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.

Comparing U.S. and Canadian treatment patterns on venous thromboembolism outcomes in the GARFIELD-VTE registry.

BACKGROUND: Economically developed countries continue to find that venous thromboembolism (VTE) is a major cause of morbidity and mortality. OBJECTIVE: To compare baseline risk profiles and patient workflow patterns between the United States (U.S.) and Canadian management of VTE patients from 2014 to 2017. METHODS: The Global Anticoagulant Registry in the FIELD (GARFIELD-VTE) is a prospective, observational study of 10,679 patients with objectively confirmed VTE, followed for 3 years. In total 1101 patients enrolled in the U.S. and Canada were included in this analysis. RESULTS: Median age and body mass index were comparable between the U.S. (60.5; 30.2) and Canadian (59.7; 29) patients. A higher percentage of U.S. patients were black (n = 128, 24.1 %; n = 22, 3.9 %) and had a higher VTE-associated risk profile, including immobilization, hospitalization, and recent surgery. U.S. patients had a higher combined DVT and PE primary diagnoses (20.3 %) and were more likely to be treated in hospitals (77.2 %) than Canadians (13.3 %; 48.1 %). Direct oral anticoagulant therapy (DOAC) was nearly two-fold more frequent in Canadian patients (n = 218, 39.2 %) at the end of 3 years in comparison to the U.S. (n = 118, 23.0 %). Adjusted for sex, recent bleed event, heart failure, chronic immobilization, family history of VTE, history of cancer and prior VTE, and renal insufficiency, the risk of all-cause mortality was 51.9 % higher in patients from the U.S. compared to those in Canada after 3 years. Patients from the U.S. also had a higher likelihood of hospitalization, major bleeding, and recurrent VTE after controlling for prior history and comorbid conditions. CONCLUSION: Higher rates of adverse VTE-associated outcomes in the U.S. may be attributed to different baseline risk profiles, facility care, and distribution of specialists and their subsequent treatment strategies. TYPE OF RESEARCH: Global, multicentre, non-interventional, prospective registry titled Global Anticoagulant Registry in the FIELD - Venous Thromboembolism (GARFIELD-VTE). KEY FINDINGS: 531 U.S. and 557 Canadians patients included in study. DOAC use more frequent in Canadian patients after 3 years than U.S. (39.2 % vs. 23.0 %, respectively). Adjusted for sex, recent bleed event, heart failure, chronic immobilization, family history of VTE, history of cancer and prior VTE, and renal insufficiency, all-cause mortality risk remained higher in U.S. patients vs. Canadian patients after 3 years. U.S. patients had higher likelihood of hospitalization, major bleeding, and recurrent VTE. TAKE-HOME MESSAGE: Higher rates of adverse VTE-associated outcomes in the U.S. may be attributed to different baseline risk profiles, facility care, and composition of specialists and their subsequent treatment strategies. TABLE OF CONTENTS SUMMARY: Global, multicentre, non-interventional, prospective registry titled Global Anticoagulant Registry in the FIELD - Venous Thromboembolism (GARFIELD-VTE). Higher rates of adverse VTE-associated outcomes were observed in U.S. patients vs Canadian patients, which may be attributed to different baseline risk profiles, facility care, and distribution of specialists and their subsequent treatment strategies.

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.

Development and Validation of the DOAC Score: A Novel Bleeding Risk Prediction Tool for Patients With Atrial Fibrillation on Direct-Acting Oral Anticoagulants.

BACKGROUND: Current clinical decision tools for assessing bleeding risk in individuals with atrial fibrillation (AF) have limited performance and were developed for individuals treated with warfarin. This study develops and validates a clinical risk score to personalize estimates of bleeding risk for individuals with atrial fibrillation taking direct-acting oral anticoagulants (DOACs). METHODS: Among individuals taking dabigatran 150 mg twice per day from 44 countries and 951 centers in this secondary analysis of the RE-LY trial (Randomized Evaluation of Long-Term Anticoagulation Therapy), a risk score was developed to determine the comparative risk for bleeding on the basis of covariates derived in a Cox proportional hazards model. The risk prediction model was internally validated with bootstrapping. The model was then further developed in the GARFIELD-AF registry (Global Anticoagulant Registry in the Field-Atrial Fibrillation), with individuals taking dabigatran, edoxaban, rivaroxaban, and apixaban. To determine generalizability in external cohorts and among individuals on different DOACs, the risk prediction model was validated in the COMBINE-AF (A Collaboration Between Multiple Institutions to Better Investigate Non-Vitamin K Antagonist Oral Anticoagulant Use in Atrial Fibrillation) pooled clinical trial cohort and the Quebec Régie de l'Assurance Maladie du Québec and Med-Echo Administrative Databases (RAMQ) administrative database. The primary outcome was major bleeding. The risk score, termed the DOAC Score, was compared with the HAS-BLED score. RESULTS: Of the 5684 patients in RE-LY, 386 (6.8%) experienced a major bleeding event, within a median follow-up of 1.74 years. The prediction model had an optimism-corrected C statistic of 0.73 after internal validation with bootstrapping and was well-calibrated based on visual inspection of calibration plots (goodness-of-fit P=0.57). The DOAC Score assigned points for age, creatinine clearance/glomerular filtration rate, underweight status, stroke/transient ischemic attack/embolism history, diabetes, hypertension, antiplatelet use, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory use, liver disease, and bleeding history, with each additional point scored associated with a 48.7% (95% CI, 38.9%-59.3%; P<0.001) increase in major bleeding in RE-LY. The score had superior performance to the HAS-BLED score in RE-LY (C statistic, 0.73 versus 0.60; P for difference <0.001) and among 12 296 individuals in GARFIELD-AF (C statistic, 0.71 versus 0.66; P for difference = 0.025). The DOAC Score had stronger predictive performance than the HAS-BLED score in both validation cohorts, including 25 586 individuals in COMBINE-AF (C statistic, 0.67 versus 0.63; P for difference <0.001) and 11 945 individuals in RAMQ (C statistic, 0.65 versus 0.58; P for difference <0.001). CONCLUSIONS: In individuals with atrial fibrillation potentially eligible for DOAC therapy, the DOAC Score can help stratify patients on the basis of expected bleeding risk.

Predictors of intracranial hemorrhage in patients with atrial fibrillation treated with oral anticoagulants: Insights from the GARFIELD-AF and ORBIT-AF registries.

BACKGROUND: An unmet need exists to reliably predict the risk of intracranial hemorrhage (ICH) in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) treated with oral anticoagulants (OACs). HYPOTHESIS: An externally validated model improves ICH risk stratification. METHODS: Independent factors associated with ICH were identified by Cox proportional hazard modeling, using pooled data from the GARFIELD-AF (Global Anticoagulant Registry in the FIELD-Atrial Fibrillation) and ORBIT-AF (Outcomes Registry for Better Informed Treatment of Atrial Fibrillation) registries. A predictive model was developed and validated by bootstrap sampling and by independent data from the Danish National Patient Register. RESULTS: In the combined training data set, 284 of 53 878 anticoagulated patients had ICH over a 2-year period (0.31 per 100 person-years; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.28-0.35). Independent predictors of ICH included: older age, prior stroke or transient ischemic attack, concomitant antiplatelet (AP) use, and moderate-to-severe chronic kidney disease (CKD). Vitamin K antagonists (VKAs) were associated with a significantly higher risk of ICH compared with non-VKA oral anticoagulants (NOACs) (adjusted hazard ratio: 1.61; 95% CI: 1.25-2.08; p = .0002). The ability of the model to discriminate individuals in the training set with and without ICH was fair (optimism-corrected C-statistic: 0.68; 95% CI: 0.65-0.71) and outperformed three previously published methods. Calibration between predicted and observed ICH probabilities was good in both training and validation data sets. CONCLUSIONS: Age, prior ischemic events, concomitant AP therapy, and CKD were important risk factors for ICH in anticoagulated AF patients. Moreover, ICH was more frequent in patients receiving VKA compared to NOAC. The new validated model is a step toward mitigating this potentially lethal complication.

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.

Treatment of Cancer-Associated Thrombosis: Recent Advances, Unmet Needs, and Future Direction.

Cancer-associated thrombosis, with the incidence rising over the years, is associated with significant morbidity and mortality in patients with cancer. Recent advances in the treatment of cancer-associated venous thromboembolism (VTE) include the introduction of direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs), which provide a more convenient and effective option than low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH). Nonetheless, important unmet needs remain including an increased risk of bleeding in certain patient subgroups such as those with gastroesophageal cancer, concerns about drug-drug interactions, and management of patients with severe renal impairment. Although DOACs are more convenient than LMWH, persistence can decline over time. Factor XI inhibitors have potential safety advantages over DOACs because factor XI appears to be essential for thrombosis but not hemostasis. In phase II trials, some factor XI inhibitors were superior to enoxaparin for the prevention of VTE after knee replacement surgery without increasing the risk of bleeding. Ongoing trials are assessing the efficacy and safety of factor XI inhibitors for the treatment of cancer-associated VTE.

Venous Thromboembolism Prophylaxis and Treatment in Patients With Cancer: ASCO Guideline Update.

PURPOSE: To conduct an update of the ASCO venous thromboembolism (VTE) guideline. METHODS: After publication of potentially practice-changing clinical trials, identified through ASCO's signals approach to updating, an updated systematic review was performed for two guideline questions: perioperative thromboprophylaxis and treatment of VTE. PubMed and the Cochrane Library were searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) published between November 1, 2018, and June 6, 2022. RESULTS: Five RCTs provided information that contributed to changes to the 2019 recommendations. Two RCTs addressed direct factor Xa inhibitors (either rivaroxaban or apixaban) for extended thromboprophylaxis after surgery. Each of these postoperative trials had important limitations but suggested that these two oral anticoagulants are safe and effective in the settings studied. An additional three RCTs addressed apixaban in the setting of VTE treatment. Apixaban was effective in reducing the risk of recurrent VTE, with a low risk of major bleeding. RECOMMENDATIONS: Apixaban and rivaroxaban were added as options for extended pharmacologic thromboprophylaxis after cancer surgery, with a weak strength of recommendation. Apixaban was also added as an option for the treatment of VTE, with high quality of evidence and a strong recommendation.Additional information is available at www.asco.org/supportive-care-guidelines.

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.

Recurrent venous thromboembolism and bleeding with extended anticoagulation: the VTE-PREDICT risk score.

AIMS: Deciding to stop or continue anticoagulation for venous thromboembolism (VTE) after initial treatment is challenging, as individual risks of recurrence and bleeding are heterogeneous. The present study aimed to develop and externally validate models for predicting 5-year risks of recurrence and bleeding in patients with VTE without cancer who completed at least 3 months of initial treatment, which can be used to estimate individual absolute benefits and harms of extended anticoagulation. METHODS AND RESULTS: Competing risk-adjusted models were derived to predict recurrent VTE and clinically relevant bleeding (non-major and major) using 14 readily available patient characteristics. The models were derived from combined individual patient data from the Bleeding Risk Study, Hokusai-VTE, PREFER-VTE, RE-MEDY, and RE-SONATE (n = 15,141, 220 recurrences, 189 bleeding events). External validity was assessed in the Danish VTE cohort, EINSTEIN-CHOICE, GARFIELD-VTE, MEGA, and Tromsø studies (n = 59 257, 2283 recurrences, 3335 bleeding events). Absolute treatment effects were estimated by combining the models with hazard ratios from trials and meta-analyses. External validation in different settings showed agreement between predicted and observed risks up to 5 years, with C-statistics ranging from 0.48-0.71 (recurrence) and 0.61-0.68 (bleeding). In the Danish VTE cohort, 5-year risks ranged from 4% to 19% for recurrent VTE and 1% -19% for bleeding. CONCLUSION: The VTE-PREDICT risk score can be applied to estimate the effect of extended anticoagulant treatment for individual patients with VTE and to support shared decision-making.

Redefining clinical venous thromboembolism phenotypes: a novel approach using latent class analysis.

BACKGROUND: Patients with venous thromboembolism (VTE) are commonly classified by the presence or absence of provoking factors at the time of VTE to guide treatment decisions. This approach may not capture the heterogeneity of the disease and its prognosis. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate clinically important novel phenotypic clusters among patients with VTE without cancer and to explore their association with anticoagulant treatment and clinical outcomes. METHODS: Latent class analysis was performed with 18 baseline clinical variables in 3062 adult patients with VTE without active cancer participating in PREFER in VTE, a noninterventional disease registry. The derived latent classes were externally validated in a post hoc analysis of Hokusai-VTE (n = 6593), a randomized trial comparing edoxaban with warfarin. The associations between cluster membership and anticoagulant treatment, recurrent VTE, bleeding, and mortality after initial treatment were studied. RESULTS: The following 5 clusters were identified: young men cluster (n = 1126, 37%), young women cluster (n = 215, 7%), older people cluster (n = 1106, 36%), comorbidity cluster (n = 447, 15%), and history of venous thromboembolism cluster (n = 168, 5%). Patient characteristics varied by age, sex, medical history, and treatment patterns. Consistent clusters were evident on external validation. In Cox proportional hazard models, recurrence risk was lower in the young women cluster (hazard ratio [HR], 0.27; 95% CI, 0.12-0.61) compared with the comorbidity cluster, after adjusting for extended anticoagulation. The risk of bleeding was lower in young men, young women, and older people clusters (HR, 0.50; 95% CI, 0.38-0.66; HR, 0.23; 95% CI, 0.11-0.46; and HR, 0.55; 95% CI 0.41-0.73, respectively). CONCLUSION: The heterogeneity of VTE cases extends beyond the distinction between provoked and unprovoked VTE.

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.