Incidence of clinical outcomes in heart failure patients with and without advanced chronic kidney disease.

AIMS: Chronic kidney disease (CKD) is a well-established risk factor for heart failure (HF); however, patients with an estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) < 30 mL/min/1.73 m2 have been systematically excluded from clinical trials. This study investigated the incidence of HF and kidney outcomes in HF patients with and without advanced CKD, that is, eGFR < 30. METHODS: From nationwide registries, HF patients were identified from 2014 to 2018 and categorized into three groups according to baseline eGFR (eGFR ≥ 60, 60 > eGFR ≥ 30 and eGFR < 30). The incidence of primary outcomes (all-cause mortality, HF hospitalization, end-stage kidney disease and sustained 50% eGFR decline) was estimated using cumulative incidence functions. RESULTS: Of the 21 959 HF patients included, the median age was 73.9 years, and 30% of patients had an eGFR between 30 and 60 and 7% had an eGFR < 30. The 4 year incidence of all-cause mortality was highest for patients with eGFR < 30 (28.3% for patients with eGFR ≥ 60, 51.6% for patients with 60 > eGFR ≥ 30 and 72.2% for patients with eGFR < 30). The 4 year incidence of HF hospitalization was comparable between the groups (25.8%, 29.8% and 26.1% for patients with eGFR ≥ 60, 60 > eGFR ≥ 30 and eGFR < 30, respectively). For patients with eGFR < 30, kidney outcomes were four times more often the first event than patients with eGFR > 30 (4 year incidence of kidney outcome as the first event was 5.0% for eGFR ≥ 60, 4.8% for 60 > eGFR ≥ 30 and 20.1% for eGFR < 30). CONCLUSIONS: Patients with advanced CKD had a higher incidence of mortality and poorer kidney outcomes than those without advanced CKD, but a similar incidence of HF hospitalizations.

Temporal changes in risk of cardiovascular events in people with newly diagnosed type 2 diabetes with and without cardiovascular disease.

AIMS: Examine temporal changes in the risk of cardiovascular events in people with newly diagnosed type 2 diabetes with and without cardiovascular disease (CVD). METHODS: 283,600 individuals with newly diagnosed type 2 diabetes and age-, sex-, and CVD-matched controls without diabetes were identified through Danish nationwide registries between 1997 and 2014. Using Cox regression models, we report the standardized absolute 5-year risk of cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, stroke, and heart failure for people with diabetes and controls. RESULTS: Individuals with newly diagnosed diabetes were at increased risk of cardiovascular events compared to controls. From 1997-2002 to 2009-2014 reductions in cardiovascular events for people with diabetes were: cardiovascular death; 26.5% to 13.8% in people with CVD and from 7.3% to 3.2% in people without CVD, myocardial infarction; 13.1% to 6.5% in people with CVD and from 4.1% to 1.9% in people without CVD, stroke; 14.2% to 8.8% in people with CVD and from 4.9% to 2.2% in people without CVD, and heart failure; 21.0% to 13.8% in people with CVD and from 5.0% to 2.6% in people without CVD. The risk of cardiovascular events declined more among people with diabetes than controls. CONCLUSIONS: Newly diagnosed type 2 diabetes was associated with an increased risk of cardiovascular events, and the risk decreased significantly 1997-2014 in both people with and without CVD. Furthermore, the excess risk associated with type 2 diabetes decreased significantly during the study period.

Cardiovascular outcomes with GLP-1 receptor agonists vs. SGLT-2 inhibitors in patients with type 2 diabetes.

AIMS: We examined cardiovascular outcomes associated with initiation of glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist (GLP-1RA) vs. sodium-glucose co-transporter-2 inhibitor (SGLT-2i) treatment in a real-world setting among patients with type 2 diabetes. METHODS AND RESULTS: This Danish nationwide registry-based cohort study included patients with type 2 diabetes with a first-ever prescription of either GLP-1RA or SGLT-2i from 2013 through 2015 with follow-up until end of 2018. All analyses were standardized with respect to age, sex, diabetes duration, comorbidity, and comedication. The main outcome was a composite of cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, and stroke. Furthermore, the components of the composite outcome and hospitalization for heart failure were evaluated. Standardized average 3-year risks of outcomes and differences thereof were estimated using doubly robust estimation combining cause-specific Cox regression with propensity score regression. We identified 8913 new users of GLP-1RA and 5275 new users of SGLT-2i. The standardized 3-year risk associated with initiating GLP-1RA and SGLT-2i, respectively, was as follows: composite cardiovascular outcome, 5.6% [95% confidence interval (CI): 5.2-6.1] vs. 5.6% (95% CI: 4.8-6.3); cardiovascular mortality, 1.6% (95% CI: 1.3-1.9) vs. 1.5% (95% CI: 1.1-1.8); hospitalization for heart failure, 1.7% (95% CI: 1.5-2.0) vs. 1.8% (95% CI: 1.2-2.5); myocardial infarction, 2.1% (95% CI: 1.8-2.4) vs. 2.1% (95% CI: 1.5-2.6); and stroke, 2.5% (95% CI: 2.2-2.9) vs. 2.6% (95% CI: 2.2-3.1). CONCLUSION: In this nationwide study of patients with type 2 diabetes, initiating GLP-1RA vs. SGLT-2i was not found to be associated with significant differences in cardiovascular risk.

Rivaroxaban Versus Apixaban for Stroke Prevention in Atrial Fibrillation: An Instrumental Variable Analysis of a Nationwide Cohort.

BACKGROUND: The comparative effectiveness of non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants (NOACs) is uncertain, as they have not been compared directly in randomized trials. Previous observational comparisons of NOACs are likely to be biased by unmeasured confounders. We sought to compare the efficacy and safety of rivaroxaban and apixaban for stroke prevention in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF), using practice variation in preference for NOAC as an instrumental variable. METHODS AND RESULTS: Patients started on apixaban or rivaroxaban after newly diagnosed AF were identified using Danish nationwide registries. Patients were categorized according to facility preferences for type of NOAC, independent of actual treatment, measured as fraction of the prior 20 patients with AF initiated on rivaroxaban in the same facility. Facility preference for NOAC was used as an instrumental variable. The occurrence of stroke/thromboembolism, major bleeding, myocardial infarction, and all-cause mortality over 2 years of follow-up were investigated using adjusted Cox regressions. We analyzed 6264 patients with AF initiated on rivaroxaban or apixaban. NOAC preference was strongly related to actual choice of treatment but not associated with any other measured baseline characteristics. Patients treated in facilities that had preference for rivaroxaban had more major bleeding: compared with patients treated in facilities that used rivaroxaban in 0% to 20% of cases, the adjusted hazard ratio for bleeding was 1.06 when treated in a facility with 25% to 40% use; 1.41 with 45% to 60% use; 1.51 with 65% to 80% use; and 1.81 with 0% to 100% use (Ptrend=0.01). Higher facility preference for rivaroxaban was not significantly associated with increased risk of stroke/thromboembolism (Ptrend=0.06), myocardial infarction (Ptrend=0.65), or all-cause mortality (Ptrend=0.89). When we used the instrumental variable to model the causal relationship between choice of NOAC and major bleeding, relative risk with rivaroxaban was 1.89 (95% CI, 1.06-2.72) compared with apixaban. CONCLUSIONS: Using instrumental variable estimation in a cohort of patients with AF, rivaroxaban was associated with higher risk of major bleeding compared with apixaban. No significant associations to other outcomes were found in main analyses.

Stroke and recurrent haemorrhage associated with antithrombotic treatment after gastrointestinal bleeding in patients with atrial fibrillation: nationwide cohort study.

STUDY QUESTION: What are the risks of all cause mortality, thromboembolism, major bleeding, and recurrent gastrointestinal bleeding associated with restarting antithrombotic treatment after gastrointestinal bleeding in patients with atrial fibrillation? METHODS: This Danish cohort study (1996-2012) included all patients with atrial fibrillation discharged from hospital after gastrointestinal bleeding while receiving antithrombotic treatment. Restarted treatment regimens were single or combined antithrombotic drugs with oral anticoagulation and antiplatelets. Follow-up started 90 days after discharge to avoid confounding from use of previously prescribed drugs on discharge. Risks of all cause mortality, thromboembolism, major bleeding, and recurrent gastrointestinal bleeding were estimated with competing risks models and time dependent multiple Cox regression models. STUDY ANSWER AND LIMITATIONS: 4602 patients (mean age 78 years) were included. Within two years, 39.9% (95% confidence interval 38.4% to 41.3%, n=1745) of the patients had died, 12.0% (11.0% to 13.0%, n=526) had experienced thromboembolism, 17.7% (16.5% to 18.8%, n=788) major bleeding, and 12.1% (11.1% to 13.1%, n=546) recurrent gastrointestinal bleeding. 27.1% (n=924) of patients did not resume antithrombotic treatment. Compared with non-resumption of treatment, a reduced risk of all cause mortality was found in association with restart of oral anticoagulation (hazard ratio 0.39, 95% confidence interval 0.34 to 0.46), an antiplatelet agent (0.76, 0.68 to 0.86), and oral anticoagulation plus an antiplatelet agent (0.41, 0.32 to 0.52), and a reduced risk of thromboembolism was found in association with restart of oral anticoagulation (0.41, 0.31 to 0.54), an antiplatelet agent (0.76, 0.61 to 0.95), and oral anticoagulation plus an antiplatelet agent (0.54, 0.36 to 0.82). Restarting oral anticoagulation alone was the only regimen with an increased risk of major bleeding (1.37, 1.06 to 1.77) compared with non-resumption of treatment; however, the difference in risk of recurrent gastrointestinal bleeding was not significant between patients who restarted an antithrombotic treatment regimen and those who did not resume treatment. WHAT THIS STUDY ADDS: Among patients with atrial fibrillation who experience gastrointestinal bleeding while receiving antithrombotic treatment; subsequent restart of oral anticoagulation alone was associated with better outcomes for all cause mortality and thromboembolism compared with patients who did not resume treatment. This was despite an increased longitudinal associated risk of bleeding. FUNDING, COMPETING INTERESTS, DATA SHARING: This study was supported by a grant from Boehringer-Ingelheim. Competing interests are available in the full paper on bmj.com. The authors have no additional data to share.