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.

Clinical Outcomes in Older Patients with Atrial Fibrillation: Insights from the GARFIELD-AF Registry.

BACKGROUND: Oral anticoagulants (OAC) are underutilized in older patients with atrial fibrillation, despite proven clinical benefits. Our objective was to investigate baseline characteristics, treatment patterns, and impact of anticoagulation upon clinical outcomes with respect to age. METHODS: Adults with newly diagnosed atrial fibrillation were recruited into the prospective observational registry, GARFIELD-AF, and followed up for 24 months. Adjusted hazard ratios (HR) were obtained via Cox proportional-hazards models with applied weights, to quantify the association of age with clinical outcomes. Comparative effectiveness of OAC vs No OAC and non-vitamin K oral anticoagulants (NOAC) vs vitamin K antagonists (VKA) were assessed using a propensity score with an overlap weighting scheme. RESULTS: Of 52,018 patients, 32.6% were 65-74 years of age, 29.3% were 75-84 years, and 7.9% were ≥85 years. OAC treatment was associated with a numerical reduction in all-cause mortality among those aged 65-74 years (HR; 95% confidence interval) (0.86; 0.69-1.06) and aged 75-84 years (0.89; 0.75-1.05) and a significant reduction in patients ≥85 years (0.77; 0.63-0.95) vs no OAC. Similarly, OACs were associated with a decrease in stroke: 65-74 (0.51; 0.35-0.76) and ≥85 years (0.58; 0.34-0.99) and a numerical decrease in 75-84 years (0.84; 0.59-1.18). No increase in major bleeding was observed in patients aged ≥85 treated with OACs. Compared with VKA, NOACs were associated with a significant reduction in all-cause mortality in patients aged <65 and 65-74, with numerical reductions in those aged 75-84 and ≥85 years. CONCLUSIONS: Older patients using OACs saw lower all-cause mortality and stroke risk; NOACs had less mortality and major bleeding compared with VKAs.

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.

Outcomes of Oral Anticoagulation in Atrial Fibrillation Patients With or Without Comorbid Vascular Disease: Insights From the GARFIELD-AF Registry.

BACKGROUND: Many patients with atrial fibrillation suffer from comorbid vascular disease. The comparative efficacy and safety of different types of oral anticoagulation (OAC) in this patient group have not been widely studied. METHODS: Adults with newly diagnosed atrial fibrillation were recruited into the prospective observational registry, GARFIELD-AF, and followed for 24 months. Associations of vascular disease with clinical outcomes were analyzed using adjusted hazard ratios (HR) obtained via Cox proportional-hazard modeling. Outcomes of OAC vs no OAC, and of non-vitamin K antagonist OAC (NOAC) vs vitamin K antagonist (VKA) treatment, were compared by overlap propensity-weighted Cox proportional-hazard models. RESULTS: Of 51,574 atrial fibrillation patients, 25.9% had vascular disease. Among eligible atrial fibrillation patients, those with vascular disease received OAC less frequently than those without (63% vs 73%). Over 2-year follow-up, patients with vascular disease showed a higher risk of all-cause mortality (HR 1.30; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.16-1.47) and cardiovascular mortality (HR 1.59; 95% CI, 1.28-1.97). OAC was associated with a significant decrease in all-cause mortality and non-hemorrhagic stroke, and increased risk of major bleeding in non-vascular disease. In vascular disease, similar but non-significant trends existed for stroke and major bleeding. A significantly lower risk of all-cause mortality (HR 0.74; 95% CI, 0.61-0.90) and major bleeding (HR 0.45; 95% CI, 0.29-0.70) was observed in vascular disease patients treated with NOACs, compared with VKAs. CONCLUSIONS: Atrial fibrillation patients with a history of vascular disease have worse long-term outcomes than those without. The association of NOACs vs VKA with clinical outcomes was more evident in atrial fibrillation patients with vascular disease.

Enoxaparin for symptomatic COVID-19 managed in the ambulatory setting: An individual patient level analysis of the OVID and ETHIC trials.

BACKGROUND: Antithrombotic treatment may improve the disease course in non-critically ill, symptomatic COVID-19 outpatients. METHODS: We performed an individual patient-level analysis of the OVID and ETHIC randomized controlled trials, which compared enoxaparin thromboprophylaxis for either 14 (OVID) or 21 days (ETHIC) vs. no thromboprophylaxis for outpatients with symptomatic COVID-19 and at least one additional risk factor. The primary efficacy outcome included all-cause hospitalization and all-cause death within 30 days from randomization. Both studies were prematurely stopped for futility. Secondary efficacy outcomes were major symptomatic venous thromboembolic events, arterial cardiovascular events, or their composite occurring within 30 days from randomization. The same outcomes were assessed over a 90-day follow-up. The primary safety outcome was major bleeding (ISTH criteria). RESULTS: A total of 691 patients were randomized: 339 to receive enoxaparin and 352 to the control group. Over 30-day follow-up, the primary efficacy outcome occurred in 6.0 % of patients in the enoxaparin group vs. 5.8 % of controls for a risk ratio (RR) of 1.05 (95%CI 0.57-1.92). The incidence of major symptomatic venous thromboembolic events and arterial cardiovascular events was 0.9 % vs. 1.8 %, respectively (RR 0.52; 95%CI 0.13-2.06). Most cardiovascular thromboembolic events were represented by symptomatic venous thromboembolic events, occurring in 0.6 % vs. 1.5 % of patients, respectively. A similar distribution of outcomes between the treatment groups was observed over 90 days. No major bleeding occurred in the enoxaparin group vs. one (0.3 %) in the control group. CONCLUSIONS: We found no evidence for the clinical benefit of early administration of enoxaparin thromboprophylaxis in outpatients with symptomatic COVID-19. These results should be interpreted taking into consideration the relatively low occurrence of events.

Oral anticoagulation across diabetic subtypes in patients with newly diagnosed atrial fibrillation: A report from the GARFIELD-AF registry.

AIMS: This study aims to describe both management and prognosis of patients with diabetes mellitus (DM) and newly diagnosed atrial fibrillation (AF), overall as well as by antidiabetic treatment, and to assess the influence of oral anticoagulation (OAC) on outcomes by DM status. METHODS: The study population comprised 52 010 newly diagnosed patients with AF, 11 542 DM and 40 468 non-DM, enrolled in the GARFIELD-AF registry. Follow-up was truncated at 2 years after enrolment. Comparative effectiveness of OAC versus no OAC was assessed by DM status using a propensity score overlap weighting scheme and weights were applied to Cox models. RESULTS: Patients with DM [39.3% oral antidiabetic drug (OAD), 13.4% insulin ± OAD, 47.2% on no antidiabetic drug] had higher risk profile, OAC use, and rates of clinical outcomes compared with patients without DM. OAC use was associated in patients without DM and patients with DM with lower risk of all-cause mortality [hazard ratio 0.75 (0.69-0.83), 0.74 (0.64-0.86), respectively] and stroke/systemic embolism (SE) [0.69 (0.58-0.83), 0.70 (0.53-0.93), respectively]. The risk of major bleeding with OAC was similarly increased in patients without DM and those with DM [1.40 (1.14-1.71), 1.37 (0.99-1.89), respectively]. Patients with insulin-requiring DM had a higher risk of all-cause mortality and stroke/SE [1.91 (1.63-2.24)], [1.57 (1.06-2.35), respectively] compared with patients without DM, and experienced significant risk reductions of all-cause mortality and stroke/SE with OAC [0.73 (0.53-0.99); 0.50 (0.26-0.97), respectively]. CONCLUSIONS: In both patients with DM and patients without DM with AF, OAC was associated with lower risk of all-cause mortality and stroke/SE. Patients with insulin-requiring DM derived significant benefit from OAC.

Guideline-directed medical therapies for comorbidities among patients with atrial fibrillation: results from GARFIELD-AF.

Aims: This study aimed to identify relationships in recently diagnosed atrial fibrillation (AF) patients with respect to anticoagulation status, use of guideline-directed medical therapy (GDMT) for comorbid cardiovascular conditions (co-GDMT), and clinical outcomes. The Global Anticoagulant Registry in the FIELD (GARFIELD)-AF is a prospective, international registry of patients with recently diagnosed non-valvular AF at risk of stroke (NCT01090362). Methods and results: Guideline-directed medical therapy was defined according to the European Society of Cardiology guidelines. This study explored co-GDMT use in patients enrolled in GARFIELD-AF (March 2013-August 2016) with CHA2DS2-VASc ≥ 2 (excluding sex) and ≥1 of five comorbidities-coronary artery disease, diabetes mellitus, heart failure, hypertension, and peripheral vascular disease (n = 23 165). Association between co-GDMT and outcome events was evaluated with Cox proportional hazards models, with stratification by all possible combinations of the five comorbidities. Most patients (73.8%) received oral anticoagulants (OACs) as recommended; 15.0% received no recommended co-GDMT, 40.4% received some, and 44.5% received all co-GDMT. At 2 years, comprehensive co-GDMT was associated with a lower risk of all-cause mortality [hazard ratio (HR) 0.89 (0.81-0.99)] and non-cardiovascular mortality [HR 0.85 (0.73-0.99)] compared with inadequate/no GDMT, but cardiovascular mortality was not significantly reduced. Treatment with OACs was beneficial for all-cause mortality and non-cardiovascular mortality, irrespective of co-GDMT use; only in patients receiving all co-GDMT was OAC associated with a lower risk of non-haemorrhagic stroke/systemic embolism. Conclusion: In this large prospective, international registry on AF, comprehensive co-GDMT was associated with a lower risk of mortality in patients with AF and CHA2DS2-VASc ≥ 2 (excluding sex); OAC therapy was associated with reduced all-cause mortality and non-cardiovascular mortality, irrespective of co-GDMT use. Clinical Trial Registration: Clinical Trial Registration-URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT01090362.

Determinants and clinical outcomes of patients who refused anticoagulation: findings from the global GARFIELD-AF registry.

OBJECTIVE: There is a substantial incidence of stroke in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) not receiving anticoagulation. The reasons for not receiving anticoagulation are generally attributed to clinician's choice, however, a proportion of AF patients refuse anticoagulation. The aim of our study was to investigate factors associated with patient refusal of anticoagulation and the clinical outcomes in these patients. METHODS: Our study population comprised patients in the Global Anticoagulant Registry in the FIELD (GARFIELD-AF) registry with CHA2DS2-VASc≥2. A logistic regression was developed with predictors of patient anticoagulation refusal identified by least absolute shrinkage and selection operator methodology. Patient demographics, medical and cardiovascular history, lifestyle factors, vital signs (body mass index, pulse, systolic and diastolic blood pressure), type of AF and care setting at diagnosis were considered as potential predictors. We also investigated 2-year outcomes of non-haemorrhagic stroke/systemic embolism (SE), major bleeding and all-cause mortality in patients who refused versus patients who received and patients who did not receive anticoagulation for other reasons. RESULTS: Out of 43 154 AF patients, who were at high risk of stroke, 13 283 (30.8%) did not receive anticoagulation at baseline. The reason for not receiving anticoagulation was unavailable for 38.7% (5146/13 283); of the patients with a known reason for not receiving anticoagulation, 12.5% (1014/8137) refused anticoagulation. Diagnosis in primary care/general practitioner, Asian ethnicity and presence of vascular disease were strongly associated with a higher risk of patient refusal of anticoagulation. Patient refusal of anticoagulation was associated with a higher risk of non-haemorrhagic stroke/SE (adjusted HR (aHR) 1.16 (95% CI 0.77 to 1.76)) but lower all-cause mortality (aHR 0.59 (95% CI 0.43 to 0.80)) compared with patients who received anticoagulation. The GARFIELD-AF mortality score corroborated this result. CONCLUSION: The data suggest patient refusal of anticoagulation is a missed opportunity to prevent AF-related stroke. Further research is required to understand the patient profile and mortality outcome of patients who refuse anticoagulation.

Healthcare Resource Utilization in Patients with Newly Diagnosed Atrial Fibrillation: A Global Analysis from the GARFIELD-AF Registry.

The management of atrial fibrillation (AF), the most common sustained arrhythmia, impacts healthcare resource utilization (HCRU). This study aims to estimate global resource use in AF patients, using the GARFIELD-AF registry. A prospective cohort study was conducted to characterize HCRU in AF patients enrolled in sequential cohorts from 2012 to 2016 in 35 countries. Components of HCRU studied were hospital admissions, outpatient care visits, and diagnostic and interventional procedures occurring during follow-up. AF-related HCRU was reported as the percentage of patients demonstrating at least one event and was quantified as rate-per-patient-per-year (PPPY) over time. A total of 49,574 patients was analyzed, having an overall median follow-up of 719 days. Almost all patients (99.5%) had at least one outpatient care visit, while hospital admissions were the second most frequent medical contact, with similar proportions in North America (37.5%) and Europe (37.2%), and slightly higher in the other GARFIELD-AF countries (42.0%; namely Australia, Egypt, and South Africa). Asia and Latin America showed lower percentages of hospitalizations, outpatient care visits, and diagnostic and interventional procedures. Analyses of GARFIELD-AF highlighted the vast AF-related HCRU, underlying significant geographical differences in the type, quantity, and frequency of AF-related HCRU. These differences were likely attributable to health service availability and differing models of care.

36-month clinical outcomes of patients with venous thromboembolism: GARFIELD-VTE.

BACKGROUND: Venous thromboembolism (VTE), encompassing both deep vein thrombosis (DVT) and pulmonary embolism (PE), is a leading cause of morbidity and mortality worldwide. METHODS: GARFIELD-VTE is a prospective, non-interventional observational study of real-world treatment practices. We aimed to capture the 36-month clinical outcomes of 10,679 patients with objectively confirmed VTE enrolled between May 2014 and January 2017 from 415 sites in 28 countries. FINDINGS: A total of 6582 (61.6 %) patients had DVT alone, 4097 (38.4 %) had PE ± DVT. At baseline, 98.1 % of patients received anticoagulation (AC) with or without other modalities of therapy. The proportion of patients on AC therapy decreased over time: 87.6 % at 3 months, 73.0 % at 6 months, 54.2 % at 12 months and 42.0 % at 36 months. At 12-months follow-up, the incidences (95 % confidence interval [CI]) of all-cause mortality, recurrent VTE and major bleeding were 6.5 (7.0-8.1), 5.4 (4.9-5.9) and 2.7 (2.4-3.0) per 100 person-years, respectively. At 36-months, these decreased to 4.4 (4.2-4.7), 3.5 (3.2-2.7) and 1.4 (1.3-1.6) per 100 person-years, respectively. Over 36-months, the rate of all-cause mortality and major bleeds were highest in patients treated with parenteral therapy (PAR) versus oral anti-coagulants (OAC) and no OAC, and the rate of recurrent VTE was highest in patients on no OAC versus those on PAR and OAC. The most frequent cause of death after 36-month follow-up was cancer (n = 565, 48.6 %), followed by cardiac (n = 94, 8.1 %), and VTE (n = 38, 3.2 %). Most recurrent VTE events were DVT alone (n = 564, 63.3 %), with the remainder PE, (n = 236, 27.3 %), or PE in combination with DVT (n = 63, 7.3 %). INTERPRETATION: GARFIELD-VTE provides a global perspective of anticoagulation patterns and highlights the accumulation of events within the first 12 months after diagnosis. These findings may help identify treatment gaps for subsequent interventions to improve patient outcomes in this patient population.

GARFIELD-AF: risk profiles, treatment patterns and 2-year outcomes in patients with atrial fibrillation in Germany, Austria and Switzerland (DACH) compared to 32 countries in other regions worldwide.

BACKGROUND: The Global Anticoagulant Registry in the FIELD-Atrial Fibrillation (GARFIELD-AF) is a worldwide non-interventional study of stroke prevention in patients with non-valvular AF. METHODS AND RESULTS: 52,080 patients with newly diagnosed AF were prospectively enrolled from 2010 to 2016. 4121 (7.9%) of these patients were recruited in DACH [Germany (n = 3567), Austria (n = 465) and Switzerland (n = 89) combined], and 47,959 patients were from 32 countries in other regions worldwide (ORW). Hypertension was most prevalent in DACH and ORW (85.3% and 75.6%, respectively). Diabetes, hypercholesterolaemia, carotid occlusive disease and vascular disease were more prevalent in DACH patients vs ORW (27.6%, 49.4%, 5.8% and 29.0% vs 21.7%, 40.9%, 2.8% and 24.5%). The use of non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants (NOACs) increased more in DACH over time. Management of vitamin K antagonists was suboptimal in DACH and ORW (time in therapeutic range of INR ≥ 65% in 44.6% and 44.4% of patients or ≥ 70% in 36.9% and 36.0% of patients, respectively). Adjusted rates of cardiovascular mortality and MI/ACS were higher in DACH while non-haemorrhagic stroke/systemic embolism was lower after 2-year follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: Similarities and dissimilarities in AF management and clinical outcomes are seen in DACH and ORW. The increased use of NOAC was associated with a mismatch of risk-adapted anticoagulation (over-and-undertreatment) in DACH. Suboptimal control of INR requires educational activities in both regional groups. Higher rates of cardiovascular death in DACH may reflect the higher risk profile of these patients and lower rates of non-haemorrhagic stroke could be associated with increased NOAC use.

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.

Thromboprophylactic low-molecular-weight heparin versus standard of care in unvaccinated, at-risk outpatients with COVID-19 (ETHIC): an open-label, multicentre, randomised, controlled, phase 3b trial.

BACKGROUND: COVID-19 is associated with inflammation and an increased risk of thromboembolic complications. Prophylactic doses of low-molecular-weight heparin have been used in hospitalised and non-critically ill patients with COVID-19. We aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of prophylactic low-molecular-weight heparin (enoxaparin) versus standard of care (no enoxaparin) in at-risk outpatients with COVID-19. METHODS: This open-label, multicentre, randomised, controlled, phase 3b trial (ETHIC) was done at 15 centres in six countries (Belgium, Brazil, India, South Africa, Spain, and the UK). We consecutively enrolled participants aged at least 30 years who had not received a COVID-19 vaccine and had symptomatic, confirmed COVID-19 in the outpatient setting plus at least one risk factor for severe disease. Within 9 days of symptom onset and by use of a web-based random block design (block size either 2 or 4), eligible participants were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive either subcutaneous enoxaparin for 21 days (40 mg once daily if they weighed <100 kg and 40 mg twice daily if they weighed ≥100 kg) or standard of care (without enoxaparin). The primary efficacy endpoint was the composite of all-cause hospitalisation and all-cause mortality at 21 days after randomisation and, in our main analysis, was analysed in the intention-to-treat population, which comprised all patients who were randomly assigned. Safety was also analysed in the intention-to-treat population for our main analysis. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04492254, and is complete. FINDINGS: Following the advice of the Data and Safety Monitoring Board, this study was terminated early due to slow enrolment and a lower-than-expected event rate. Between Oct 27, 2020, and Nov 8, 2021, 230 patients with COVID-19 were assessed for eligibility, of whom 219 were enrolled and randomly assigned to receive standard of care (n=114) or enoxaparin (n=105). 96 (44%) patients were women, 122 (56%) were men, and one patient had missing sex data. 141 (65%) of 218 participants with data on race and ethnicity were White, 60 (28%) were Asian, and 16 (7%) were Black, mixed race, or Arab or Middle Eastern. Median follow-up in both groups was 21 days (IQR 21-21). There was no difference in the composite of all-cause mortality and hospitalisation at 21 days between the enoxaparin group (12 [11%] of 105 patients) and the standard-of-care group (12 [11%] of 114 patients; unadjusted hazard ratio 1·09 [95% CI 0·49-2·43]; log-rank p=0·83). At 21 days, two (2%) of 105 patients in the enoxaparin group (one minor bleed and one bleed of unknown severity) and one (1%) of 114 patients in the standard-of-care group (major abnormal uterine bleeding) had a bleeding event. 22 (21%) patients in the enoxaparin group and 13 (11%) patients in the standard-of-care group had adverse events. The most common adverse event in both groups was COVID-19-related pneumonia (six [6%] patients in the enoxaparin group and five [4%] patients in the standard-of-care group). One patient in the enoxaparin group died and their cause of death was unknown. INTERPRETATION: The ETHIC trial results suggest that prophylaxis with low-molecular-weight heparin had no benefit for at-risk outpatients with COVID-19. Although the trial was terminated early, our data, combined with data from similar studies, provide further insights to inform international guidelines and influence clinical practice. FUNDING: The Thrombosis Research Institute and Sanofi UK.

Do baseline characteristics and treatments account for geographical disparities in the outcomes of patients with newly diagnosed atrial fibrillation? The prospective GARFIELD-AF registry.

OBJECTIVE: In patients with newly diagnosed atrial fibrillation (AF), do baseline risk factors and stroke prevention strategies account for the geographically diverse outcomes. DESIGN: Global Anticoagulant Registry in the FIELD-Atrial Fibrillation is a prospective multinational non-interventional registry of patients with newly diagnosed AF (n=52 018 patients). SETTING: Investigator sites (n=1317) were representative of the care settings/locations in each of the 35 participating countries. Treatment decisions were all determined by the local responsible clinicians. PARTICIPANTS: The patients (18 years and over) with newly diagnosed AF had at least 1 investigator-determined stroke risk factor and patients were not required to meet specific thresholds of risk score for anticoagulant treatment. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Observed 1-year event rates and risk-standardised rates were derived. RESULTS: Rates of death, non-haemorrhagic stroke/systemic embolism and major bleeding varied more than three-to-four fold across countries even after adjustment for baseline factors and antithrombotic treatments. Rates of anticoagulation and antithrombotic treatment varied widely. Patients from countries with the highest rates of cardiovascular mortality and stroke were among the least likely to receive oral anticoagulants. Beyond anticoagulant treatment, variations in the treatment of comorbidities and lifestyle factors may have contributed to the variations in outcomes. Countries with the lowest healthcare Access and Quality indices (India, Ukraine, Argentina, Brazil) had the highest risk-standardised mortality. CONCLUSION: The variability in outcomes across countries for patients with newly diagnosed AF is not accounted for by baseline characteristics and antithrombotic treatments. Residual mortality rates were correlated with Healthcare Access and Quality indices. The findings suggest the management of patients with AF needs to not only address guideline indicated and sustained anticoagulation, but also the treatment of comorbidities and lifestyle factors. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT01090362.

Adherence and Persistence with Once-Daily vs Twice-Daily Direct Oral Anticoagulants Among Patients with Atrial Fibrillation: Real-World Analyses from the Netherlands, Italy and Germany.

BACKGROUND: Direct oral anticoagulants are available for patients with atrial fibrillation. OBJECTIVE: This study compared adherence and persistence of once-daily (QD) vs twice-daily (BID) direct oral anticoagulants in patients with atrial fibrillation. METHODS: A cohort study was conducted in three databases in the Netherlands, Italy and Germany. Patients with AF starting direct oral anticoagulants after drug approval date were included. The index date was the date of first dispensing. Study patients were restricted to those aged ≥ 18 years, ≥ 1 year database history and ≥ 1 year follow-up. Adherence to treatment was defined as the proportion of days covered ≥ 80% between the index date and the date of last dispensing of the index regimen (i.e. exposure period). The proportion of days covered was also determined during the 12-month follow-up. Persistence was defined as continuous use from index to treatment discontinuation. RESULTS: In the Netherlands, Italy and Germany, respectively, 6068, 32,260 and 167,445 patients were included. The mean age of the patients was 70, 77 and 74 years, and 31%, 40% and 61% were QD users, all respectively. Among QD/BID users, 93/90%, 88/86% and 77/58%, respectively were adherent during the exposure period. Persistence rates at 1 year in QD/BID users were 60/59%, 13/14% and 46/31%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Adherence to treatment was high. In Germany, adherence was markedly higher in QD users compared with BID users. In Italy and the Netherlands, these differences were marginal. Persistence was low in all countries, but discontinuation was temporary. Only in Germany, persistence was markedly lower in BID users vs QD users.

Management strategies and clinical outcomes in patients with inferior vena cava thrombosis: Data from GARFIELD-VTE.

BACKGROUND: Inferior vena cava (IVC) thrombosis is a rare form of venous thromboembolism (VTE). The optimal treatment strategies and outcomes are unclear in patients with this presentation. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to compare baseline characteristics, treatment patterns and 24-month outcomes in IVC thrombosis patients (n = 100) with lower extremity deep vein thrombosis (LEDVT) patients (n = 7629). METHODS: GARFIELD-VTE is a prospective, observational registry of 10 868 patients with objectively diagnosed VTE from 415 sites in 28 countries. RESULTS: IVC thrombosis patients were younger (51.9 vs. 59.8 years), more frequently had active cancer (26.0% vs. 8.9%) or history of cancer (21.0% vs. 12.2%), and less frequently had recent trauma or surgery than LEDVT patients. IVC thrombosis was more frequently treated with parenteral anticoagulants alone (35.1% vs. 15.9%), whereas patients with LEDVT more commonly received vitamin K antagonists (32.0% vs. 25.8%) or direct oral anticoagulants (49.0% vs. 35.1%). Thrombolysis (11.0% vs. 3.6%) and surgical/mechanical interventions (4.0% vs. 1.4%) were more frequent in IVC thrombosis. At 24-months, the rate per 100 person-years (95% confidence interval) of all-cause mortality was higher in patients with IVC thrombosis than LEDVT (13.28 [8.57-20.58] vs. 4.91 [4.55-5.3]); the incidence of cancer-associated mortality was comparable as was the incidence of VTE recurrence (4.11 [1.85-9.15] vs. 4.18 [3.84-4.55]). Major bleeding was slightly higher in IVC thrombosis (2.03 [0.66-6.31] vs. 1.66 [1.45-1.89]). CONCLUSION: In summary, IVC thrombosis patients have higher all-cause mortality rates than those with LEDVT, a finding only partly attributable to malignancy.

GARFIELD-AF risk score for mortality, stroke, and bleeding within 2 years in patients with atrial fibrillation.

AIMS: To determine whether the Global Anticoagulant Registry in the FIELD-Atrial Fibrillation (GARFIELD-AF) integrated risk tool predicts mortality, non-haemorrhagic stroke/systemic embolism, and major bleeding for up to 2 years after new-onset AF and to assess how this risk tool performs compared with CHA2DS2-VASc and HAS-BLED. METHODS AND RESULTS: Potential predictors of events included demographic and clinical characteristics, choice of treatment, and lifestyle factors. A Cox proportional hazards model was identified for each outcome by least absolute shrinkage and selection operator methods. Indices were evaluated in comparison with CHA2DS2-VASc and HAS-BLED risk predictors. Models were validated internally and externally in ORBIT-AF and Danish nationwide registries. Among the 52 080 patients enrolled in GARFIELD-AF, 52 032 had follow-up data. The GARFIELD-AF risk tool outperformed CHA2DS2-VASc for all-cause mortality in all cohorts. The GARFIELD-AF risk score was superior to CHA2DS2-VASc for non-haemorrhagic stroke, and it outperformed HAS-BLED for major bleeding in internal validation and in the Danish AF cohort. In very low- to low-risk patients [CHA2DS2-VASc 0 or 1 (men) and 1 or 2 (women)], the GARFIELD-AF risk score offered strong discriminatory value for all the endpoints when compared to CHA2DS2-VASc and HAS-BLED. The GARFIELD-AF tool also included the effect of oral anticoagulation (OAC) therapy, thus allowing clinicians to compare the expected outcome of different anticoagulant treatment decisions [i.e. no OAC, non-vitamin K antagonist (VKA) oral anticoagulants, or VKAs]. CONCLUSIONS: The GARFIELD-AF risk tool outperformed CHA2DS2-VASc at predicting death and non-haemorrhagic stroke, and it outperformed HAS-BLED for major bleeding in overall as well as in very low- to low-risk group patients with AF. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier for GARFIELD-AF: NCT01090362, ORBIT-AF I: NCT01165710; ORBIT-AF II: NCT01701817.

Influence of body mass index on clinical outcomes in venous thromboembolism: Insights from GARFIELD-VTE.

BACKGROUND: There is limited information on the influence of body mass index (BMI) on clinical outcomes in patients with venous thromboembolism (VTE). OBJECTIVES: Investigate the influence of BMI on baseline characteristics, treatment patterns, and 24-month outcomes in VTE patients. METHODS: GARFIELD-VTE is a prospective, non-interventional study of 10 869 patients with objectively confirmed VTE. Patients were grouped according to BMI: <18.5 (underweight; n = 214); 18.5-24.9 (normal; n = 2866); 25.0-29.9 (overweight; n = 3326); ≥30 (obese; n = 3073). RESULTS: Compared with patients with a normal BMI, obese patients were more frequently Caucasian (77.4% vs. 57.9%), treated in the outpatient setting (30.4% vs. 23.1%), and had previous VTE (17.5% vs. 11.7%). Active cancer was associated with lower BMI (underweight: 30.4%, normal: 13.5%, overweight: 9.4%, obese: 7.0%). At baseline, overweight and obese patients less often received parenteral therapy alone (16.7% and 14.4%) compared with those with an underweight or normal BMI (30.8% and 21.6%). Obese patients more commonly remained on anticoagulants for ≥2-years compared to those with a normal BMI (52.3% vs. 37.7%). After 24-months, the risk of all-cause mortality was lower in overweight and obese patients than in those with normal BMI (adjusted hazard ratio [95% CI]; 0.75 [0.63-0.89] and 0.59 [0.49-0.72], respectively). Underweight patients more often experienced major bleeding (2.45 [1.41-4.26]) and all-cause mortality (1.90 [1.43-2.53]) than patients with a normal BMI. Recurrent VTE was comparable among groups. CONCLUSION: Underweight VTE patients have the highest risk of mortality and major bleeding. The risk of mortality in obese VTE patients is lower than that in VTE patients with a normal BMI.