Incidence and predictors of post-thrombotic syndrome in patients with proximal DVT in a real-world setting: findings from the GARFIELD-VTE registry.

Although substantial progress has been made in the pathophysiology and management of the post-thrombotic syndrome (PTS), several aspects still need clarification. Among them, the incidence and severity of PTS in the real world, the risk factors for its development, the value of patient's self-evaluation, and the ability to identify patients at risk for severe PTS. Eligible participants (n = 1107) with proximal deep-vein thrombosis (DVT) from the global GARFIELD-VTE registry underwent conventional physician's evaluation for PTS 36 months after diagnosis of their DVT using the Villalta score. In addition, 856 patients completed a Villalta questionnaire at 24 months. Variable selection was performed using stepwise algorithm, and predictors of severe PTS were incorporated into a multivariable risk model. The optimistic adjusted c-index was calculated using bootstrapping techniques. Over 36-months, 27.8% of patients developed incident PTS (mild in 18.7%, moderate in 5.7%, severe in 3.4%). Patients with incident PTS were older, had a lower prevalence of transient risk factors of DVT and a higher prevalence of persistent risk factors of DVT. Self-assessment of overall PTS at 24 months showed an agreement of 63.4% with respect to physician's evaluations at 36 months. The severe PTS multivariable model provided an optimistic adjusted c-index of 0.68 (95% CI 0.59-0.77). Approximately a quarter of DVT patients experienced PTS over 36 months after VTE diagnosis. Patient's self-assessment after 24 months provided added value for estimating incident PTS over 36 months. Multivariable risk analysis allowed good discrimination for severe PTS.

CYP2C9 and VKORC1 genotyping for the quality of long-standing warfarin treatment in Russian patients.

A total of 263 warfarin naive patients with indications to long-term anticoagulation were included in prospective multicenter study and randomized into Pharmacogenetics and Standard dosing groups. The loading warfarin dose in Pharmacogenetics group was calculated by Gage algorithm and corrected starting on day 5 of treatment according to INR. In Standard dosing group warfarin initial dose was 5 mg and starting on day 3 of treatment it was titrated according to INR. Pharmacogenetics dosing in comparison with prescription of starting dose of 5 mg decreased major bleedings (0 vs. 6, p = 0.031), time to target INR (11 [9-14] vs. 17 [15-24] days, p = 0.046), and frequency of INR fluctuations ≥4.0 (11% vs. 30.9%, p = 0.002). The advantages of the pharmacogenetics dosing were mainly achieved due to the patients with increased warfarin sensitivity.

Predictors of NOAC versus VKA use for stroke prevention in patients with newly diagnosed atrial fibrillation: Results from GARFIELD-AF.

INTRODUCTION: A principal aim of the Global Anticoagulant Registry in the FIELD-Atrial Fibrillation (GARFIELD-AF) was to document changes in treatment practice for patients with newly diagnosed atrial fibrillation during an era when non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants (NOACs) were becoming more widely adopted. In these analyses, the key factors which determined the choice between NOACs and vitamin K antagonists (VKAs) are explored. METHODS: Logistic least absolute shrinkage and selection operator regression determined predictors of NOAC and VKA use. Data were collected from 24,137 patients who were initiated on AC ±â€¯antiplatelet (AP) therapy (NOAC [51.4%] or VKA [48.6%]) between April 2013 and August 2016. RESULTS: The most significant predictors of AC therapy were country, enrolment year, care setting at diagnosis, AF type, concomitant AP, and kidney disease. Patients enrolled in emergency care or in the outpatient setting were more likely to receive a NOAC than those enrolled in hospital (OR 1.16 [95% CI: 1.04-1.30], OR: 1.15 [95% CI: 1.05-1.25], respectively). NOAC prescribing seemed to be favored in lower-risk groups, namely, patients with paroxysmal AF, normotensive patients, and those with moderate alcohol consumption, but also the elderly and patients with acute coronary syndrome. By contrast, VKAs were preferentially used in patients with permanent AF, moderate to severe kidney disease, heart failure, vascular disease, and diabetes and with concomitant AP. CONCLUSION: GARFIELD-AF data highlight marked heterogeneity in stroke prevention strategies globally. Physicians are adopting an individualized approach to stroke prevention where NOACs are favored in patients with a lower stroke risk but also in the elderly and patients with acute coronary syndrome.

Rhythm versus rate control in patients with newly diagnosed atrial fibrillation - Observations from the GARFIELD-AF registry.

Background: Investigate real-world outcomes of early rhythm versus rate control in patients with recent onset atrial fibrillation. Methods: The Global Anticoagulant Registry in the FIELD-AF (GARFIELD-AF) is an international multi-centre, non-interventional prospective registry of newly diagnosed (≤6 weeks' duration) atrial fibrillation patients at risk for stroke. Patients were stratified according to treatment initiated at baseline (≤48 days post enrolment), and outcome risks evaluated by overlap propensity weighted Cox proportional-hazards models. Results: Of 45,382 non-permanent atrial fibrillation patients, 23,858 (52.6 %) received rhythm control and 21,524 (47.4 %) rate control. Rhythm-controlled patients had lower median age (68.0 [Q1;Q3: 60.0;76.0] versus 73.0 [65.0;79.0]), fewer histories of stroke/transient ischemic attack/systemic embolism (9.4 % versus 13.0 %), and lower expected probabilities of death (median GARFIELD-AF death score 4.0 [2.3;7.5] versus 5.1 [2.8;9.2]). The two groups had the same median CHA2DS2-VASc scores (3.0 [2.0;4.0]) and similar proportions of anticoagulated patients (rhythm control: 66.0 %, rate control: 65.5 %). The propensity-score-weighted hazard ratios of rhythm vs rate control (reference) were 0.85 (95 % CI: 0.79-0.92, p-value < 0.0001) for all-cause mortality, 0.84 (0.72-0.97, p-value 0.020) for non-haemorrhagic stroke/systemic embolism and 0.90 (0.78-1.04, p-value 0.164) for major bleeding. Conclusion: Rhythm control strategy was initiated in about half of the patients with newly diagnosed non-valvular non-permanent atrial fibrillation. After balancing confounders, significantly lower risks of all-cause mortality and non-haemorrhagic stroke were observed in patients who received early rhythm control.

On-treatment Comparative Effectiveness of Vitamin K Antagonists and Direct Oral Anticoagulants in GARFIELD-VTE, and Focus on Cancer and Renal Disease.

Background Direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) provide a safe, effective alternative to vitamin K antagonists (VKAs) for venous thromboembolism (VTE) treatment, as shown via intention-to-treat comparative effectiveness analysis. However, on-treatment analysis is imperative in observational studies because anticoagulation choice and duration are at investigators' discretion. Objectives The aim of the study is to compare the effectiveness of DOACs and VKAs on 12-month outcomes in VTE patients using on-treatment analysis. Methods The Global Anticoagulant Registry in the FIELD - VTE (GARFIELD-VTE) is a world-wide, prospective, non-interventional study observing treatment of VTE in routine clinical practice. Results In total, 8,034 patients received VKAs ( n = 3,043, 37.9%) or DOACs ( n = 4,991, 62.1%). After adjustment for baseline characteristics and follow-up bleeding events, and accounting for possible time-varying confounding, all-cause mortality was significantly lower with DOACs than VKAs (hazard ratio: 0.58 [95% confidence interval 0.42-0.79]). Furthermore, patients receiving VKAs were more likely to die of VTE complications (4.9 vs. 2.2%) or bleeding (4.9 vs. 0.0%). There was no significant difference in rates of recurrent VTE (hazard ratio: 0.74 [0.55-1.01]), major bleeding (hazard ratio: 0.76 [0.47-1.24]), or overall bleeding (hazard ratio: 0.87 [0.72-1.05]) with DOACs or VKAs. Unadjusted analyses suggested that VKA patients with active cancer or renal insufficiency were more likely to die than patients treated with DOAC (52.51 [37.33-73.86] vs. 26.52 [19.37-36.29] and 9.97 [7.51-13.23] vs. 4.70 [3.25-6.81] per 100 person-years, respectively). Conclusion DOACs and VKAs had similar rates of recurrent VTE and major bleeding. However, DOACs were associated with reduced all-cause mortality and a lower likelihood of death from VTE or bleeding compared with VKAs.

Clinical Outcomes in Asymptomatic and Symptomatic Atrial Fibrillation Presentations in GARFIELD-AF: Implications for AF Screening.

BACKGROUND: Asymptomatic atrial fibrillation is often detected incidentally. Prognosis and optimal therapy for asymptomatic compared with symptomatic atrial fibrillation is uncertain. This study compares clinical characteristics, treatment, and 2-year outcomes of asymptomatic and symptomatic atrial fibrillation presentations. METHODS: Global Anticoagulant Registry in the Field-Atrial Fibrillation (GARFIELD-AF) is a global, prospective, observational study of newly diagnosed atrial fibrillation with ≥1 stroke risk factors (http://www.clinicaltrials.gov, unique identifier: NCT01090362). Patients were characterized by atrial fibrillation-related symptoms at presentation and the CHA2DS2-VASc score. Two-year follow-up recorded anticoagulation patterns (vitamin K antagonist, direct oral anticoagulants, parenteral therapy) and outcomes (stroke/systemic embolism, all-cause mortality, and bleeding). RESULTS: At presentation, of 52,032 eligible patients, 25.4% were asymptomatic and 74.6% symptomatic. Asymptomatic patients were slightly older (72 vs 70 years), more often male (64.2% vs 52.9%), and more frequently initiated on anticoagulation ± antiplatelets (69.4% vs 66.0%). No difference in events (adjusted hazard ratios, 95% confidence interval) for nonhemorrhagic stroke/systemic embolism (1.19, 0.97-1.45), all-cause mortality (1.06, 0.94-1.20), or bleeding (1.02, 0.87-1.19) was observed. Anticoagulation was associated with comparable reduction in nonhemorrhagic stroke/systemic embolism (0.59, 0.43-0.82 vs 0.78, 0.65-0.93) and all-cause mortality (0.69, 0.59-0.81 vs 0.77, 0.71-0.85) in asymptomatic versus symptomatic, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Major outcomes do not differ between asymptomatic and symptomatic atrial fibrillation presentations and are comparably reduced by anticoagulation. Opportunistic screening-detected asymptomatic atrial fibrillation likely has the same prognosis as asymptomatic atrial fibrillation at presentation and likely responds similarly to anticoagulation thromboprophylaxis.