Back to Search
Start Over
Anamnestic frailty phenotype and adverse outcomes in patients treated with direct oral anticoagulants: Validation and comparative performance with frailty phenotype.
- Source :
-
Archives of gerontology and geriatrics [Arch Gerontol Geriatr] 2023 May; Vol. 108, pp. 104945. Date of Electronic Publication: 2023 Jan 25. - Publication Year :
- 2023
-
Abstract
- Aims: The anamnestic frailty phenotype (AFP) is a quick, instrument-free tool derived from frailty phenotype (FP). We prospectively evaluated the discriminative capacity and prognostic value of AFP in ambulatory patients receiving DOACs for atrial fibrillation (AF) or venous thromboembolism (VTE), and compared AFP performance with that of FP.<br />Methods and Results: Sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive value (PPV, NPV) with corresponding 95% confidence intervals (95%CI), were estimated for bleeding, thromboembolism, and all-cause mortality. Risk ratios (RRs) were calculated in frail versus non-frail patients. Of 236 patients (median age 78 years), 98 (42%) and 89 (38%) were classified as frail according to FP and AFP, respectively (Kappa= 0.76). Frailty, as assessed by AFP, was associated with higher risk of bleeding (RR 2.3; 95%CI, 1.2 to 4.6), and mortality (RR 4.4; 95%CI, 1.3 to 19.7). Similarly, to FP, AFP exhibited modest sensitivity and specificity, but high NPV that was 91% (95%CI, 85 to 95) for bleeding, 98% (95%CI, 94 to 100) for thromboembolism, and 98% (95%CI, 94 to 100) for mortality.<br />Conclusion: Among patients receiving DOACs for AF or VTE, AFP was associated with an increased risk of adverse outcomes. AFP exhibited modest sensitivity and specificity, but excellent NPV. If confirmed, these findings suggest that AFP may represent a rapid, easy-to-use and unexpensive tool that may potentially help identify patients at lower risk for adverse outcomes and tailor anticoagulation management.<br />Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest Matteo Candeloro, Nicola Potere, Camilla Federici, Raffaella Auciello, and Ettore Porreca have no conflict of interest to declare; Marcello Di Nisio received honoraria for participation at advisory boards from Bayer, Daiichi Sankyo, Pfizer, Leo Pharma, Sanofi, and Viatris, outside the submitted work.<br /> (Copyright © 2023 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)
Details
- Language :
- English
- ISSN :
- 1872-6976
- Volume :
- 108
- Database :
- MEDLINE
- Journal :
- Archives of gerontology and geriatrics
- Publication Type :
- Academic Journal
- Accession number :
- 36716647
- Full Text :
- https://doi.org/10.1016/j.archger.2023.104945