 1 dose of a study drug were included. Major bleeding was defined according to the criteria of the International Society on Thrombosis and Haemostasis. Factors associated with major hemorrhage were identified using a multivariable Cox model., Results: The on-treatment safety population included 18,140 patients. The rate of major hemorrhage among patients in the apixaban group was 2.13% per year compared with 3.09% per year in the warfarin group (hazard ratio [HR] 0.69, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.60 to 0.80; p < 0.001). Compared with warfarin, major extracranial hemorrhage associated with apixaban led to reduced hospitalization, medical or surgical intervention, transfusion, or change in antithrombotic therapy. Major hemorrhage followed by mortality within 30 days occurred half as often in apixaban-treated patients than in those receiving warfarin (HR 0.50, 95% CI: 0.33 to 0.74; p < 0.001). Older age, prior hemorrhage, prior stroke or transient ischemic attack, diabetes, lower creatinine clearance, decreased hematocrit, aspirin therapy, and nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs were independently associated with an increased risk., Conclusions: Apixaban, compared with warfarin, was associated with fewer intracranial hemorrhages, less adverse consequences following extracranial hemorrhage, and a 50% reduction in fatal consequences at 30 days in cases of major hemorrhage., (Copyright © 2014 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Physicians treating patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) must weigh the benefits of anticoagulation in preventing stroke versus the risk of bleeding. Although empirical models have been developed to predict such risks, the degree to which these coincide with clinicians' estimates is unclear., Methods and Results: We examined 10 094 AF patients enrolled in the Outcomes Registry for Better Informed Treatment of AF (ORBIT-AF) registry between June 2010 and August 2011. Empirical stroke and bleeding risks were assessed by using the congestive heart failure, hypertension, age ≥75 years, diabetes mellitus, and previous stroke or transient ischemic attack (CHADS2) and Anticoagulation and Risk Factors in Atrial Fibrillation (ATRIA) scores, respectively. Separately, physicians were asked to categorize their patients' stroke and bleeding risks: low risk (<3%); intermediate risk (3%-6%); and high risk (>6%). Overall, 72% (n=7251) in ORBIT-AF had high-risk CHADS2 scores (≥2). However, only 16% were assessed as high stroke risk by physicians. Although 17% (n=1749) had high ATRIA bleeding risk (score ≥5), only 7% (n=719) were considered so by physicians. The associations between empirical and physician-estimated stroke and bleeding risks were low (weighted Kappa 0.1 and 0.11, respectively). Physicians weighed hypertension, heart failure, and diabetes mellitus less significantly than empirical models in estimating stroke risk; physicians weighted anemia and dialysis less significantly than empirical models when estimating bleeding risks. Anticoagulation use was highest among patients with high stroke risk, assessed by either empirical model or physician estimates. In contrast, physician and empirical estimates of bleeding had limited impact on treatment choice., Conclusions: There is little agreement between provider-assessed risk and empirical scores in AF. These differences may explain, in part, the current divergence of anticoagulation treatment decisions from guideline recommendations., Clinical Trial Registration Url: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT01165710., (© 2014 American Heart Association, Inc.)

Background: Patients with atrial fibrillation who are vitamin K antagonist (VKA)-naive may have a higher risk of thrombosis and/or bleeding than VKA-experienced patients., Methods and Results: Using data from ARISTOTLE, we assessed baseline characteristics and the treatment effect of apixaban versus warfarin in the VKA-naive and VKA-experienced cohorts. We compared rates of study drug discontinuation and time-in-therapeutic range. Overall, 7,800 (43%) were VKA naive, and 10,401 were VKA experienced. At baseline, both groups were similar with respect to age and congestive heart failure, hypertension, age, diabetes, stroke score (CHADS2). Fewer VKA-naive patients had a history of prior stroke (18% vs 21%) or prior bleeding (10% vs 22%) and were more often female (39% vs 33%). The effect of apixaban on the primary efficacy and safety outcomes was similar in VKA-naive (stroke/systemic embolism: hazard ratio [HR] 0.86, 95% CI 0.67-1.11 and major bleeding: HR 0.73, 95% CI 0.59-0.91) and VKA-experienced populations (stroke/systemic embolism: HR 0.73, 95% CI 0.57-0.95, P value for interaction = 0.39 and major bleeding: HR 0.66, 95% CI 0.55-0.80, P value for interaction = 0.50). Permanent study drug discontinuation was numerically less likely in patients receiving apixaban whether they were VKA naive (HR for discontinuation: 0.87, 95% CI 0.79-0.95) or VKA experienced (HR for discontinuation: 0.93, 95% CI 0.85-1.02). Among patients receiving warfarin, the mean/median times in therapeutic range were lower in the VKA-naive group (VKA-naive: 57.5/61.4, VKA-experienced: 66.0/69.1, P < .001)., Conclusion: The treatment effects of apixaban (vs warfarin) were not modified by VKA naivety. The rates of stroke/systemic embolism and major bleeding were numerically lower among the patients assigned to apixaban, irrespective of prior VKA use., (Copyright © 2013 Mosby, Inc. All rights reserved.)

Aims: It is uncertain whether the benefit from apixaban varies by type and duration of atrial fibrillation (AF)., Methods and Results: A total of 18 201 patients with AF [2786 (15.3%) with paroxysmal and 15 412 (84.7%) with persistent or permanent] were randomized to apixaban or warfarin. In this pre-specified secondary analysis, we compared outcomes and treatment effect of apixaban vs. warfarin by AF type and duration. The primary efficacy endpoint was a composite of ischaemic or haemorrhagic stroke or systemic embolism. The secondary efficacy endpoint was all-cause mortality. There was a consistent reduction in stroke or systemic embolism (P for interaction = 0.71), all-cause mortality (P for interaction = 0.75), and major bleeding (P for interaction = 0.50) with apixaban compared with warfarin for both AF types. Apixaban was superior to warfarin in all studied endpoints, regardless of AF duration at study entry (P for all interactions >0.13). The rate of stroke or systemic embolism was significantly higher in patients with persistent or permanent AF than patients with paroxysmal AF (1.52 vs. 0.98%; P = 0.003, adjusted P = 0.015). There was also a trend towards higher mortality in patients with persistent or permanent AF (3.90 vs. 2.81%; P = 0.0002, adjusted P = 0.066)., Conclusion: The risks of stroke, mortality, and major bleeding were lower with apixaban than warfarin regardless of AF type and duration. Although the risk of stroke or systemic embolism was lower in paroxysmal than persistent or permanent AF, apixaban is an attractive alternative to warfarin in patients with AF and at least one other risk factor for stroke, regardless of the type or duration of AF.

Background: Patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) at the highest stroke risk derive the largest benefit from oral anticoagulation (OAC). Those with the highest stroke risk have been paradoxically less likely to receive OAC. This study assessed the association between stroke and bleeding risk on rates of OAC., Methods and Results: We analyzed OAC use among 10,098 patients with AF from 174 community-based outpatient practices enrolled in 2010-2011 in the Outcomes Registry for Better Informed Treatment of Atrial Fibrillation (ORBIT-AF). OAC was defined as warfarin or dabigatran use at study enrollment. Stroke and bleeding risk were calculated using congestive heart failure, hypertension, age, diabetes mellitus, prior stroke (CHADS₂), and anticoagulation and risk factors in AF (ATRIA) scores, respectively. The mean subject age was 73 years; 58% were men. Overall, 76% of patients received OAC (71% warfarin and 5% dabigatran). The use of OAC increased among those with higher CHADS₂ scores, from 53% for CHADS₂=0 to 80% for CHADS₂≥2 (P<0.001). OAC use fell slightly with increasing ATRIA bleeding risk score, from 81% for ATRIA=3 to 73% for ATRIA≥5 (P<0.001). A significant interaction existed between ATRIA and CHADS₂ scores (P=0.021). Among those with low bleeding risk, use of OAC increased significantly with increasing stroke risk. Among those with high bleeding risk, CHADS₂ stroke risk had a smaller impact on use of OAC., Conclusions: In community-based outpatients with AF, use of OAC was high and driven by not only predominantly stroke but also bleeding risk. Stroke risk significantly affects OAC use among those with low bleeding risk, whereas those with high bleeding risk demonstrate consistently lower use of OAC regardless of stroke risk.

Background: In the Apixaban for Reduction in Stroke and Other Thromboembolic Events in Atrial Fibrillation (ARISTOTLE) trial, apixaban compared with warfarin reduced stroke and systemic embolism, major bleeding, and mortality. We evaluated treatment effects in relation to 2 predictions of time in therapeutic range (TTR)., Methods and Results: The trial randomized 18 201 patients with atrial fibrillation to apixaban 5 mg twice daily or warfarin for at least 12 months. For each patient, a center average TTR was estimated with the use of a linear mixed model on the basis of the real TTRs in its warfarin-treated patients, with a fixed effect for country and random effect for center. For each patient, an individual TTR was also predicted with the use of a linear mixed effects model including patient characteristics as well. Median center average TTR was 66% (interquartile limits, 61% and 71%). Rates of stroke or systemic embolism, major bleeding, and mortality were consistently lower with apixaban than with warfarin across center average TTR and individual TTR quartiles. In the lowest and highest center average TTR quartiles, hazard ratios for stroke or systemic embolism were 0.73 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.53-1.00) and 0.88 (95% CI, 0.57-1.35) (Pinteraction=0.078), for mortality were 0.91 (95% CI, 0.74-1.13) and 0.91 (95% CI, 0.71-1.16) (Pinteraction=0.34), and for major bleeding were 0.50 (95% CI, 0.36-0.70) and 0.75 (95% CI, 0.58-0.97) (Pinteraction=0.095), respectively. Similar results were seen for quartiles of individual TTR., Conclusions: The benefits of apixaban compared with warfarin for stroke or systemic embolism, bleeding, and mortality appear similar across the range of centers' and patients' predicted quality of international normalized ratio control.