Search

Background: ARTESiA (Apixaban for the Reduction of Thrombo-Embolism in Patients With Device-Detected Sub-Clinical Atrial Fibrillation) demonstrated that apixaban, compared with aspirin, significantly reduced stroke and systemic embolism (SE) but increased major bleeding in patients with subclinical atrial fibrillation., Objectives: To help inform decision making, the authors evaluated the efficacy and safety of apixaban according to baseline CHA 2 DS 2 -VASc score., Methods: We performed a subgroup analysis according to baseline CHA 2 DS 2 -VASc score and assessed both the relative and absolute differences in stroke/SE and major bleeding., Results: Baseline CHA 2 DS 2 -VASc scores were <4 in 1,578 (39.4%) patients, 4 in 1,349 (33.6%), and >4 in 1,085 (27.0%). For patients with CHA 2 DS 2 -VASc >4, the rate of stroke was 0.98%/year with apixaban and 2.25%/year with aspirin; compared with aspirin, apixaban prevented 1.28 (95% CI: 0.43-2.12) strokes/SE per 100 patient-years and caused 0.68 (95% CI: -0.23 to 1.57) major bleeds. For CHA 2 DS 2 -VASc <4, the stroke/SE rate was 0.85%/year with apixaban and 0.97%/year with aspirin. Apixaban prevented 0.12 (95% CI: -0.38 to 0.62) strokes/SE per 100 patient-years and caused 0.33 (95% CI: -0.27 to 0.92) major bleeds. For patients with CHA 2 DS 2 -VASc =4, apixaban prevented 0.32 (95% CI: -0.16 to 0.79) strokes/SE per 100 patient-years and caused 0.28 (95% CI: -0.30 to 0.86) major bleeds., Conclusions: One in 4 patients in ARTESiA with subclinical atrial fibrillation had a CHA 2 DS 2 -VASc score >4 and a stroke/SE risk of 2.2% per year. For these patients, the benefits of treatment with apixaban in preventing stroke/SE are greater than the risks. The opposite is true for patients with CHA 2 DS 2 -VASc score <4. A substantial intermediate group (CHA 2 DS 2 -VASc =4) exists in which patient preferences will inform treatment decisions. (Apixaban for the Reduction of Thrombo-Embolism in Patients With Device-Detected Sub-Clinical Atrial Fibrillation; NCT01938248)., Competing Interests: Funding Support and Author Disclosures The ARTESiA study was funded by grants from the Canadian Institutes of Health Research (201610PTJ-378238), the Bristol Myers Squibb–Pfizer Alliance, the Heart and Stroke Foundation of Canada, the Canadian Stroke Prevention Intervention Network, Hamilton Health Sciences, the Accelerating Clinical Trials Network, the Population Health Research Institute, and Medtronic. The sponsors had no role in data analysis, interpretation, or publication. Dr Lopes has received research grants from Amgen, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myers Squibb, GlaxoSmithKline, Medtronic, Novo Nordisk, Pfizer, and Sanofi US Services Inc; and has served as a consultant to Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myers Squibb, Daiichi-Sankyo Company, GlaxoSmithKline, Medtronic, Merck, Novo Nordisk, Pfizer, Portola Pharmaceuticals, and Sanofi US Services Inc. Dr Granger has received research grants from Bayer and Boehringer Ingelheim; and has served as a consultant to Anthos, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Boston Scientific Corporation, Bristol Myers Squibb, Cadrenal, Daiichi-Sankyo Company, Janssen Global Services, LLC, Merck, Pfizer Inc, and Tenac.io. Dr McIntyre has served as a consultant to Servier Pharmaceuticals LLC. Dr Rivard has received research grants from Bayer Inc, Heart and Stroke Foundation, Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR), and FRQS (Fonds de Recherche Quebec-Sante). Dr Atar has received speaker fees from Amgen, Amarin, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myers Squibb, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Novartis, Novo Nordisk, Pfizer, Pharmacosmos, Philips, Roche Diagnostics, Sanofi, Takeda, and Vifor; and has received institutional grant support from Bristol Myers Squibb/Pfizer, Medtronic, Bayer, and Roche Diagnostics. Dr Boriani has received speaker fees from Bayer, Boston Scientific, Boehringer Ingelheim, Daiichi-Sankyo, Janssen, and Sanofi. Dr Duray has served as a consultant to Medtronic and Biotronik. Dr Gold has received institutional research support from Abbott, Boston Scientific, and Medtronic; and has received consulting fees from Boston Scientific and Medtronic. Dr Hohnloser has served as a consultant to Pfizer, Bristol Myers Squibb, Boehringer Ingelheim, and Sanofi. Dr Kutyifa has received research grants from Boston Scientific, ZOLL, National Institutes of Health, and Spire Inc; has received speaker fees from Medtronic, Abbott, and Biotronik; and has received consultant fees from Biotronik. Dr Sticherling has served as a consultant to Medtronic, Boston Scientific, and Biotronik. Dr Benz has received lecture fees from Bristol Myers Squibb and AstraZeneca; and has participated in an educational program supported by Boston Scientific (“Fellowship Herzrhythmus”). Dr Linde has received research support from the Swedish Heart Lung Foundation, Swedish Royal Society of Science, and Stockholm County Council; has received consulting fees from AstraZeneca and Roche Diagnostics; has received speaker honoraria from Novartis, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Vifor Pharma, Medtronic, and Impulse Dynamics; and has served on advisory boards for Astra Zeneca. Dr Kautzner has served as a consultant for Abbott Vascular, Biotronik, Boston Scientific Corporation, GE Healthcare, and Medtronic, Inc. Dr Mairesse has received consultant or speaker fees from Abbott, Biotronik, Microport, Bristol Myers Squibb/Pfizer, and Daiichi-Sankyo. Dr Connolly has received research grants from Pfizer Inc; and has served as a consultant for Bayer, Bristol Myers Squibb, Daiichi-Sankyo Company, and Javelin Ventures. Dr Healey has received research grants from Boston Scientific Corporation, Bristol Myers Squibb, Medtronic, and Pfizer; has served as a consultant for Bayer, Boston Scientific Corporation, Medtronic, Novartis, and Servier Affaires Medicales; and has served as an expert witness for Bayer., (Copyright © 2024 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Heart failure (HF) may complicate acute coronary syndrome (ACS) and is associated with a high burden of short- and long-term morbidity and mortality. Only limited data regarding future ischemic events and rehospitalization are available for patients who suffer HF before or during ACS., Methods: A secondary analysis of 4 large ACS trials (PLATO, APPRAISE-2, TRACER, and TRILOGY ACS) using Cox proportional hazards models was performed to investigate the association of HF status (no HF, chronic HF, de novo HF) at presentation for ACS with all-cause and cardiovascular death, major adverse cardiovascular event (MACE ), myocardial infarction, stroke, and hospitalization for heart failure (HHF) by 1 year. Cumulative incidence plots are presented at 30 days and 1 year., Results: A total of 11.1% of the 47,474 patients presenting with ACS presented with evidence of acute HF, 55.0% of whom presented with de novo HF. Patients with chronic HF presented with evidence of acute HF at a higher rate than those with no previous HF (40.3% vs 6.9%). Compared to those without HF, those with chronic and de novo HF had higher rates of all-cause mortality (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] 2.01, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.72-2.34 and aHR 1.47, 95% CI1.15-1.88, respectively), MACE (aHR 1.47, 95% CI1.31-1-.66 and aHR 1.38, 95% CI1.12-1.69), and HHF (aHR 2.29, 95% CI2.02-2.61 and aHR 1.48, 95% CI 1.20-1.82) at 1 year., Conclusion: In this large cohort of patients with ACS, both prior and de novo HF complicating ACS were associated with significantly higher risk-adjusted rates of death, ischemic events and HHF at 30 days and 1 year. Further studies examining the association between HF and outcomes in this high-risk population are warranted, especially given the advent of more contemporary HF therapies., Competing Interests: Disclosures JAU reports speaker/consulting honoraria from Amgen, Boehringer Ingelheim, Janssen, Merck, Novartis, and Sanofi; grant support to his institutions: AstraZeneca, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Janssen, Novartis, Sanofi; and is supported by an Ontario Ministry of Colleges and Universities Early Researcher Award (ER15-11-037); University of Toronto Department of Medicine Merit Award; Women's College Research Institute and Department of Medicine, Women's College Hospital; and the Peter Munk Cardiac Centre, Toronto General Hospital. JB is a consultant to Abbott, Adrenomed, American Regent, Amgen, Array, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myers Squibb, CVRx, G3 Pharmaceutical, Impulse Dynamics, Innolife, Janssen, LivaNova, Medtronic, Merck, Novartis, Novo Nordisk, Roche, and Vifor. JLJ is a trustee of the American College of Cardiology and a Board member of Imbria Pharmaceuticals, has received grant support from Applied Therapeutics, Innolife, Novartis Pharmaceuticals, and Abbott Diagnostics and consulting income from Abbott, Janssen, Novartis, and Roche Diagnostics and participates in clinical endpoint committees/data safety monitoring boards for Abbott, AbbVie, Amgen, Bayer, CVRx, Janssen, MyoKardia, and Takeda, and is supported in part by the Hutter Family Professorship. PBP has served on the Advisory Board for AstraZeneca Pharmaceuticals and as a consultant for Medtronic. SJ reports research grants from Uppsala Clinical Research Center, Astra Zeneca, Novartis, and Jansen Pharmaceuticals. JHA reports research grants through Duke University from Bayer, Bristol-Myers Squibb, CryoLife, CSL Behring, Ferring, the US Food and Drug Administration, Glaxosmithkline, Humacyte, the US National Institutes of Health, and XaTek and consultant/honoraria payments from AbbVie, Akros, Atricure, Bristol-Myers Squibb, CryoLife, Ferring, Glaxosmithkline, Janssen, Pfizer, Portola, and the US Veterans Administration. AFH reports research grants from American Regent, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Merck, Novartis, and Verily and consulting fees from Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Cytokinetics, Merck, and Novartis. WSJ reports research grants from Bayer, Boehringer-Ingelheim, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Doris Duke Charitable Foundation, National Institutes of Health, and Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute and honoraria/other from Bayer, Bristol-Myers Squibb and Janssen Pharmaceuticals. All other authors report no disclosures., (Copyright © 2023 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest The authors have no competing interests to declare.

Importance: Stroke is the fifth-highest cause of death in the US and a leading cause of serious long-term disability with particularly high risk in Black individuals. Quality risk prediction algorithms, free of bias, are key for comprehensive prevention strategies., Objective: To compare the performance of stroke-specific algorithms with pooled cohort equations developed for atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease for the prediction of new-onset stroke across different subgroups (race, sex, and age) and to determine the added value of novel machine learning techniques., Design, Setting, and Participants: Retrospective cohort study on combined and harmonized data from Black and White participants of the Framingham Offspring, Atherosclerosis Risk in Communities (ARIC), Multi-Ethnic Study for Atherosclerosis (MESA), and Reasons for Geographical and Racial Differences in Stroke (REGARDS) studies (1983-2019) conducted in the US. The 62 482 participants included at baseline were at least 45 years of age and free of stroke or transient ischemic attack., Exposures: Published stroke-specific algorithms from Framingham and REGARDS (based on self-reported risk factors) as well as pooled cohort equations for atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease plus 2 newly developed machine learning algorithms., Main Outcomes and Measures: Models were designed to estimate the 10-year risk of new-onset stroke (ischemic or hemorrhagic). Discrimination concordance index (C index) and calibration ratios of expected vs observed event rates were assessed at 10 years. Analyses were conducted by race, sex, and age groups., Results: The combined study sample included 62 482 participants (median age, 61 years, 54% women, and 29% Black individuals). Discrimination C indexes were not significantly different for the 2 stroke-specific models (Framingham stroke, 0.72; 95% CI, 0.72-073; REGARDS self-report, 0.73; 95% CI, 0.72-0.74) vs the pooled cohort equations (0.72; 95% CI, 0.71-0.73): differences 0.01 or less (P values >.05) in the combined sample. Significant differences in discrimination were observed by race: the C indexes were 0.76 for all 3 models in White vs 0.69 in Black women (all P values <.001) and between 0.71 and 0.72 in White men and between 0.64 and 0.66 in Black men (all P values ≤.001). When stratified by age, model discrimination was better for younger (<60 years) vs older (≥60 years) adults for both Black and White individuals. The ratios of observed to expected 10-year stroke rates were closest to 1 for the REGARDS self-report model (1.05; 95% CI, 1.00-1.09) and indicated risk overestimation for Framingham stroke (0.86; 95% CI, 0.82-0.89) and pooled cohort equations (0.74; 95% CI, 0.71-0.77). Performance did not significantly improve when novel machine learning algorithms were applied., Conclusions and Relevance: In this analysis of Black and White individuals without stroke or transient ischemic attack among 4 US cohorts, existing stroke-specific risk prediction models and novel machine learning techniques did not significantly improve discriminative accuracy for new-onset stroke compared with the pooled cohort equations, and the REGARDS self-report model had the best calibration. All algorithms exhibited worse discrimination in Black individuals than in White individuals, indicating the need to expand the pool of risk factors and improve modeling techniques to address observed racial disparities and improve model performance.

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: Non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants (NOACs) are the preferred class of medications for prevention of stroke and systemic embolism in patients with atrial fibrillation unless contraindications exist. Five large, international, randomized, controlled trials of NOACs versus either warfarin or aspirin have been completed to date., Design: COMBINE AF incorporates de-identified individual patient data from 77,282 patients with atrial fibrillation at risk for stroke randomized to NOAC, warfarin, or aspirin from 5 pivotal randomized controlled trials. All patients randomized in the constituent trials are included. Variables common to ≥3 of the constituent trials are included in the master database. Individual trial data sets from the 4 coordinating centers were combined at the Duke Clinical Research Institute. The final database will be securely shared with the 4 academic coordinating centers. The combined master database will be used to perform statistical analyses aimed at better understanding underlying risk factors and outcomes in patients with atrial fibrillation treated with oral anticoagulants, with a special focus on patient subgroups and uncommon outcomes. The initial analysis from COMBINE AF will be a network meta-analysis investigating the relative efficacy and safety of pooled higher-dose NOACs versus pooled lower-dose NOACs versus warfarin with respect to multiple time-to-event efficacy and safety outcomes. COMBINE AF is registered with PROSPERO (CRD42020178771)., Conclusion: In conclusion, COMBINE AF provides a rich and robust database consisting of individual patient data and will offer opportunities to investigate oral anticoagulants across many patient subgroups. Data sharing and collaboration across academic institutions and investigators will serve as overarching themes., (Copyright © 2020 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

We sought to determine if the absence of hypertension in older adults can be used to identify those at lower risk of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD). We identified participants ≥75 years old free of cardiovascular disease (CVD) in the National Institutes of Health Pooled Cohorts with and without hypertension. We assessed the association between systolic blood pressure (BP), diastolic BP, and cardiovascular events using multivariable modeling. The association between predicted ASCVD risk and observed events was compared. Of 2,667 adults aged ≥75 years, 67.9% had hypertension. Lower systolic BP correlated with lower CVD event rates. ASCVD predicted risk score and systolic BP were both independently associated with ASCVD event rates. Among adults with similar ASCVD predicted risk estimates, those without (vs with) hypertension had lower observed event rates across the predicted risk spectrum. The absence of hypertension may help refine the risk stratification of older adults, particularly those with intermediate predicted risk., (Copyright © 2020 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Aims: Lowering low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) reduces cardiovascular risk irrespective of age, but the evidence is less strong for older patients., Methods and Results: This prespecified analysis from ODYSSEY OUTCOMES compared the effect of alirocumab vs. placebo in 18 924 patients with recent acute coronary syndrome (ACS) according to age. We examined the effect of assigned treatment on occurrence of the primary study outcome, a composite of coronary heart disease death, myocardial infarction, ischaemic stroke, or unstable angina requiring hospitalization [major adverse cardiovascular event (MACE)] and all-cause death. Relative risk reductions were consistent for patients ≥65 vs. <65 years for MACE [hazard ratio (HR) 0.78, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.68-0.91 vs. 0.89, 0.80-1.00; Pinteraction = 0.19] and all-cause death [HR 0.77, 0.62-0.95 vs. 0.94, 0.77-1.15; Pinteraction = 0.46], and consistent for MACE when dichotomizing at age 75 years (HR 0.85, 0.64-1.13 in ≥75 vs. 0.85, 0.78-0.93 in <75, Pinteraction = 0.19). When considering age as a continuous variable in regression models, advancing age increased risk of MACE, as well as the absolute reduction in MACE with alirocumab, with numbers-needed-to-treat for MACE at 3 years of 43 (25-186) at age 45 years, 26 (15-97) at age 75 years, and 12 (6-81) for those at age 85 years. Although adverse events were more frequent in older patients, there were no differences between alirocumab and placebo., Conclusion: In patients with recent ACS, alirocumab improves outcomes irrespective of age. Increasing absolute benefit but not harm with advancing age suggests that LDL-C lowering is an important preventive intervention for older patients after ACS., (© The Author(s) 2019. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology.)

Background: The ACC/AHA guidelines for primary prevention rely on the Pooled Cohort Risk Equations (PCE) risk estimates of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) to guide treatment decisions. In light of the PCE being derived in younger populations, their accuracy in older adults is uncertain., Objective: To evaluate the predictive accuracy and calibration of the PCE in older individuals., Design and Setting: We estimated CVD predicted and observed risk among individuals from four large prospective cohort studies: Cardiovascular Health Study, Multiethnic Study of Atherosclerosis, Framingham Original, and Framingham Offspring., Participants: 12,527 overall individuals without ASCVD, including 9864 individuals aged 40-74 years and 2663 aged ≥75 years., Measurements: We examined the operating characteristics of the PCE to estimate 5-year risk of stroke, MI, and CHD death overall and by age and sex strata. The associations between individual components of the PCE and cardiovascular events by age group (≥75 vs 40-74 years) were also evaluated., Results: The PCE had low discrimination for 5-year ASCVD risk in older (≥75 years) (c-statistic = 0.62, 95% CI 0.60-0.65) vs. younger (40-74 years) adults (c-statistic = 0.75, 95% CI 0.73-0.76). Calibration of the PCE was suboptimal in both older and younger adults, overestimating risk in the highest risk groups. Performance of the PCE in older adults was similarly poor when stratified by sex and age ≥ 80 years., Limitations: Since the PCE were derived from similar cohorts, though using different age groups and exams, this analysis likely overestimates the performance of the PCE., Conclusion: The performance of the PCE for ASCVD risk estimation in older adults is suboptimal; new models to effectively risk-stratify older adults are needed.

Background: In the ARISTOTLE (Apixaban for Reduction in Stroke and Other Thromboembolic Events in Atrial Fibrillation) trial, patients with atrial fibrillation and ≥2 dose-adjustment criteria (age ≥80 years, weight ≤60 kg, or creatinine ≥1.5 mg/dl [133 μmol/l]) were randomized to receive apixaban 2.5 mg twice daily or warfarin., Objectives: The purpose of this study was to describe the effects of apixaban dose adjustment on clinical and pharmacological outcomes., Methods: Patients receiving the correct dose of study drug were included (n = 18,073). The effect of apixaban 2.5 mg twice daily versus warfarin on population pharmacokinetics, D-dimer, prothrombin fragment 1 + 2 (PF1+2), and clinical outcomes was compared with the standard dose (5 mg twice daily)., Results: Patients receiving apixaban 2.5 mg twice daily exhibited lower apixaban exposure (median area under the concentration time curve at a steady state 2,720 ng/ml vs. 3,599 ng/ml; p < 0.0001) than those receiving the standard dose. In patients with ≥2 dose-adjustment criteria, reductions in D-dimers (p interaction = 0.20) and PF1+2 (p interaction = 0.55) were consistent with those observed in the standard-dose population. Patients with ≥2 dose-adjustment criteria (n = 751) were at higher risk for stroke/systemic embolism, major bleeding, and all-cause death than the standard-dose population (0 or 1 dose-adjustment criterion, n = 17,322). The effect of apixaban 2.5 mg twice daily versus warfarin in the ≥2 dose-adjustment criteria population was consistent with the standard dose in the reductions in stroke or systemic embolism (p interaction = 0.26), major bleeding (p interaction = 0.25), and death (p interaction = 0.72)., Conclusions: Apixaban drug concentrations were lower in patients receiving 2.5 mg twice daily compared with 5 mg twice daily. However, the effects of apixaban dose adjustment to 2.5 mg versus warfarin were consistent for coagulation biomarkers and clinical outcomes, providing reassuring data on efficacy and safety. (Apixaban for the Prevention of Stroke in Subjects With Atrial Fibrillation [ARISTOTLE]; NCT00412984)., (Copyright © 2020 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Variation in patient characteristics and practice patterns may influence outcomes at a regional level., Methods: We assessed differences in demographics, practice patterns, outcomes, and the effect of apixaban compared with warfarin in ARISTOTLE (n = 18,201) by prespecified regions: North America, Latin America, Europe, and Asia Pacific. The primary outcomes were stroke/systemic embolism and major bleeding., Results: Compared with other regions, patients from Asia Pacific were younger, more women were enrolled in Latin America. Coronary artery disease was more prevalent in Europe and Asia Pacific had the highest rate of prior stroke and renal impairment. Over 50% of patients in North America were taking ≥9 drugs at randomization, compared with 10% in Latin America. North America had the highest rates of temporary study drug discontinuation and procedures. Time in therapeutic range (INR 2.0-3.0) on warfarin was highest in North America and lowest in Asia Pacific. After adjustment and compared with Europe, patients in Asia Pacific had 2-fold higher risk of stroke/systemic embolism and 3-fold higher risk of intracranial hemorrhage. Patients in Latin America had 2-fold increased risk of all-cause death compared with Europe. The benefits of apixaban compared with warfarin were consistent across regions; there was a pronounced reduction in major bleeding in patients from Asia Pacific compared with other regions (p-interaction = 0.03)., Conclusions: Patients with AF enrolled in prespecified regions in ARISTOTLE had differences in clinical baseline characteristics and practice patterns. After adjustment, patients in Asia Pacific and Latin America had worse outcomes than patients from other regions. The relative benefits of apixaban compared with warfarin were consistent across regions with an even greater treatment effect in the reduction of bleeding in patients from Asia Pacific., (Copyright © 2018. Published by Elsevier B.V.)

Background: Guidelines caution against the use of non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants in patients with extremely high (>120 kg) or low (≤60 kg) body weight because of a lack of data in these populations., Methods: In a post hoc analysis of ARISTOTLE (Apixaban for Reduction in Stroke and Other Thromboembolic Events in Atrial Fibrillation; n=18 201), a randomized trial comparing apixaban with warfarin for the prevention of stroke in patients with atrial fibrillation, we estimated the randomized treatment effect (apixaban versus warfarin) stratified by body weight (≤60, >60-120, >120 kg) using a Cox regression model and tested the interaction between body weight and randomized treatment. The primary efficacy and safety outcomes were stroke or systemic embolism and major bleeding., Results: Of the 18 139 patients with available weight and outcomes data, 1985 (10.9%) were in the low-weight group (≤60 kg), 15 172 (83.6%) were in the midrange weight group (>60-120 kg), and 982 (5.4%) were in the high-weight group (>120 kg). The treatment effect of apixaban versus warfarin for the efficacy outcomes of stroke/systemic embolism, all-cause death, or myocardial infarction was consistent across the weight spectrum (interaction P value>0.05). For major bleeding, apixaban had a better safety profile than warfarin in all weight categories and even showed a greater relative risk reduction in patients in the low (≤60 kg; HR, 0.55; 95% CI, 0.36-0.82) and midrange (>60-120 kg) weight groups (HR, 0.71; 95% CI, 0.61-0.83; interaction P value=0.016)., Conclusions: Our findings provide evidence that apixaban is efficacious and safe across the spectrum of weight, including in low- (≤60 kg) and high-weight patients (>120 kg). The superiority on efficacy and safety outcomes of apixaban compared with warfarin persists across weight groups, with even greater reductions in major bleeding in patients with atrial fibrillation with low to normal weight as compared with high weight. The superiority of apixaban over warfarin in regard to efficacy and safety for stroke prevention seems to be similar in patients with atrial fibrillation across the spectrum of weight, including in low- and very high-weight patients. Thus, apixaban appears to be appropriate for patients with atrial fibrillation irrespective of body weight., Clinical Trial Registration: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov . Unique identifier: NCT00412984.

Background: The optimal anticoagulation strategy for patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) and bioprosthetic valve (BPV) replacement or native valve repair remains uncertain., Hypothesis: We evaluated the safety and efficacy of apixaban vs warfarin in patients with AF and a history of BPV replacement or native valve repair., Methods: Using data from Apixaban for Reduction in Stroke and Other Thromboembolic Events in Atrial Fibrillation (ARISTOTLE) (n = 18 201), a randomized trial comparing apixaban with warfarin in patients with AF, we analyzed the subgroup of patients (n = 251) with prior valve surgery. We contacted sites by telephone to obtain additional data about prior valve surgery. Full data were available for 156 patients. The primary efficacy endpoint was stroke/systemic embolism. The primary safety endpoint was major bleeding. Treatment groups were compared using a Cox regression model., Results: In ARISTOTLE, 104 (0.6%) patients had a history of BPV replacement (n = 73 [aortic], n = 26 [mitral], n = 5 [mitral and aortic]) and 52 (0.3%) had a history of valve repair (n = 50 [mitral], n = 2 [aortic]). Among patients with BPVs, 55 were randomized to apixaban and 49 to warfarin. Among those with a history of native valve repair, 32 were randomized to apixaban and 20 to warfarin. Overall clinical event rates were low, with no significant differences between apixaban and warfarin for any outcomes., Conclusions: In patients with AF and a history of BPV replacement or repair, the safety and efficacy of apixaban compared with warfarin was consistent with results from ARISTOTLE. These data suggest that apixaban may be reasonable for patients with BPVs or prior valve repair, though future larger randomized trials are needed. CLINICALTRIALS.GOV: NCT00412984., (© 2019 The Authors. Clinical Cardiology published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc.)

Background: We assessed antiplatelet therapy use and outcomes in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) during the ARISTOTLE trial., Methods: Patients were categorized based on the occurrence of PCI during follow-up (median 1.8 years); PCI details and outcomes post-PCI are reported. Of the 18,201 trial participants, 316 (1.7%) underwent PCI (152 in apixaban group, 164 in warfarin group)., Results: At the time of PCI, 84% (267) were on study drug (either apixaban or warfarin). Of these, 19% did not stop study drug during PCI, 49% stopped and restarted <5 days post-PCI, and 30% stopped and restarted >5 days post-PCI. At 30 days post-PCI, 35% of patients received dual -antiplatelet therapy (DAPT), 23% received aspirin only, and 13% received a P2Y 12 inhibitor only; 29% received no antiplatelet therapy. Triple therapy (DAPT + oral anticoagulant [OAC]) was used in 21% of patients, 23% received OAC only, 15% received OAC plus aspirin, and 9% received OAC plus a P2Y 12 inhibitor; 32% received antiplatelet agents without OAC. Post-PCI, patients assigned to apixaban versus warfarin had numerically similar rates of major bleeding (5.93 vs 6.73 events/100 patient-years; P = .95) and stroke (2.74 vs 1.84 events/100 patient-years; P = .62)., Conclusions: PCI occurred infrequently during follow-up. Most patients on study drug at the time of PCI remained on study drug in the peri-PCI period; 19% continued the study drug without interruption. Antiplatelet therapy use post-PCI was variable, although most patients received DAPT. Additional data are needed to guide the use of antithrombotics in patients undergoing PCI., (Copyright © 2017 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objectives: Critical limb ischaemia (CLI) implies an increased risk of cardiovascular morbidity and mortality, and the optimal antithrombotic treatment is not established., Design, Materials, Methods: The EUCLID trial investigated the effect of monotherapy with ticagrelor versus clopidogrel in 13,885 patients with peripheral artery disease (PAD); the primary endpoint was cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, or ischaemic stroke. Patients planned for revascularisation or amputation within 3 months, were excluded. This analysis focuses on the subgroup with CLI, defined by rest pain (58.8%), major (9.0%) or minor (32.2%) tissue loss., Results: In EUCLID, 643 patients (4.6%) had CLI at baseline. Diabetes mellitus was more common in the CLI group, while coronary disease, carotid disease, and hypertension were more common in the non-CLI group. A majority of CLI patients (62.1%) had only lower extremity PAD. In patients enrolled on the ankle brachial index (ABI) criteria, ABI was 0.55 ± 0.21 (mean ± SD) for those with CLI versus 0.63 ± 0.15 for those without CLI. The primary efficacy endpoint significantly increased among patients with CLI compared with those without CLI with a rate of 8.85 versus 4.28/100 patient years (adjusted for baseline characteristics hazard ratio [HR] 1.43 [95% CI 1.16-1.76]; p = 0.0009). When acute limb ischaemia requiring hospitalisation was added to the model, significant differences remained (adjusted HR 1.38, [95% CI 1.13-1.69]; p = 0.0016). The 1 year mortality was 8.9%. A trend towards increased lower limb revascularisation among those with CLI was observed. Bleeding (TIMI major, fatal, intracranial) did not differ between those with and without CLI., Conclusions: Nearly 5% of patients enrolled in EUCLID had CLI at baseline. Milder forms of CLI dominated, a result of the trial design. Patients with CLI had a significantly higher rate of cardiovascular mortality and morbidity versus those without CLI. Further efforts are required to reduce the risk of cardiovascular events in PAD, especially in patients with CLI. CLINICALTRIALS.GOV: NCT01732822., (Copyright © 2017 European Society for Vascular Surgery. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Objective: We describe the incidence, location and management of non-major bleeding, and assess the association between non-major bleeding and clinical outcomes in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) receiving anticoagulation therapy enrolled in Apixaban for Reduction in Stroke and other Thromboembolic Events in Atrial Fibrillation (ARISTOTLE)., Methods: We included patients who received ≥1 dose of study drug (n=18 140). Non-major bleeding was defined as the first bleeding event considered to be clinically relevant non-major (CRNM) or minor bleeding, and not preceded by a major bleeding event., Results: Non-major bleeding was three times more common than major bleeding (12.1% vs 3.8%). Like major bleeding, non-major bleeding was less frequent with apixaban (6.4 per 100 patient-years) than warfarin (9.4 per 100 patient-years) (adjusted HR 0.69, 95% CI 0.63 to 0.75). The most frequent sites of non-major bleeding were haematuria (16.4%), epistaxis (14.8%), gastrointestinal (13.3%), haematoma (11.5%) and bruising/ecchymosis (10.1%). Medical or surgical intervention was similar among patients with non-major bleeding on warfarin versus apixaban (24.7% vs 24.5%). A change in antithrombotic therapy (58.6% vs 50.0%) and permanent study drug discontinuation (5.1% (61) vs 3.6% (30), p=0.10) was numerically higher with warfarin than apixaban. CRNM bleeding was independently associated with an increased risk of overall death (adjusted HR 1.70, 95% CI 1.32 to 2.18) and subsequent major bleeding (adjusted HR 2.18, 95% CI 1.56 to 3.04)., Conclusions: In ARISTOTLE, non-major bleeding was common and substantially less frequent with apixaban than with warfarin. CRNM bleeding was independently associated with a higher risk of death and subsequent major bleeding. Our results highlight the importance of any severity of bleeding in patients with AF treated with anticoagulation therapy and suggest that non-major bleeding, including minor bleeding, might not be minor., Trial Registration Number: NCT00412984; post-results., (Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://www.bmj.com/company/products-services/rights-and-licensing/.)

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: 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: 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.)

Aims: To determine the effect of ticagrelor compared to clopidogrel in patients with peripheral artery disease (PAD) and acute coronary syndromes (ACS)., Methods and Results: PLATO (n = 18,624) was a multicentre, double-blind, randomized trial in ACS, that showed a 16% reduction in cardiovascular death (CV-death), myocardial infarction (MI) and stroke with ticagrelor compared with clopidogrel, without significant increase in overall major bleeding. We performed a post-hoc analysis of cardiovascular and bleeding outcomes in PLATO according to reported PAD status at baseline. At one year, CV death, MI or stroke occurred in 19.3% of patients with PAD (n = 1144) compared to 10.2% in patients without PAD (p < 0.001). The Kaplan-Meier one year event rate for the primary endpoint of CV death, MI or stroke in PAD patients treated with ticagrelor as compared with clopidogrel, was 18% vs 20.6% (HR: 0.85 95% CI 0.64-1.11; for PAD status by treatment interaction, p = 0.99) and for death from any cause 8.7% vs 11.9%, (HR: 0.74 95% CI 0.50-1.08; interaction p = 0.73). PLATO-defined major bleeding event rates at one year were 14.8% for ticagrelor compared to 17.9% for clopidogrel, (HR: 0.81 95% CI 0.59-1.10; interaction p = 0.09)., Conclusion: PAD patients have a high rate of ischaemic and bleeding events post ACS. The reduction of CV death, MI or stroke with ticagrelor compared with clopidogrel in PAD patients was consistent with the overall trial result although it did not reach statistical significance. Overall major bleeding was similar between the therapies., (© The European Society of Cardiology 2014 Reprints and permissions: sagepub.co.uk/journalsPermissions.nav.)

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.)

Background: The perceived risk of serious bleeding is an obstacle to the use of oral anticoagulation in East Asia. The efficacy and safety of apixaban in East Asian patients with atrial fibrillation are unknown., Methods: ARISTOTLE included 18,201 patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation randomized to apixaban 5mg twice daily or warfarin. The efficacy and safety of apixaban and warfarin among patients recruited from East Asia (n = 1,993) were compared with those recruited from outside East Asia (n = 16,208)., Results: Compared with warfarin, apixaban resulted in a consistent reduction in stroke or systemic embolism in East Asian (hazard ratio [HR] 0.74, 95% CI 0.50-1.10) and non-East Asian (HR 0.81, 95% CI 0.66-0.99) patients (interaction P = .70). Consistent benefits of apixaban over warfarin were also seen for major bleeding in East Asian (HR 0.53, 95% CI 0.35-0.80) and non-East Asian (HR 0.72, 95% CI 0.62-0.83) patients (interaction P = .17). There was a greater reduction in major or clinically relevant nonmajor bleeding with apixaban compared with warfarin in East Asian (HR 0.49, 95% CI 0.35-0.67) than in non-East Asian (HR 0.71, 95% CI 0.63-0.79) patients (interaction P = .03). Numerically higher rates of intracranial bleeding were seen in East Asian patients with warfarin but not with apixaban., Conclusions: Apixaban resulted in similar reductions in stroke or systemic embolism and major bleeding and greater reductions in major or clinically relevant nonmajor bleeding in patients from East Asia. Warfarin is associated with more intracranial bleeding, particularly in patients from East Asia., (Copyright © 2014 Mosby, Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Nonvalvular atrial fibrillation is common in elderly patients, who face an elevated risk of stroke but difficulty sustaining warfarin treatment. The oral factor Xa inhibitor rivaroxaban was noninferior to warfarin 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). This prespecified secondary analysis compares outcomes in older and younger patients., Methods and Results: There were 6229 patients (44%) aged ≥75 years with atrial fibrillation and ≥2 stroke risk factors randomized to warfarin (target international normalized ratio=2.0-3.0) or rivaroxaban (20 mg daily; 15 mg if creatinine clearance <50 mL/min), double blind. The primary end point was stroke and systemic embolism by intention to treat. Over 10 866 patient-years, older participants had more primary events (2.57% versus 2.05%/100 patient-years; P=0.0068) and major bleeding (4.63% versus 2.74%/100 patient-years; P<0.0001). Stroke/systemic embolism rates were consistent among older (2.29% rivaroxaban versus 2.85% warfarin per 100 patient-years; hazard ratio=0.80; 95% confidence interval, 0.63-1.02) and younger patients (2.00% versus 2.10%/100 patient-years; hazard ratio=0.95; 95% confidence interval, 0.76-1.19; interaction P=0.313), as were major bleeding rates (≥75 years: 4.86% rivaroxaban versus 4.40% warfarin per 100 patient-years; hazard ratio=1.11; 95% confidence interval, 0.92-1.34; <75 years: 2.69% versus 2.79%/100 patient-years; hazard ratio=0.96; 95% confidence interval, 0.78-1.19; interaction P=0.336). Hemorrhagic stroke rates were similar in both age groups; there was no interaction between age and rivaroxaban response., Conclusions: Elderly patients had higher stroke and major bleeding rates than younger patients, but the efficacy and safety of rivaroxaban relative to warfarin did not differ with age, supporting rivaroxaban as an alternative for the elderly., (© 2014 American Heart Association, Inc.)

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.)

Objectives: This study sought to report additional safety results 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)., Background: The ROCKET AF trial demonstrated similar risks of stroke/systemic embolism and major/nonmajor clinically relevant bleeding (principal safety endpoint) with rivaroxaban and warfarin., Methods: The risk of the principal safety and component bleeding endpoints with rivaroxaban versus warfarin were compared, and factors associated with major bleeding were examined in a multivariable model., Results: The principal safety endpoint was similar in the rivaroxaban and warfarin groups (14.9 vs. 14.5 events/100 patient-years; hazard ratio: 1.03; 95% confidence interval: 0.96 to 1.11). Major bleeding risk increased with age, but there were no differences between treatments in each age category (<65, 65 to 74, ≥75 years; pinteraction = 0.59). Compared with those without (n = 13,455), patients with a major bleed (n = 781) were more likely to be older, current/prior smokers, have prior gastrointestinal (GI) bleeding, mild anemia, and a lower calculated creatinine clearance and less likely to be female or have a prior stroke/transient ischemic attack. Increasing age, baseline diastolic blood pressure (DBP) ≥90 mm Hg, history of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease or GI bleeding, prior acetylsalicylic acid use, and anemia were independently associated with major bleeding risk; female sex and DBP <90 mm Hg were associated with a decreased risk., Conclusions: Rivaroxaban and warfarin had similar risk for major/nonmajor clinically relevant bleeding. Age, sex, DBP, prior GI bleeding, prior acetylsalicylic acid use, and anemia were associated with the risk of major bleeding. (An Efficacy and Safety Study of Rivaroxaban With Warfarin for the Prevention of Stroke and Non-Central Nervous System Systemic Embolism in Patients With Non-Valvular Atrial Fibrillation: NCT00403767)., (Copyright © 2014 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: In 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), a large randomized, clinical trial, rivaroxaban was noninferior to warfarin in preventing stroke or systemic embolism in patients with atrial fibrillation., Objective: To determine the efficacy and safety of rivaroxaban compared with warfarin among vitamin K antagonist (VKA)-naive and VKA-experienced patients., Design: Prespecified subgroup analysis. (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT00403767)., Setting: Global., Patients: 14,264 persons with atrial fibrillation., Measurements: Interaction of the relative treatment effect of rivaroxaban and warfarin on stroke or systemic embolism among VKA-naive and VKA-experienced patients., Results: Overall, 7897 (55.4%) patients were VKA-experienced and 6367 (44.6%) were VKA-naive. The effect of rivaroxaban versus warfarin on stroke or systemic embolism was consistent: Rates per 100 patient-years of follow-up were 2.32 versus 2.87 for VKA-naive patients (hazard ratio [HR], 0.81 [95% CI, 0.64 to 1.03]) and 1.98 versus 2.09 for VKA-experienced patients (HR, 0.94 [CI, 0.75 to 1.18]; interaction P = 0.36). During the first 7 days, rivaroxaban was associated with more bleeding than warfarin (HR in VKA-naive patients, 5.83 [CI, 3.25 to 10.44], and in VKA-experienced patients, 6.66 [CI, 3.83 to 11.58]; interaction P = 0.53). After 30 days, rivaroxaban was associated with less bleeding than warfarin in VKA-naive patients (HR, 0.84 [CI, 0.74 to 0.95]) and similar bleeding in VKA-experienced patients (HR, 1.06 [CI, 0.96 to 1.17]; interaction P = 0.003)., Limitation: The trial was not designed to detect differences in these subgroups., Conclusion: The efficacy of rivaroxaban in VKA-experienced and VKA-naive patients was similar to that of the overall trial. There were more bleeding events within 7 days of study drug initiation with rivaroxaban, but after 30 days, rivaroxaban was associated with less bleeding in VKA-naive patients and similar bleeding in VKA-experienced patients. This information may be useful to clinicians considering a transition to rivaroxaban for patients receiving VKA therapy., Primary Funding Source: Johnson & Johnson and Bayer HealthCare.

Background: We examined the risk of stroke or systemic embolism (SSE) conferred by heart failure (HF) and left ventricular systolic dysfunction (LVSD) in the Apixaban for Reduction in Stroke and Other Thromboembolic Events in Atrial Fibrillation Trial (ARISTOTLE), as well as the effect of apixaban versus warfarin., Methods and Results: The risk of a number of outcomes, including the composite of SSE or death (to take account of competing risks) and composite of SSE, major bleeding, or death (net clinical benefit) were calculated in 3 patient groups: (1) no HF/no LVSD (n=8728), (2) HF/no LVSD (n=3207), and (3) LVSD with/without symptomatic HF (n=2736). The rate of both outcomes was highest in patients with LVSD (SSE or death 8.06; SSE, major bleeding, or death 10.46 per 100 patient-years), intermediate for HF but preserved LV systolic function (5.32; 7.24), and lowest in patients without HF or LVSD (1.54; 5.27); each comparison P<0.0001. Each outcome was less frequent in patients treated with apixaban: in all ARISTOTLE patients, the apixaban/warfarin hazard ratio for SSE or death was 0.89 (95% confidence interval, 0.81-0.98; P=0.02); for SSE, major bleed, or death it was 0.85 (0.78-0.92; P<0.001). There was no heterogeneity of treatment effect across the 3 groups., Conclusions: Patients with LVSD (with/without HF) had a higher risk of SSE or death (but similar rate of SSE) compared with patients with HF but preserved LV systolic function; both had a greater risk than patients without either HF or LVSD. Apixaban reduced the risk of both outcomes more than warfarin in all 3 patient groups., Clinical Trial Registration: URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT00412984.

Background: In the ARISTOTLE trial, the rate of stroke or systemic embolism was reduced by apixaban compared with warfarin in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF). Patients with AF and previous stroke or transient ischaemic attack (TIA) have a high risk of stroke. We therefore aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of apixaban compared with warfarin in prespecified subgroups of patients with and without previous stroke or TIA., Methods: Between Dec 19, 2006, and April 2, 2010, patients were enrolled in the ARISTOTLE trial at 1034 clinical sites in 39 countries. 18,201 patients with AF or atrial flutter were randomly assigned to receive apixaban 5 mg twice daily or warfarin (target international normalised ratio 2·0-3·0). The median duration of follow-up was 1·8 years (IQR 1·4-2·3). The primary efficacy outcome was stroke or systemic embolism, analysed by intention to treat. The primary safety outcome was major bleeding in the on-treatment population. All participants, investigators, and sponsors were masked to treatment assignments. In this subgroup analysis, we estimated event rates and used Cox models to compare outcomes in patients with and without previous stroke or TIA. The ARISTOTLE trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NTC00412984., Findings: Of the trial population, 3436 (19%) had a previous stroke or TIA. In the subgroup of patients with previous stroke or TIA, the rate of stroke or systemic embolism was 2·46 per 100 patient-years of follow-up in the apixaban group and 3·24 in the warfarin group (hazard ratio [HR] 0·76, 95% CI 0·56 to 1·03); in the subgroup of patients without previous stroke or TIA, the rate of stroke or systemic embolism was 1·01 per 100 patient-years of follow-up with apixaban and 1·23 with warfarin (HR 0·82, 95% CI 0·65 to 1·03; p for interaction=0·71). The absolute reduction in the rate of stroke and systemic embolism with apixaban versus warfarin was 0·77 per 100 patient-years of follow-up (95% CI -0·08 to 1·63) in patients with and 0·22 (-0·03 to 0·47) in those without previous stroke or TIA. The difference in major bleeding with apixaban compared with warfarin was 1·07 per 100 patient-years (95% CI 0·09-2·04) in patients with and 0·93 (0·54-1·32) in those without previous stroke or TIA., Interpretation: The effects of apixaban versus warfarin were consistent in patients with AF with and without previous stroke or TIA. Owing to the higher risk of these outcomes in patients with previous stroke or TIA, the absolute benefits of apixaban might be greater in this population., Funding: Bristol-Myers Squibb and Pfizer., (Copyright © 2012 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Aims: Patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation (AF) and renal insufficiency are at increased risk for ischaemic stroke and bleeding during anticoagulation. Rivaroxaban, an oral, direct factor Xa inhibitor metabolized predominantly by the liver, preserves the benefit of warfarin for stroke prevention while causing fewer intracranial and fatal haemorrhages., Methods and Results: We randomized 14 264 patients with AF in a double-blind trial to rivaroxaban 20 mg/day [15 mg/day if creatinine clearance (CrCl) 30-49 mL/min] or dose-adjusted warfarin (target international normalized ratio 2.0-3.0). Compared with patients with CrCl >50 mL/min (mean age 73 years), the 2950 (20.7%) patients with CrCl 30-49 mL/min were older (79 years) and had higher event rates irrespective of study treatment. Among those with CrCl 30-49 mL/min, the primary endpoint of stroke or systemic embolism occurred in 2.32 per 100 patient-years with rivaroxaban 15 mg/day vs. 2.77 per 100 patient-years with warfarin [hazard ratio (HR) 0.84; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.57-1.23] in the per-protocol population. Intention-to-treat analysis yielded similar results (HR 0.86; 95% CI 0.63-1.17) to the per-protocol results. Rates of the principal safety endpoint (major and clinically relevant non-major bleeding: 17.82 vs. 18.28 per 100 patient-years; P = 0.76) and intracranial bleeding (0.71 vs. 0.88 per 100 patient-years; P = 0.54) were similar with rivaroxaban or warfarin. Fatal bleeding (0.28 vs. 0.74% per 100 patient-years; P = 0.047) occurred less often with rivaroxaban., Conclusion: Patients with AF and moderate renal insufficiency have higher rates of stroke and bleeding than those with normal renal function. There was no evidence of heterogeneity in treatment effect across dosing groups. Dose adjustment in ROCKET-AF yielded results consistent with the overall trial in comparison with dose-adjusted warfarin.

Background: In the Platelet Inhibition and Patient Outcomes (PLATO) trial, a prespecified subgroup analysis showed a significant interaction between treatment and region (P=0.045), with less effect of ticagrelor in North America than in the rest of the world., Methods and Results: Reasons for the interaction were explored independently by 2 statistical groups. Systematic errors in trial conduct were investigated. Statistical approaches evaluated the likelihood of play of chance. Cox regression analyses were performed to quantify how much of the regional interaction could be explained by patient characteristics and concomitant treatments, including aspirin maintenance therapy. Landmark Cox regressions at 8 time points evaluated the association of selected factors, including aspirin dose, with outcomes by treatment. Systematic errors in trial conduct were ruled out. Given the large number of subgroup analyses performed and that a result numerically favoring clopidogrel in at least 1 of the 4 prespecified regions could occur with 32% probability, chance alone cannot be ruled out. More patients in the United States (53.6%) than in the rest of the world (1.7%) took a median aspirin dose ≥300 mg/d. Of 37 baseline and postrandomization factors explored, only aspirin dose explained a substantial fraction of the regional interaction. In adjusted analyses, both Cox regression with median maintenance dose and landmark techniques showed that, in patients taking low-dose maintenance aspirin, ticagrelor was associated with better outcomes compared with clopidogrel, with statistical superiority in the rest of the world and similar outcomes in the US cohort., Conclusions: The regional interaction could arise from chance alone. Results of 2 independently performed analyses identified an underlying statistical interaction with aspirin maintenance dose as a possible explanation for the regional difference. The lowest risk of cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, or stroke with ticagrelor compared with clopidogrel is associated with a low maintenance dose of concomitant aspirin., Clinical Trial Registration: URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT00391872.

BACKGROUND: High-quality research in cardiovascular prevention, as in other fields, requires inclusion of a broad range of data sets from different sources. Integrating and harmonizing different data sources are essential to increase generalizability, sample size, and representation of understudied populations--strengthening the evidence for the scientific questions being addressed. METHODS: Here, we describe an effort to build an open-access repository and interactive online portal for researchers to access the metadata and code harmonizing data from 4 well-known cohort studies--the REGARDS (Reasons for Geographic and Racial Differences in Stroke) study, FHS (Framingham Heart Study), MESA (Multi-Ethnic Study of Atherosclerosis), and ARIC (Atherosclerosis Risk in Communities) study. We introduce a methodology and a framework used for preprocessing and harmonizing variables from multiple studies. RESULTS: We provide a real-case study and step-by-step guidance to demonstrate the practical utility of our repository and interactive web page. In addition to our successful development of such an open-access repository and interactive web page, this exercise in harmonizing data from multiple cohort studies has revealed several key themes. These themes include the importance of careful preprocessing and harmonization of variables, the value of creating an open-access repository to facilitate collaboration and reproducibility, and the potential for using harmonized data to address important scientific questions and disparities in cardiovascular disease research. CONCLUSIONS: By integrating and harmonizing these large-scale cohort studies, such a repository may improve the statistical power and representation of understudied cohorts, enabling development and validation of risk prediction models, identification and investigation of risk factors, and creating a platform for racial disparities research. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Keywords: anticoagulants; apixaban; atrial fibrillation; embolism, paradoxical; hemorrhage; stroke EN anticoagulants apixaban atrial fibrillation embolism, paradoxical hemorrhage stroke 958 960 3 09/19/22 20220920 NES 220920 Factor Xa inhibitors are the predominant type of oral anticoagulant for stroke prevention in atrial fibrillation.[1] Although recommendations exist on holding these medications before procedures with a low, intermediate, or high bleeding risk, whether and for how long to interrupt these medications around the time of a procedure continue to be debated.[2] In a previous analysis of the ARISTOTLE trial (Apixaban for the Prevention of Stroke in Subjects With Atrial Fibrillation), the 30-day postprocedure risk of stroke and major bleeding was similarly low in apixaban- and warfarin-treated patients, regardless of whether or not anticoagulation was interrupted at the time of a procedure.[3] Despite these results, many clinicians remain concerned about the risk of stroke when anticoagulation is held and the risk of bleeding when anticoagulation is not held before an invasive procedure. Atrial fibrillation, hemorrhage, stroke, anticoagulants, apixaban, embolism, paradoxical The rates of stroke/systemic embolism, myocardial infarction, death and major bleeding were <0.5% for patients on study drug 1 or 2 days after the procedure. [Extracted from the article]

Aims: The ARISTOTLE (Apixaban for Reduction in Stroke and Other Thromboembolic Events in Atrial Fibrillation) trial randomised patients with atrial fibrillation at risk of stroke to apixaban or warfarin. We sought to describe patients from ARISTOTLE who prematurely permanently discontinued study drug.Methods/results: We performed a posthoc analysis of patients from ARISTOTLE who prematurely permanently discontinued study drug during the study or follow-up period. Discontinuation rates and reasons for discontinuation were described. Death, thromboembolism (stroke, transient ischaemic attack, systemic embolism), myocardial infarction and major bleeding rates were stratified by ≤30 days or >30 days after discontinuation. A total of 4063/18 140 (22.4%) patients discontinued study drug at a median of 7.3 (2.2, 15.2) months after randomisation. Patients with discontinuation were more likely to be female and had a higher prevalence of cardiovascular disease, diabetes, renal impairment and anaemia. Premature permanent discontinuation was more common in those randomised to warfarin than apixaban (23.4% vs 21.4%; p=0.002). The most common reasons for discontinuation were patient request (46.1%) and adverse event (34.9%), with no significant difference between treatment groups. The cumulative incidence of clinical events ≤30 days after premature permanent discontinuation for all-cause death, thromboembolism, myocardial infarction, and major bleeding was 5.8%, 2.6%, 0.9%, and 3.0%, respectively. No significant difference was seen between treatment groups with respect to clinical outcomes after discontinuation.Conclusion: Premature permanent discontinuation of study drug in ARISTOTLE was common, less frequent in patients receiving apixaban than warfarin and was followed by high 30-day rates of death, thromboembolism and major bleeding. Initiatives are needed to reduce discontinuation of oral anticoagulation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The ACC/AHA guidelines for primary prevention rely on the Pooled Cohort Risk Equations (PCE) risk estimates of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) to guide treatment decisions. In light of the PCE being derived in younger populations, their accuracy in older adults is uncertain.Objective: To evaluate the predictive accuracy and calibration of the PCE in older individuals.Design and Setting: We estimated CVD predicted and observed risk among individuals from four large prospective cohort studies: Cardiovascular Health Study, Multiethnic Study of Atherosclerosis, Framingham Original, and Framingham Offspring.Participants: 12,527 overall individuals without ASCVD, including 9864 individuals aged 40-74 years and 2663 aged ≥75 years.Measurements: We examined the operating characteristics of the PCE to estimate 5-year risk of stroke, MI, and CHD death overall and by age and sex strata. The associations between individual components of the PCE and cardiovascular events by age group (≥75 vs 40-74 years) were also evaluated.Results: The PCE had low discrimination for 5-year ASCVD risk in older (≥75 years) (c-statistic = 0.62, 95% CI 0.60-0.65) vs. younger (40-74 years) adults (c-statistic = 0.75, 95% CI 0.73-0.76). Calibration of the PCE was suboptimal in both older and younger adults, overestimating risk in the highest risk groups. Performance of the PCE in older adults was similarly poor when stratified by sex and age ≥ 80 years.Limitations: Since the PCE were derived from similar cohorts, though using different age groups and exams, this analysis likely overestimates the performance of the PCE.Conclusion: The performance of the PCE for ASCVD risk estimation in older adults is suboptimal; new models to effectively risk-stratify older adults are needed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: In AUGUSTUS (Open-Label, 2×2 Factorial, Randomized, Controlled Clinical Trial to Evaluate the Safety of Apixaban vs Vitamin K Antagonist and Aspirin vs Aspirin Placebo in Patients With Atrial Fibrillation and Acute Coronary Syndrome and/or Percutaneous Coronary Intervention), patients with atrial fibrillation and a recent acute coronary syndrome and those undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention had less bleeding with apixaban than vitamin K antagonist (VKA) and with placebo than aspirin. However, the number of ischemic events was numerically higher with placebo. The aim of this analysis is to assess the tradeoff of risk (bleeding) and benefit (ischemic events) over time with apixaban versus VKA and aspirin versus placebo.Methods: In AUGUSTUS, 4614 patients with atrial fibrillation and recent acute coronary syndrome or percutaneous coronary intervention on a P2Y12 inhibitor were randomized to blinded aspirin or placebo and to open-label apixaban or VKA for 6 months. In a post hoc analysis, we compared the risk of 3 composite bleeding outcomes and 3 composite ischemic outcomes from randomization through 30 days and from 30 days to 6 months with apixaban and VKA and with aspirin and placebo.Results: Compared with VKA, apixaban had either a lower or a similar risk of bleeding and ischemic outcomes from randomization to 30 days and from 30 days to 6 months. From randomization to 30 days, aspirin caused more severe bleeding (absolute risk difference, 0.97% [95% CI, 0.23-1.70]) and fewer severe ischemic events (absolute risk difference, -0.91% [95% CI, -1.74 to -0.08]) than placebo. From 30 days to 6 months, the risk of severe bleeding was higher with aspirin than placebo (absolute risk difference, 1.25% [95% CI, 0.23-2.27]), whereas the risk of severe ischemic events was similar (absolute risk difference, -0.17% [95% CI, -1.33 to 0.98]).Conclusions: In patients with atrial fibrillation and recent acute coronary syndrome or percutaneous coronary intervention receiving a P2Y12 inhibitor, apixaban is preferred over VKA. Use of aspirin immediately and for up to 30 days results in an equal tradeoff between an increase in severe bleeding and a reduction in severe ischemic events. After 30 days, aspirin continues to increase bleeding without significantly reducing ischemic events. These results inform shared, patient-centric decision making on the ideal duration of the use of aspirin after an acute coronary syndrome or percutaneous coronary intervention in patients with atrial fibrillation receiving oral anticoagulation. Registration: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT02415400. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES: Elevated low‐density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL‐C) in early adulthood is associated with increased risk of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD). The strength of the association between LDL‐C and ASCVD among older adults, however, is less understood. DESIGN: We examined individual‐level cohort data from the National Institutes of Health Pooled Cohorts (Framingham Study, Framingham Offspring Study, Multi‐Ethnic Study of Atherosclerosis, and Cardiovascular Health Study), which prospectively measured CVD risk factors and incident disease. SETTING: Prospective cohort study. PARTICIPANTS: Adults, aged 75 years or older, free of ASCVD. MEASUREMENTS: We evaluated the associations between LDL‐C and incident ASCVD (stroke, myocardial infarction, and cardiovascular death) in unadjusted analysis and in multivariable‐adjusted Cox proportional hazards models. We assessed 5‐year Kaplan‐Meier ASCVD event rates in patients with and without hyperlipidemia (LDL‐C ≥130 mg/dL or on lipid‐lowering medications), stratified by the number of other risk factors, including smoking, diabetes, and hypertension. RESULTS: We included 2667 adults, aged 75 years or older (59% female), free of ASCVD; median age was 78 years, with median LDL‐C of 117 mg/dL. In both unadjusted and adjusted analyses, there was no association between LDL‐C and ASCVD (adjusted hazard ratio = 1.022; 95% confidence interval = 0.998‐1.046; P =.07). Among adults without other risk factors (free of smoking, diabetes, and hypertension), event rates were similar between those with and without hyperlipidemia (Kaplan‐Meier rates = 5.8% and 7.0%, respectively). Among adults with one or two or more other risk factors, the presence of hyperlipidemia was also not associated with 5‐year CVD event rates (Kaplan‐Meier rates = 12.8% vs 15.0% [P =.44] for one other risk factor and 21.9% vs 24.0% [P =.59] for two or more other risk factors). CONCLUSION: Among a well‐characterized cohort, LDL‐C was not associated with CVD risk among adults aged 75 years or older, even in the presence of other risk factors. J Am Geriatr Soc 67:2560–2567, 2019 [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aims We assessed the effect of concomitant aspirin use on the efficacy and safety of apixaban compared with warfarin in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF). Methods and results In ARISTOTLE, 18 201 patients were randomized to apixaban 5 mg twice daily or warfarin. Concomitant aspirin use was left to the discretion of the treating physician. In this predefined analysis, simple and marginal structured models were used to adjust for baseline and time-dependent confounders associated with aspirin use. Outcome measures included stroke or systemic embolism, ischaemic stroke, myocardial infarction, mortality, major bleeding, haemorrhagic stroke, major or clinically relevant non-major bleeding, and any bleeding. On Day 1, 4434 (24%) patients were taking aspirin. Irrespective of concomitant aspirin use, apixaban reduced stroke or systemic embolism [with aspirin: apixaban 1.12% vs. warfarin 1.91%, hazard ratio (HR) 0.58, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.39–0.85 vs. without aspirin: apixaban 1.11% vs. warfarin 1.32%, HR 0.84, 95% CI 0.66–1.07; P interaction = 0.10] and caused less major bleeding than warfarin (with aspirin: apixaban 3.10% vs. warfarin 3.92%, HR 0.77, 95% CI 0.60–0.99 vs. without aspirin: apixaban 1.82% vs. warfarin 2.78%, HR without aspirin 0.65, 95% CI 0.55–0.78; P interaction = 0.29). Similar results were seen in the subgroups of patients with and without arterial vascular disease. Conclusion Apixaban had similar beneficial effects on stroke or systemic embolism and major bleeding compared with warfarin, irrespective of concomitant aspirin use. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

Background: The use of apixaban instead of vitamin K antagonists (VKA) as well as dropping aspirin results in less bleeding and comparable ischemic events in patients with atrial fibrillation and acute coronary syndrome and/or percutaneous coronary intervention treated with a P2Y12 inhibitor.Objectives: The authors assessed the safety and efficacy of antithrombotic regimens according to HAS-BLED and CHA2DS2-VASc scores in AUGUSTUS (The Open-Label, 2 × 2 Factorial, Randomized, Controlled Clinical Trial to Evaluate the Safety of Apixaban vs. Vitamin K Antagonist and Aspirin vs. Placebo in Patients with Atrial Fibrillation and Acute Coronary Syndrome and/or Percutaneous Coronary Intervention).Methods: In AUGUSTUS, 4,614 patients were randomized in a 2-by-2 factorial design to open-label apixaban or VKA and blinded aspirin or placebo. The primary endpoint was major or clinically relevant nonmajor bleeding over 6 months of follow-up. Cox proportional hazards models were used to assess treatment effects by baseline HAS-BLED (≤2 vs ≥3) and CHA2DS2-VASc (≤2 vs ≥3) scores.Results: Of 4,386 (95.1%) patients with calculable scores, 66.8% had HAS-BLED ≥3 and 81.7% had CHA2DS2-VASc ≥3. Bleeding rates were lower with apixaban than VKA irrespective of baseline risk (HR: 0.57; 95% CI: 0.41-0.78 [HAS-BLED ≤2]; HR: 0.72; 95% CI: 0.59-0.88 [HAS-BLED ≥3]; interaction P = 0.23). Aspirin increased bleeding irrespective of baseline risk (HR: 1.86; 95% CI: 1.36-2.56 [HAS-BLED ≤2]; HR: 1.81; 95% CI: 1.47-2.23 [HAS-BLED ≥3]; interaction P = 0.88). Apixaban resulted in a lower risk of death or hospitalization than VKA without a significant interaction with baseline stroke risk (HR: 0.92; 95% CI: 0.67-1.25 [CHA2DS2-VASc ≤2]; HR: 0.82; 95% CI: 0.73-0.94 [CHA2DS2-VASc ≥3]; interaction P = 0.53).Conclusions: Our findings support the use of apixaban and a P2Y12 inhibitor without aspirin for most patients with atrial fibrillation and acute coronary syndrome and/or percutaneous coronary intervention, irrespective of a patient's baseline bleeding and stroke risk (NCT02415400). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: We assessed outcomes among anticoagulated patients with atrial fibrillation and a history of falling, and whether the benefits of apixaban vs warfarin are consistent in this population.Methods: Of the 18,201 patients in the Apixaban for Reduction in Stroke and Other Thromboembolic Events in Atrial Fibrillation (ARISTOTLE) study, 16,491 had information about history of falling-753 with history of falling and 15,738 without history of falling. The primary efficacy outcome was stroke or systemic embolism; the primary safety outcome was major bleeding.Results: When compared with patients without a history of falling, patients with a history of falling were older, more likely to be female and to have dementia, cerebrovascular disease, depression, diabetes, heart failure, osteoporosis, fractures, and higher CHA2DS2-VASc (Congestive heart failure, Hypertension, Age ≥75 years, Diabetes mellitus, prior Stroke or TIA or thromboembolism, Vascular disease, Age 65-74 years, Sex category female) and HAS-BLED (Hypertension, Abnormal renal and liver function, Stroke, Bleeding, Labile international normalized ratio, Elderly, Drugs or alcohol) scores. Patients with a history of falling had higher rates of major bleeding (adjusted hazard ratio [HR] 1.39; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.05-1.84; P = .020), including intracranial bleeding (adjusted HR 1.87; 95% CI, 1.02-3.43; P = .044) and death (adjusted HR 1.70; 95% CI, 1.36-2.14; P < .0001), but similar rates of stroke or systemic embolism and hemorrhagic stroke. There was no evidence of a differential effect of apixaban compared with warfarin on any outcome, regardless of history of falling. Among those with a history of falling, subdural bleeding occurred in 5 of 367 patients treated with warfarin and 0 of 386 treated with apixaban.Conclusions: Patients with atrial fibrillation and a history of falling receiving anticoagulation have a higher risk of major bleeding, including intracranial, and death. The efficacy and safety of apixaban compared with warfarin were consistent, irrespective of history of falling. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background Amiodarone is an effective medication in preventing atrial fibrillation (AF), but it interferes with the metabolism of warfarin. Objectives This study sought to examine the association of major thrombotic clinical events and bleeding with the use of amiodarone in the ARISTOTLE (Apixaban for Reduction in Stroke and Other Thromboembolic Events in Atrial Fibrillation) trial. Methods Baseline characteristics of patients who received amiodarone at randomization were compared with those who did not receive amiodarone. The interaction between randomized treatment and amiodarone was tested using a Cox model, with main effects for randomized treatment and amiodarone and their interaction. Matching on the basis of a propensity score was used to compare patients who received and who did not receive amiodarone at the time of randomization. Results In ARISTOTLE, 2,051 (11.4%) patients received amiodarone at randomization. Patients on warfarin and amiodarone had time in the therapeutic range that was lower than patients not on amiodarone (56.5% vs. 63.0%; p < 0.0001). More amiodarone-treated patients had a stroke or a systemic embolism (1.58%/year vs. 1.19%/year; adjusted hazard ratio [HR]: 1.47, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.03 to 2.10; p = 0.0322). Overall mortality and major bleeding rates were elevated, but were not significantly different in amiodarone-treated patients and patients not on amiodarone. When comparing apixaban with warfarin, patients who received amiodarone had a stroke or a systemic embolism rate of 1.24%/year versus 1.85%/year (HR: 0.68, 95% CI: 0.40 to 1.15), death of 4.15%/year versus 5.65%/year (HR: 0.74, 95% CI: 0.55 to 0.98), and major bleeding of 1.86%/year versus 3.06%/year (HR: 0.61, 95% CI: 0.39 to 0.96). In patients who did not receive amiodarone, the stroke or systemic embolism rate was 1.29%/year versus 1.57%/year (HR: 0.82, 95% CI: 0.68 to 1.00), death was 3.43%/year versus 3.68%/year (HR: 0.93, 95% CI: 0.83 to 1.05), and major bleeding was 2.18%/year versus 3.03%/year (HR: 0.72, 95% CI: 0.62 to 0.84). The interaction p values for amiodarone use by apixaban treatment effects were not significant. Conclusions Amiodarone use was associated with significantly increased stroke and systemic embolism risk and a lower time in the therapeutic range when used with warfarin. Apixaban consistently reduced the rate of stroke and systemic embolism, death, and major bleeding compared with warfarin in amiodarone-treated patients and patients who were not on amiodarone. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: In the ARISTOTLE trial, the rate of stroke or systemic embolism was reduced by apixaban compared with warfarin in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF). Patients with AF and previous stroke or transient ischaemic attack (TIA) have a high risk of stroke. We therefore aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of apixaban compared with warfarin in prespecified subgroups of patients with and without previous stroke or TIA.Methods: Between Dec 19, 2006, and April 2, 2010, patients were enrolled in the ARISTOTLE trial at 1034 clinical sites in 39 countries. 18,201 patients with AF or atrial flutter were randomly assigned to receive apixaban 5 mg twice daily or warfarin (target international normalised ratio 2·0-3·0). The median duration of follow-up was 1·8 years (IQR 1·4-2·3). The primary efficacy outcome was stroke or systemic embolism, analysed by intention to treat. The primary safety outcome was major bleeding in the on-treatment population. All participants, investigators, and sponsors were masked to treatment assignments. In this subgroup analysis, we estimated event rates and used Cox models to compare outcomes in patients with and without previous stroke or TIA. The ARISTOTLE trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NTC00412984.Findings: Of the trial population, 3436 (19%) had a previous stroke or TIA. In the subgroup of patients with previous stroke or TIA, the rate of stroke or systemic embolism was 2·46 per 100 patient-years of follow-up in the apixaban group and 3·24 in the warfarin group (hazard ratio [HR] 0·76, 95% CI 0·56 to 1·03); in the subgroup of patients without previous stroke or TIA, the rate of stroke or systemic embolism was 1·01 per 100 patient-years of follow-up with apixaban and 1·23 with warfarin (HR 0·82, 95% CI 0·65 to 1·03; p for interaction=0·71). The absolute reduction in the rate of stroke and systemic embolism with apixaban versus warfarin was 0·77 per 100 patient-years of follow-up (95% CI -0·08 to 1·63) in patients with and 0·22 (-0·03 to 0·47) in those without previous stroke or TIA. The difference in major bleeding with apixaban compared with warfarin was 1·07 per 100 patient-years (95% CI 0·09-2·04) in patients with and 0·93 (0·54-1·32) in those without previous stroke or TIA.Interpretation: The effects of apixaban versus warfarin were consistent in patients with AF with and without previous stroke or TIA. Owing to the higher risk of these outcomes in patients with previous stroke or TIA, the absolute benefits of apixaban might be greater in this population.Funding: Bristol-Myers Squibb and Pfizer. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]