Systematic approach to outcome assessment from coded electronic healthcare records in the DaRe2THINK NHS-embedded randomized trial.

Aims: Improving the efficiency of clinical trials is key to their continued importance in directing evidence-based patient care. Digital innovations, in particular the use of electronic healthcare records (EHRs), allow for large-scale screening and follow up of participants. However, it is critical these developments are accompanied by robust and transparent methods that can support high-quality and high clinical value research. Methods and results: The DaRe2THINK trial includes a series of novel processes, including nationwide pseudonymized pre screening of the primary-care EHR across England, digital enrolment, remote e-consent, and 'no-visit' follow up by linking all primary- and secondary-care health data with patient-reported outcomes. DaRe2THINK is a pragmatic, healthcare-embedded randomized trial testing whether earlier use of direct oral anticoagulants in patients with prior or current atrial fibrillation can prevent thromboembolic events and cognitive decline (www.birmingham.ac.uk/dare2think). This study outlines the systematic approach and methodology employed to define patient information and outcome events. This includes transparency on all medical code lists and phenotypes used in the trial across a variety of national data sources, including Clinical Practice Research Datalink Aurum (primary care), Hospital Episode Statistics (secondary care), and the Office for National Statistics (mortality). Conclusion: Co-designed by a patient and public involvement team, DaRe2THINK presents an opportunity to transform the approach to randomized trials in the setting of routine healthcare, providing high-quality evidence generation in populations representative of the community at risk.

Machine learning for subtype definition and risk prediction in heart failure, acute coronary syndromes and atrial fibrillation: systematic review of validity and clinical utility.

BACKGROUND: Machine learning (ML) is increasingly used in research for subtype definition and risk prediction, particularly in cardiovascular diseases. No existing ML models are routinely used for cardiovascular disease management, and their phase of clinical utility is unknown, partly due to a lack of clear criteria. We evaluated ML for subtype definition and risk prediction in heart failure (HF), acute coronary syndromes (ACS) and atrial fibrillation (AF). METHODS: For ML studies of subtype definition and risk prediction, we conducted a systematic review in HF, ACS and AF, using PubMed, MEDLINE and Web of Science from January 2000 until December 2019. By adapting published criteria for diagnostic and prognostic studies, we developed a seven-domain, ML-specific checklist. RESULTS: Of 5918 studies identified, 97 were included. Across studies for subtype definition (n = 40) and risk prediction (n = 57), there was variation in data source, population size (median 606 and median 6769), clinical setting (outpatient, inpatient, different departments), number of covariates (median 19 and median 48) and ML methods. All studies were single disease, most were North American (n = 61/97) and only 14 studies combined definition and risk prediction. Subtype definition and risk prediction studies respectively had limitations in development (e.g. 15.0% and 78.9% of studies related to patient benefit; 15.0% and 15.8% had low patient selection bias), validation (12.5% and 5.3% externally validated) and impact (32.5% and 91.2% improved outcome prediction; no effectiveness or cost-effectiveness evaluations). CONCLUSIONS: Studies of ML in HF, ACS and AF are limited by number and type of included covariates, ML methods, population size, country, clinical setting and focus on single diseases, not overlap or multimorbidity. Clinical utility and implementation rely on improvements in development, validation and impact, facilitated by simple checklists. We provide clear steps prior to safe implementation of machine learning in clinical practice for cardiovascular diseases and other disease areas.

Dynamic risk assessment to improve quality of care in patients with atrial fibrillation: the 7th AFNET/EHRA Consensus Conference.

AIMS: The risk of developing atrial fibrillation (AF) and its complications continues to increase, despite good progress in preventing AF-related strokes. METHODS AND RESULTS: This article summarizes the outcomes of the 7th Consensus Conference of the Atrial Fibrillation NETwork (AFNET) and the European Heart Rhythm Association (EHRA) held in Lisbon in March 2019. Sixty-five international AF specialists met to present new data and find consensus on pressing issues in AF prevention, management and future research to improve care for patients with AF and prevent AF-related complications. This article is the main outcome of an interactive, iterative discussion between breakout specialist groups and the meeting plenary. AF patients have dynamic risk profiles requiring repeated assessment and risk-based therapy stratification to optimize quality of care. Interrogation of deeply phenotyped datasets with outcomes will lead to a better understanding of the cardiac and systemic effects of AF, interacting with comorbidities and predisposing factors, enabling stratified therapy. New proposals include an algorithm for the acute management of patients with AF and heart failure, a call for a refined, data-driven assessment of stroke risk, suggestions for anticoagulation use in special populations, and a call for rhythm control therapy selection based on risk of AF recurrence. CONCLUSION: The remaining morbidity and mortality in patients with AF needs better characterization. Likely drivers of the remaining AF-related problems are AF burden, potentially treatable by rhythm control therapy, and concomitant conditions, potentially treatable by treating these conditions. Identifying the drivers of AF-related complications holds promise for stratified therapy.

Importance and Assessment of Quality of Life in Symptomatic Permanent Atrial Fibrillation: Patient Focus Groups from the RATE-AF Trial.

AIMS: To establish the extent and impact of symptoms in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF), the importance of different aspects of quality of life (QoL), and how we should assess wellbeing. METHODS: Focus groups of patients with symptomatic permanent AF in a trial of heart rate control; the RATE-AF trial randomised 160 patients aged ≥60 years with permanent AF and at least NYHA class II dyspnoea to either digoxin or beta-blockers. Patient and public representatives led the focus groups and performed all data acquisition and analysis, using thematic approaches to interpret patient views about QoL and its measurement. RESULTS: Substantial impairment of health-related QoL was noted in 160 trial patients, with impact on all domains apart from mental health. Eight women and 11 men aged 61-87 years participated in the focus groups. Common themes were a lack of information from healthcare professionals about AF, a lack of focus on QoL in consultations, and a sense of frustration, isolation, and reduced confidence. There was marked variability in symptoms in individual patients, with some describing severe impact on activities of daily living, and profound interaction with comorbidities such as arthritis. Day-to-day variation in QoL and difficulty in attributing symptom burden to AF or other comorbidities led to challenges in questionnaire completion. Consensus was reached that collecting both general and AF-specific QoL would be useful in routine practice, along with participation in peer support, which was empowering for the patients. CONCLUSIONS: The impact of comorbidities is poorly appreciated in the context of AF, with considerable variability in QoL that requires both generic and AF-specific assessment. Improvement in QoL should direct the appraisal, and reappraisal, of treatment decisions for patients with permanent AF.

Beta-blocker efficacy across different cardiovascular indications: an umbrella review and meta-analytic assessment.

BACKGROUND: Beta-blockers are widely used for many cardiovascular conditions; however, their efficacy in contemporary clinical practice remains uncertain. METHODS: We performed a prospectively designed, umbrella review of meta-analyses of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) investigating the evidence of beta-blockers in the contemporary management of coronary artery disease (CAD), heart failure (HF), patients undergoing surgery or hypertension (registration: PROSPERO CRD42016038375). We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE and the Cochrane Library from inception until December 2018. Outcomes were analysed as beta-blockers versus control for all-cause mortality, myocardial infarction (MI), incident HF or stroke. Two independent investigators abstracted the data, assessed the quality of the evidence and rated the certainty of evidence. RESULTS: We identified 98 meta-analyses, including 284 unique RCTs and 1,617,523 patient-years of follow-up. In CAD, 12 meta-analyses (93 RCTs, 103,481 patients) showed that beta-blockers reduced mortality in analyses before routine reperfusion, but there was a lack of benefit in contemporary studies where ≥ 50% of patients received thrombolytics or intervention. Beta-blockers reduced incident MI at the expense of increased HF. In HF with reduced ejection fraction, 34 meta-analyses (66 RCTs, 35,383 patients) demonstrated a reduction in mortality and HF hospitalisation with beta-blockers in sinus rhythm, but not in atrial fibrillation. In patients undergoing surgery, 23 meta-analyses (89 RCTs, 19,211 patients) showed no effect of beta-blockers on mortality for cardiac surgery, but increased mortality in non-cardiac surgery. In non-cardiac surgery, beta-blockers reduced MI after surgery but increased the risk of stroke. In hypertension, 27 meta-analyses (36 RCTs, 260,549 patients) identified no benefit versus placebo, but beta-blockers were inferior to other agents for preventing mortality and stroke. CONCLUSIONS: Beta-blockers substantially reduce mortality in HF patients in sinus rhythm, but for other conditions, clinicians need to weigh up both benefit and potential risk.

A randomised controlled trial evaluating arrhythmia burden, risk of sudden cardiac death and stroke in patients with Fabry disease: the role of implantable loop recorders (RaILRoAD) compared with current standard practice.

BACKGROUND: Fabry disease (FD) is a genetic disorder caused by a deficiency in the enzyme alpha-galactosidase A, leading to an accumulation of glycosphingolipids in tissues across the body. Cardiac disease is the leading cause of morbidity and mortality. Advanced disease, characterised by extensive left ventricular hypertrophy, ventricular dysfunction and fibrosis, is known to be associated with an increase in arrhythmia. Data identifying risk factors for arrhythmia are limited, and no Fabry-specific risk stratification tool is available to select those who may benefit from initiation of medical or device therapy (implantable cardiac defibrillators). Current monitoring strategies have a limited diagnostic yield, and implantable loop recorders (ILRs) have the potential to change treatment and clinical outcomes. AIM: The aim of this study is to determine whether ILRs can (1) improve arrhythmia detection in FD and (2) identify risk predictors of arrhythmia. METHODS: A prospective, 5-year, open-label, international, multi-centre randomised controlled trial of a minimum of 164 participants with genetically or enzymatically confirmed FD (or both) who have evidence of cardiac disease will be recruited from five centres: Queen Elizabeth Hospital, Birmingham, UK; Salford Royal Hospital, Salford, UK; Royal Free Hospital, London, UK; Addenbrookes Hospital, Cambridge, UK; and Westmead Hospital, Sydney, Australia. Participants will be block-randomised (1:1) to two study arms for cardiac monitoring (i) control arm: standard of care with annual 24 h or 5-day Holter monitor or (ii) treatment arm: continuous cardiac monitoring with ILR implantation plus standard of care. Participants will undergo multiple investigations-blood/urine biomarkers, 12-lead and advanced electrocardiogram (ECG) recording, echocardiography and cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) imaging-at baseline and 6-12 monthly follow-up visits. The primary endpoint is identification of arrhythmia requiring initiation or alteration in therapy. Secondary outcome measures include characterising the risk factors associated with arrhythmia and outcome data in the form of imaging, ECG and blood biomarkers. DISCUSSION: This is the first study evaluating arrhythmia burden and the use of ILR across the spectrum of risk profiles in Fabry cardiomyopathy. This will enable detailed characterisation of arrhythmic risk predictors in FD and ultimately support formulation of Fabry-specific guidance in this high-risk population. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov ( NCT03305250 ). Registered on 9 October 2017.

Patient-Reported Outcomes for Quality of Life Assessment in Atrial Fibrillation: A Systematic Review of Measurement Properties.

BACKGROUND: Atrial fibrillation is a large and growing burden across all types of healthcare. Both incidence and prevalence are expected to double in the next 20 years, with huge impact on hospital admissions, costs and patient quality of life. Patient wellbeing determines the management strategy for atrial fibrillation, including the use of rhythm control therapy and the clinical success of heart rate control. Hence, evaluation of quality of life is an emerging and important part of the assessment of patients with atrial fibrillation. Although a number of questionnaires to assess quality of life in atrial fibrillation are available, a comprehensive overview of their measurement properties is lacking. METHODS AND RESULTS: We performed a systematic review of the measurement properties of atrial fibrillation-specific health-related quality of life questionnaires. Methodological quality was assessed using the Consensus based Standards for selection of health Measurement Instruments (COSMIN) checklist, with measurement properties rated for quality against optimal criteria and levels of evidence. We screened 2,216 articles, of which eight articles describing five questionnaires were eligible for inclusion: Atrial Fibrillation 6 (AF6), Atrial Fibrillation Effect on QualiTy-of-Life (AFEQT), Atrial Fibrillation Quality of Life Questionnaire (AFQLQ), Atrial Fibrillation Quality of Life (AFQoL), and Quality of Life in Atrial Fibrillation (QLAF). Good reliability (internal consistency and test-retest reliability) was demonstrated for AF6, AFEQT, AFQLQ and AFQoL. Content, construct and criterion validity were positively rated only in AFEQT. Responsiveness was positively rated only in AFEQT, but with limited evidence. Overall, AFEQT showed strong positive evidence for 2 of 9 measurement properties, compared to one for AFQoL and none for the remaining questionnaires. INTERPRETATION: Given the low ratings for many measurement properties, no single questionnaire can be recommended, although AFEQT performed strongest. Further studies to robustly assess reliability, validity and responsiveness of AF-specific quality of life questionnaires are required. This review consolidates the current evidence for quality of life assessment in patients with atrial fibrillation and identifies priority areas for future research.

Radial artery pulse wave analysis for non-invasive assessment of coronary artery disease.

BACKGROUND: Angiographically-normal coronary arteries are reported in 10-20% of patients undergoing diagnostic coronary angiography despite screening with risk factors and functional tests. We sought to validate and determine the clinical value of radial artery pulse wave analysis (PWA), a simple, quick and non-invasive marker of central artery stiffness and define its ability to predict coronary artery disease in high-risk patients. MATERIALS AND METHODS: 531 consecutive patients referred for elective coronary angiography, irrespective of previous co-morbidity, were assessed in a prospective, multicenter observational study [the Alternative Risk Markers in Coronary Artery Disease (ARM-CAD) study]. RESULTS: Mean age was 65 ± 11 years, 33% were women, 18% had impaired left-ventricular function and 22% a prior myocardial infarction. Angiography demonstrated normal coronary arteries in 20% of participants. The only independent associations with this outcome were younger age, female gender, absence of diabetes and PWA-derived central augmentation pressure <24 mm Hg. The odds ratio for the latter after adjustment for medications and baseline risk factors (including blood pressure, high-sensitivity C-reactive protein and B-type natriuretic peptide) was 3.4 (95% CI 1.2 to 9.5; p=0.021). The specificity for the multivariate model that included PWA was 95.7% with a receiver operator curve area of 0.876. Validation studies suggested that systolic variables from PWA were robust regardless of waveform quality and similar to measured aortic pressures (mean difference 2.7 mm Hg). CONCLUSIONS: Assessment of radial artery waveforms is a useful non-invasive clinical test that can stratify the likelihood of coronary disease and assist in identifying patients who require diagnostic angiography.