Predictors of sinus rhythm 6 weeks after cardioversion of atrial fibrillation: a pre-planned post hoc analysis of the X-VeRT trial.

AIMS: Using a pre-planned post hoc analysis of patients included in X-VeRT, we evaluated predictors of sinus rhythm at 6 weeks after planned cardioversion. METHODS AND RESULTS: Receiver operating characteristic curves and logistic regression models were used to evaluate continuous and categorical variables as predictors of sinus rhythm 6 at weeks from cardioversion (end of study). The primary analysis was performed in successfully cardioverted patients with an evaluable electrocardiogram at end of study. A second analysis evaluated additional patients who spontaneously restored sinus rhythm before planned cardioversion. Of the 1504 patients with atrial fibrillation of >48 h or of unknown duration who were randomly assigned to either rivaroxaban or vitamin K antagonist, 1039 (64.6 ± 10.3 years, 73.4% male) underwent planned cardioversion and were included in this study. Patients receiving early cardioversion (i.e. between 1 and 5 days from hospitalization) had a 67% higher probability to have sinus rhythm at end of study than those who received delayed cardioversion (i.e. between 21 and 56 days from hospitalization) [odds ratio (OR) 1.67, confidence interval (CI) 1.27-2.18; P < 0.0001]. In a multivariate analysis of 17 baseline variables, patients with a CHADS2 score of 0 were 33% less likely to be in sinus rhythm than those with a CHADS2 score ≥2 (OR 0.66, CI 0.47-0.94; P = 0.0225). In the secondary analysis, spontaneous restoration of sinus rhythm was also found to predict sinus rhythm at end of study (OR 8.62, CI 1.54-48.16; P = 0.0142). CONCLUSION: In X-VeRT, early cardioversion and high CHADS2 scores predicted sinus rhythm at 6 weeks from cardioversion.

Angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 (ACE2) levels in relation to risk factors for COVID-19 in two large cohorts of patients with atrial fibrillation.

AIMS: The global COVID-19 pandemic is caused by the SARS-CoV-2 virus entering human cells using angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 (ACE2) as a cell surface receptor. ACE2 is shed to the circulation, and a higher plasma level of soluble ACE2 (sACE2) might reflect a higher cellular expression of ACE2. The present study explored the associations between sACE2 and clinical factors, cardiovascular biomarkers, and genetic variability. METHODS AND RESULTS: Plasma and DNA samples were obtained from two international cohorts of elderly patients with atrial fibrillation (n = 3999 and n = 1088). The sACE2 protein level was measured by the Olink Proteomics® Multiplex CVD II96 × 96 panel. Levels of the biomarkers high-sensitive cardiac troponin T (hs-cTnT), N-terminal probrain natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP), growth differentiation factor 15 (GDF-15), C-reactive protein, interleukin-6, D-dimer, and cystatin-C were determined by immunoassays. Genome-wide association studies were performed by Illumina chips. Higher levels of sACE2 were statistically significantly associated with male sex, cardiovascular disease, diabetes, and older age. The sACE2 level was most strongly associated with the levels of GDF-15, NT-proBNP, and hs-cTnT. When adjusting for these biomarkers, only male sex remained associated with sACE2. We found no statistically significant genetic regulation of the sACE2 level. CONCLUSIONS: Male sex and clinical or biomarker indicators of biological ageing, cardiovascular disease, and diabetes are associated with higher sACE2 levels. The levels of GDF-15 and NT-proBNP, which are associated both with the sACE2 level and a higher risk for mortality and cardiovascular disease, might contribute to better identification of risk for severe COVID-19 infection.

Guideline-directed therapies for comorbidities and clinical outcomes among individuals with atrial fibrillation.

BACKGROUND: Comorbidities are common in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) and affect prognosis, yet are often undertreated. However, contemporary rates of use of guideline-directed therapies (GDT) for non-AF comorbidities and their association with outcomes are not well described. METHODS: We used the Outcomes Registry for Better Informed Treatment of AF (ORBIT-AF) to test the association between GDT for non-AF comorbidities and major adverse cardiac or neurovascular events (MACNE; cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, stroke/thromboembolism, or new-onset heart failure), all-cause mortality, new-onset heart failure, and AF progression. Adjustment was performed using Cox proportional hazards models and logistic regression. RESULTS: Only 6,782 (33%) of the 20,434 patients eligible for 1 or more GDT for non-AF comorbidities received all indicated therapies. Use of all comorbidity-specific GDT was highest for patients with hyperlipidemia (75.6%) and lowest for those with diabetes mellitus (43.1%). Use of "all eligible" GDT was associated with a nonsignificant trend toward lower rates of MACNE (HR 0.90 [0.79-1.02]) and all-cause mortality (HR 0.90 [0.80-1.01]). Use of GDT for heart failure was associated with a lower risk of all-cause mortality (HR 0.77 [0.67-0.89]), and treatment of obstructive sleep apnea was associated with a lower risk of AF progression (OR 0.75 [0.62-0.90]). CONCLUSIONS: In AF patients, there is underuse of GDT for non-AF comorbidities. The association between GDT use and outcomes was strongest in heart failure and obstructive sleep apnea patients where use of GDT was associated with lower mortality and less AF progression.

Characteristics and outcomes of atrial fibrillation in patients without traditional risk factors: an RE-LY AF registry analysis.

AIMS: Data on patient characteristics, prevalence, and outcomes of atrial fibrillation (AF) patients without traditional risk factors, often labelled 'lone AF', are sparse. METHODS AND RESULTS: The RE-LY AF registry included 15 400 individuals who presented to emergency departments with AF in 47 countries. This analysis focused on patients without traditional risk factors, including age ≥60 years, hypertension, coronary artery disease, heart failure, left ventricular hypertrophy, congenital heart disease, pulmonary disease, valve heart disease, hyperthyroidism, and prior cardiac surgery. Patients without traditional risk factors were compared with age- and region-matched controls with traditional risk factors (1:3 fashion). In 796 (5%) patients, no traditional risk factors were present. However, 98% (779/796) had less-established or borderline risk factors, including borderline hypertension (130-140/80-90 mmHg; 47%), chronic kidney disease (eGFR < 60 mL/min; 57%), obesity (body mass index > 30; 19%), diabetes (5%), excessive alcohol intake (>14 units/week; 4%), and smoking (25%). Compared with patients with traditional risk factors (n = 2388), patients without traditional risk factors were more often men (74% vs. 59%, P < 0.001) had paroxysmal AF (55% vs. 37%, P < 0.001) and less AF persistence after 1 year (21% vs. 49%, P < 0.001). Furthermore, 1-year stroke occurrence rate (0.6% vs. 2.0%, P = 0.013) and heart failure hospitalizations (0.9% vs. 12.5%, P < 0.001) were lower. However, risk of AF-related re-hospitalization was similar (18% vs. 21%, P = 0.09). CONCLUSION: Almost all patients without traditionally defined AF risk factors have less-established or borderline risk factors. These patients have a favourable 1-year prognosis, but risk of AF-related re-hospitalization remains high. Greater emphasis should be placed on recognition and management of less-established or borderline risk factors.

Prognostic Significance of Nuisance Bleeding in Anticoagulated Patients With Atrial Fibrillation.

BACKGROUND: Bleeding is commonly cited as a reason for stopping oral anticoagulants (OACs). Whether minor bleeding events (nuisance bleeding, NB) in patients with atrial fibrillation on OACs are associated with OAC discontinuation, major bleeding, and stroke/systemic embolism (SSE) is unknown. METHODS: Within the ORBIT-AF prospective, outpatient registry (Outcomes Registry for Better Informed Treatment of Atrial Fibrillation), we identified 6771 patients ≥18 years of age at 172 sites with atrial fibrillation and eligible follow-up visits. NB was ascertained from the medical record and was defined as minor bleeding that did not require medical attention (eg, bruising, hemorrhoidal bleeding). We used multivariable pooled logistic regression modeling to evaluate the associations between NB and major bleeding and SSE in the 180 days after documentation of NB. Our unit of analysis was the patient visit, occurring at ≈6-month intervals for a median of 1.5 years following enrollment. Changes in anticoagulation treatment satisfaction after NB were examined descriptively in a subset of patients. RESULTS: The median age of the overall population was 75.0 (interquartile range, 67.0-81.0); 90.0% were white and 42.5% were female. Among 6771 patients (18 560 visits), n=1357 (20.0%) had documented NB, for an incidence rate of 14.8 events per 100 person-years. Over 96.4% of patients remained on OAC therapy after the NB event. Overall, 287 (4.3%) patients experienced major bleeding and 64 (0.96%) had a SSE event during follow-up. NB was not associated with a significant increased risk of major bleeding over 6 months in models adjusting for the ATRIA bleeding score (Anticoagulation and Risk Factors in Atrial Fibrillation) (odds ratio, 1.04; 95% confidence interval, 0.68-1.60; P=0.86). NB was also not associated with increased SSE risk over 6 months in models adjusting for the CHA2DS2-VASc risk score (odds ratio, 1.24; 95% confidence interval, 0.53-2.91; P=0.62). CONCLUSIONS: NB is common among patients with atrial fibrillation on OACs. However, NB was not associated with a higher risk of major bleeding or SSE over the next 6 months, suggesting its occurrence should not lead to changes in anticoagulation treatment strategies in OAC-treated patients. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov . Unique identifier: NCT01165710.

Treatment of atrial fibrillation with concomitant coronary or peripheral artery disease: Results from the outcomes registry for better informed treatment of atrial fibrillation II.

BACKGROUND: Treatment patterns and outcomes of individuals with vascular disease who have new-onset atrial fibrillation (AF) are not well characterized. METHODS: Among patients with new-onset AF, we analyzed treatment and outcomes in those with or without vascular disease in the ORBIT-AF II registry. Vascular disease was defined as coronary disease with or without myocardial infarction (MI) or revascularization, or peripheral artery disease. The primary outcomes included major adverse cardiovascular or neurological events (MACNE) and major bleeding. Cox proportional hazard models were used to adjust the difference in patient characteristics. RESULTS: Overall 1920 of 6203 (31.0%) of new-onset AF had vascular disease. In patients with vascular disease, 62.2% of those were treated with direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) and 23.4% with warfarin. Dual therapy and triple therapy were used in 36.9% and 4.9%, respectively. Vascular disease patients had increased risk of MACNE (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] 1.83 [95%CIs 1.32-2.55]), but not major bleeding (aHR 1.24 [0.95-1.63]). Among patients with vascular disease, relative to those on warfarin, those treated with DOACs had similar risk for MACNE (aHR 1.20 [0.77-1.87]) but lower risks for bleeding, although it did not reach statistical significance (aHR 0.70 [0.43-1.15]). Concomitant antiplatelet therapy was associated with higher bleeding (aHR 2.27 [1.38-3.73]) with no apparent reduction in MACNE (aHR 1.50 [1.00-2.25]). CONCLUSIONS: Most patients with AF and vascular disease were managed with oral anticoagulation. About half of them were also treated with concomitant antiplatelet therapy, which was associated with increased risk of bleeding, without evidence of improved cardiovascular outcomes.

Determinants of left atrium thrombi in scheduled cardioversion: an ENSURE-AF study analysis.

AIMS: ENSURE-AF (NCT02072434) was the largest prospective randomized clinical trial of anticoagulation for cardioversion in atrial fibrillation (AF), which also provides the largest prospective dataset for transoesophageal echocardiography (TOE) prior to cardioversion. This ancillary analysis investigated determinants of TOE-detected left atrium thrombi (LAT) in patients scheduled for electrical cardioversion (ECV). METHODS AND RESULTS: The ENSURE-AF multicentre PROBE evaluation trial compared edoxaban 60 mg once daily (QD) with enoxaparin/warfarin in 2199 subjects undergoing ECV of non-valvular AF. Patients were stratified by the use of TOE, anticoagulant experience, and selected edoxaban dose. Electrical cardioversion was cancelled or deferred when TOEdetected LAT. In total, 1183 subjects were stratified to the TOE arm and LAT was reported in 91 (8.2%). In univariate analysis, age ≥75 years (26.4% vs. 16.9%, P = 0.0308), lower weight (86.5 ± 15.0 vs. 90.7 ± 18.0 kg, P = 0.0309), lower creatinine clearance (80.1 ± 30.6 vs. 93.2 ± 33.9 mL/min, P = 0.0007), heart failure (59.3% vs. 43.0%, P = 0.0029), and diuretic treatment (53.9% vs. 40.1%, P = 0.0141) were more prevalent in the LAT group. Non-significant trends were seen for higher mean CHA2DS2-VASc score (3.0 ± 1.41 vs. 2.7 ± 1.48, P = 0.0571) and more prevalent anticoagulation use prior to enrolment (60.4% vs. 50.3%, P = 0.0795) in the LAT group. In logistic regression analysis, age (P = 0.0202) and heart failure (P = 0.0064) were independently associated with LAT. CONCLUSION: Elective ECV is commonly cancelled or deferred due to TOE-detected LAT in patients with non-valvular AF. Age ≥75 years and heart failure were associated with the presence of LAT.

Apixaban compared to heparin/vitamin K antagonist in patients with atrial fibrillation scheduled for cardioversion: the EMANATE trial.

Aim: The primary objective was to compare apixaban to heparin/vitamin K antagonist (VKA) in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) and ≤48 h anticoagulation prior to randomization undergoing cardioversion. Methods: One thousand five hundred patients were randomized. The apixaban dose of 5 mg b.i.d. was reduced to 2.5 mg b.i.d. in patients with two of the following: age ≥ 80 years, weight ≤ 60 kg, or serum creatinine ≥ 133 µmol/L. To expedite cardioversion, at the discretion of the investigator, imaging and/or a loading dose of 10 mg (down-titrated to 5 mg) was allowed. The endpoints for efficacy were stroke, systemic embolism (SE), and death. The endpoints for safety were major bleeding and clinically relevant non-major (CRNM) bleeding. Results: There were 1038 active and 300 spontaneous cardioversions; 162 patients were not cardioverted. Imaging was performed in 855 patients, and 342 received a loading dose of apixaban. Comparing apixaban to heparin/VKA in the full analysis set, there were 0/753 vs. 6/747 strokes [relative risk (RR) 0; 95% confidence interval (95% CI) 0-0.64; nominal P = 0.015], no SE, and 2 vs. 1 deaths (RR 1.98; 95% CI 0.19-54.00; nominal P > 0.999). In the safety population, there were 3/735 vs. 6/721 major (RR 0.49; 95% CI 0.10-2.07; nominal P = 0.338) and 11 vs. 13 CRNM bleeding events (RR 0.83; 95% CI 0.34-1.89; nominal P = 0.685). On imaging, 60/61 with thrombi continued randomized treatment; all (61) were without outcome events. Conclusions: Rates of strokes, systemic emboli, deaths, and bleeds were low for both apixaban and heparin/VKA treated AF patients undergoing cardioversion. Clinical Trials.gov number: NCT02100228.

A biomarker-based risk score to predict death in patients with atrial fibrillation: the ABC (age, biomarkers, clinical history) death risk score.

Aims: In atrial fibrillation (AF), mortality remains high despite effective anticoagulation. A model predicting the risk of death in these patients is currently not available. We developed and validated a risk score for death in anticoagulated patients with AF including both clinical information and biomarkers. Methods and results: The new risk score was developed and internally validated in 14 611 patients with AF randomized to apixaban vs. warfarin for a median of 1.9 years. External validation was performed in 8548 patients with AF randomized to dabigatran vs. warfarin for 2.0 years. Biomarker samples were obtained at study entry. Variables significantly contributing to the prediction of all-cause mortality were assessed by Cox-regression. Each variable obtained a weight proportional to the model coefficients. There were 1047 all-cause deaths in the derivation and 594 in the validation cohort. The most important predictors of death were N-terminal pro B-type natriuretic peptide, troponin-T, growth differentiation factor-15, age, and heart failure, and these were included in the ABC (Age, Biomarkers, Clinical history)-death risk score. The score was well-calibrated and yielded higher c-indices than a model based on all clinical variables in both the derivation (0.74 vs. 0.68) and validation cohorts (0.74 vs. 0.67). The reduction in mortality with apixaban was most pronounced in patients with a high ABC-death score. Conclusion: A new biomarker-based score for predicting risk of death in anticoagulated AF patients was developed, internally and externally validated, and well-calibrated in two large cohorts. The ABC-death risk score performed well and may contribute to overall risk assessment in AF. ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT00412984 and NCT00262600.

Edoxaban therapy increases treatment satisfaction and reduces utilization of healthcare resources: an analysis from the EdoxabaN vs. warfarin in subjectS UndeRgoing cardiovErsion of atrial fibrillation (ENSURE-AF) study.

Aims: The EdoxabaN vs. warfarin in subjectS UndeRgoing cardiovErsion of atrial fibrillation (ENSURE-AF) (NCT02072434) study was a multicentre prospective, randomized, open-label, blinded-endpoint evaluation (PROBE) trial comparing edoxaban with enoxaparin/warfarin followed by warfarin alone in 2199 non-valvular atrial fibrillation patients undergoing electrical cardioversion and showed comparable rates of bleeding and thromboembolism between treatments. This prespecified ancillary analysis investigated the impact of edoxaban therapy on treatment satisfaction and utilization of healthcare services. Methods and results: The Perception of Anticoagulant Treatment Questionnaire (PACT-Q2) was completed by study patients on Day 28 post-cardioversion. Higher scores represent greater satisfaction. Healthcare resource utilizations were collected from randomization to Day 28 post-cardioversion. Data from patients who received at least one dose of study drugs were analysed. Patients treated with edoxaban were more satisfied than enoxaparin/warfarin in both PACT-Q treatment satisfaction and convenience scores (P < 0.001 for both). Differences in treatment satisfaction scores were greater in patients who underwent non-transoesophageal echocardiography (TOE)-guided cardioversion than in patients who underwent TOE-guided cardioversion. Edoxaban was associated with fewer clinic visits (4.75 visits vs. 7.60 visits; P < 0.001) and fewer hospital days (3.43 days vs. 5.41 days; P < 0.05). Rates of hospitalizations and emergency room visits were not significantly different. Overall, edoxaban therapy was estimated to reduce healthcare costs by €107.73, €437.92, €336.75, and $246.32 per patient in German, Spanish, Italian, and US settings, respectively. Conclusions: The convenience of edoxaban therapy over warfarin in patients undergoing cardioversion may provide greater treatment satisfaction and cost savings to the healthcare system.

Dabigatran vs. warfarin in relation to the presence of left ventricular hypertrophy in patients with atrial fibrillation- the Randomized Evaluation of Long-term anticoagulation therapY (RE-LY) study.

Aim: We tested the hypothesis that left ventricular hypertrophy (LVH) interferes with the antithrombotic effects of dabigatran and warfarin in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF). Methods and results: This is a post-hoc analysis of the Randomized Evaluation of Long-term anticoagulation therapY (RE-LY) Study. We defined LVH by electrocardiography (ECG) and included patients with AF on the ECG tracing at entry. Hazard ratios (HR) for each dabigatran dose vs. warfarin were calculated in relation to LVH. LVH was present in 2353 (22.7%) out of 10 372 patients. In patients without LVH, the rates of primary outcome were 1.59%/year with warfarin, 1.60% with dabigatran 110 mg (HR vs. warfarin 1.01, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.75-1.36) and 1.08% with dabigatran 150 mg (HR vs. warfarin 0.68, 95% CI 0.49-0.95). In patients with LVH, the rates of primary outcome were 3.21%/year with warfarin, 1.69% with dabigatran 110 mg (HR vs. warfarin 0.52, 95% CI 0.32-0.84) and 1.55% with 150 mg (HR vs. warfarin 0.48, 95% CI 0.29-0.78). The interaction between LVH status and dabigatran 110 mg vs. warfarin was significant for the primary outcome (P = 0.021) and stroke (P = 0.016). LVH was associated with a higher event rate with warfarin, not with dabigatran. In the warfarin group, the time in therapeutic range was significantly lower in the presence than in the absence of LVH. Conclusions: LVH was associated with a lower antithrombotic efficacy of warfarin, but not of dabigatran, in patients with AF. Consequently, the relative benefit of the lower dose of dabigatran compared to warfarin was enhanced in patients with LVH. The higher dose of dabigatran was superior to warfarin regardless of LVH status. Clinical trial registration: http:www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT00262600.

Early therapeutic persistence on dabigatran versus warfarin therapy in patients with atrial fibrillation: results from the Outcomes Registry for Better Informed Treatment of Atrial Fibrillation (ORBIT-AF) registry.

Anticoagulation is highly effective for the prevention of stroke in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) but it is dependent on patients continuing therapy. While studies have demonstrated suboptimal therapeutic persistence on warfarin, few have studied persistence rates with non vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants (NOACs) such as dabigatran. We examined rates of continued use of dabigatran versus warfarin over 1 year among AF patients in the ORBIT-AF registry between June 29, 2010 and August 09, 2011. Multivariable logistic regression analysis was used to identify characteristics associated with 1-year persistent use of dabigatran therapy or warfarin. At baseline, 6.4 and 93.6% of 7150 AF patients were on dabigatran and warfarin, respectively. At 12 months, dabigatran-treated patients were less likely to have continued their therapy than warfarin-treated patients [Adjusted persistence rates: 66% (95% CI 60-72) vs. 82% (95% CI 80-84), p < .0001]. Predictors of dabigatran persistence included: CHA2DS2-VASc risk scores ≥ 2 OR 5.69, (95% CI 1.50-21.6) and BMI greater than 25 mg/m2 but less than 38 kg/m2 1.05 (1.01-1.09). Predictors of persistence on warfarin included: African American race (vs. White) 1.53 (1.07-2.19), Hispanic ethnicity (vs. White) 1.66 (1.06-2.60), paroxysmal and persistent AF (vs. new-onset) 1.68 (1.21-2.33) and 1.91 (1.35-2.69) respectively, LVH 1.40 (1.08-1.81), and CHA2DS2-VASc risk scores ≥ 2 1.94 (1.18-3.19). While 1-year persistence rates for dabigatran were lower than warfarin, persistence rates for both agents were not ideal. Future studies evaluating contemporary persistence are needed in order to assist in better targeting interventions aimed to improve anticoagulation persistence.

Choosing a particular oral anticoagulant and dose for stroke prevention in individual patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation: part 1.

Patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) have a high risk of stroke and mortality, which can be considerably reduced by oral anticoagulants (OAC). Recently, four non-vitamin-K oral anticoagulants (NOACs) were compared with warfarin in large randomized trials for the prevention of stroke and systemic embolism. Today's clinician is faced with the difficult task of selecting a suitable OAC for a patient with a particular clinical profile or a particular pattern of risk factors and concomitant diseases. We reviewed analyses of subgroups of patients from trials of vitamin K antagonists vs. NOACs for stroke prevention in AF with the aim to identify patient groups who might benefit from a particular OAC more than from another. In the first of a two-part review, we discuss the choice of NOAC for stroke prevention in the following subgroups of patients with AF: (i) stable coronary artery disease or peripheral artery disease, including percutaneous coronary intervention with stenting and triple therapy; (ii) cardioversion, ablation and anti-arrhythmic drug therapy; (iii) mechanical valves and rheumatic valve disease, (iv) patients with time in therapeutic range of >70% on warfarin; (v) patients with a single stroke risk factor (CHA2DS2VASc score of 1 in males, 2 in females); and (vi) patients with a single first episode of paroxysmal AF. Although there are no major differences in terms of efficacy and safety between the NOACs for some clinical scenarios, in others we are able to suggest that particular drugs and/or doses be prioritized for anticoagulation.

Choosing a particular oral anticoagulant and dose for stroke prevention in individual patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation: part 2.

The choice of oral anticoagulant (OAC) for patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) may be influenced by individual clinical features or by patterns of risk factors and comorbidities. We reviewed analyses of subgroups of patients from trials of vitamin K antagonists vs. non-vitamin K oral anticoagulants (NOACs) for stroke prevention in AF with the aim to identify patient groups who might benefit from a particular OAC more than from another. In addition, we discuss the timing of initiation of anticoagulation. In the second of a two-part review, we discuss the use of NOAC for stroke prevention in the following subgroups of patients with AF: (vii) secondary stroke prevention in patients after stroke or transient ischaemic attack (TIA), (viii) patients with acute stroke requiring thrombolysis or thrombectomy, (ix) those initiating or restarting OAC treatment after stroke or TIA, (x) those with renal impairment on dialysis, (xi) the elderly, (xii) those at high risk of gastrointestinal bleeding, and (xiii) those with hypertension. In addition, we discuss adherence and compliance. Finally, we present a summary of treatment suggestions. In specific subgroups of patients with AF, evidence supports the use of particular NOACs and/or particular doses of anticoagulant. The appropriate choice of treatment for these subgroups will help to promote optimal clinical outcomes.

Comparison of Dabigatran and Warfarin in Patients With Atrial Fibrillation and Valvular Heart Disease: The RE-LY Trial (Randomized Evaluation of Long-Term Anticoagulant Therapy).

BACKGROUND: The RE-LY trial (Randomized Evaluation of Long-Term Anticoagulant Therapy) compared dabigatran 150 and 110 mg twice daily with warfarin in 18 113 patients with atrial fibrillation. Those with prosthetic heart valves, significant mitral stenosis, and valvular heart disease (VHD) requiring intervention were excluded. Others with VHD were included. METHODS: This is a post hoc analysis of the RE-LY trial. RESULTS: There were 3950 patients with any VHD: 3101 had mitral regurgitation, 1179 with tricuspid regurgitation, 817 had aortic regurgitation, 471 with aortic stenosis, and 193 with mild mitral stenosis. At baseline, patients with any VHD had more heart failure, coronary disease, renal impairment, and persistent atrial fibrillation. Patients with any VHD had higher rates of major bleeds (hazard ratio [HR], 1.32; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.16-1.5) but similar stroke or systemic embolism event rates (HR, 1.09; 95% CI, 0.88-1.33). For patients receiving dabigatran 110 mg, major bleed rates were lower than for patients taking warfarin (HR, 0.73; 95% CI, 0.56-0.95 with VHD; HR, 0.84; 95% CI, 0.71-0.99 without VHD), and major bleed rates for dabigatran 150 mg were similar to those for warfarin in patients with VHD (HR, 0.82; 95% CI, 0.64-1.06) or without VHD (HR, 0.98; 95% CI, 0.83-1.15). For dabigatran 150 mg, stroke/systemic embolic event rates were lower compared with warfarin in those with VHD (HR, 0.59; 95% CI, 0.37-0.93) and those without VHD (HR, 0.67; 95% CI, 0.52-0.86), and stroke/systemic embolic event rates were similar for warfarin and dabigatran 110 mg regardless of the presence of VHD (HR, 0.97; 95% CI, 0.65-1.45; and HR, 0.88; 95% CI, 0.70-1.10). Intracranial bleeds and death rates for dabigatran 150 and 110 mg were lower compared with warfarin independently of the presence of VHD. CONCLUSIONS: The presence of any VHD did not influence the comparison of dabigatran with warfarin. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT00262600.

Performance and Validation of a Novel Biomarker-Based Stroke Risk Score for Atrial Fibrillation.

BACKGROUND: Atrial fibrillation is associated with increased but variable risk of stroke. Our aim was to validate the recently developed biomarker-based ABC (age, biomarkers [high-sensitivity troponin and N-terminal fragment B-type natriuretic peptide], and clinical history of prior stroke/transient ischemic attack)-stroke risk score and compare its performance with the CHA2DS2VASc and ATRIA (Anticoagulation and Risk Factors in Atrial Fibrillation) risk scores. METHODS: The ABC-stroke score includes age, biomarkers (N-terminal fragment B-type natriuretic peptide and high-sensitivity cardiac troponin), and clinical history (prior stroke). This validation was based on 8356 patients, 16 137 person-years of follow-up, and 219 adjudicated stroke or systemic embolic events in anticoagulated patients with atrial fibrillation in the RE-LY study (Randomized Evaluation of Long-Term Anticoagulation Therapy). Levels of N-terminal fragment B-type natriuretic peptide, high-sensitivity cardiac troponin T (hs-cTnT), and high-sensitivity cardiac troponin I (hs-cTnI) were determined in plasma samples obtained at study entry. RESULTS: The ABC-stroke score was well calibrated with 0.76 stroke/systemic embolic events per 100 person-years in the predefined low (<1%/y) risk group, 1.48 in the medium (1%-2%/y) risk group, and 2.60 in the high (>2%/y) risk group for the ABC-stroke score with hs-cTnT. Hazard ratios for stroke/systemic embolic events were 1.95 for medium- versus low-risk groups, and 3.44 for high- versus low-risk groups. ABC-stroke score achieved C indices of 0.65 with both hs-cTnT and hs-cTnI, in comparison with 0.60 for CHA2DS2VASc (P=0.004 for hs-cTnT and P=0.022 hs-cTnI) and 0.61 for ATRIA scores (P=0.005 hs-cTnT and P=0.034 for hs-cTnI). CONCLUSIONS: The biomarker-based ABC-stroke score was well calibrated and consistently performed better than both the CHA2DS2VASc and ATRIA stroke scores. The ABC score should be considered an improved decision support tool in the care of patients with atrial fibrillation. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifiers: ARISTOTLE, NCT00412984; RE-LY, NCT00262600.

The novel biomarker-based ABC (age, biomarkers, clinical history)-bleeding risk score for patients with atrial fibrillation: a derivation and validation study.

BACKGROUND: The benefit of oral anticoagulation in atrial fibrillation is based on a balance between reduction in ischaemic stroke and increase in major bleeding. We aimed to develop and validate a new biomarker-based risk score to improve the prognostication of major bleeding in patients with atrial fibrillation. METHODS: We developed and internally validated a new biomarker-based risk score for major bleeding in 14,537 patients with atrial fibrillation randomised to apixaban versus warfarin in the ARISTOTLE trial and externally validated it in 8468 patients with atrial fibrillation randomised to dabigatran versus warfarin in the RE-LY trial. Plasma samples for determination of candidate biomarker concentrations were obtained at randomisation. Major bleeding events were centrally adjudicated. The predictive values of biomarkers and clinical variables were assessed with Cox regression models. The most important variables were included in the score with weights proportional to the model coefficients. The ARISTOTLE and RE-LY trials are registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, numbers NCT00412984 and NCT00262600, respectively. FINDINGS: The most important predictors for major bleeding were the concentrations of the biomarkers growth differentiation factor-15 (GDF-15), high-sensitivity cardiac troponin T (cTnT-hs) and haemoglobin, age, and previous bleeding. The ABC-bleeding score (age, biomarkers [GDF-15, cTnT-hs, and haemoglobin], and clinical history [previous bleeding]) score yielded a higher c-index than the conventional HAS-BLED and the newer ORBIT scores for major bleeding in both the derivation cohort (0·68 [95% CI 0·66-0·70] vs 0·61 [0·59-0·63] vs 0·65 [0·62-0·67], respectively; ABC-bleeding vs HAS-BLED p<0·0001 and ABC-bleeding vs ORBIT p=0·0008). ABC-bleeding score also yielded a higher c-index score in the the external validation cohort (0·71 [95% CI 0·68-0·73] vs 0·62 [0·59-0·64] for HAS-BLED vs 0·68 [0·65-0·70] for ORBIT; ABC-bleeding vs HAS-BLED p<0·0001 and ABC-bleeding vs ORBIT p=0·0016). A modified ABC-bleeding score using alternative biomarkers (haematocrit, cTnI-hs, cystatin C, or creatinine clearance) also outperformed the HAS-BLED and ORBIT scores. INTERPRETATION: The ABC-bleeding score, using age, history of bleeding, and three biomarkers (haemoglobin, cTn-hs, and GDF-15 or cystatin C/CKD-EPI) was internally and externally validated and calibrated in large cohorts of patients with atrial fibrillation receiving anticoagulation therapy. The ABC-bleeding score performed better than HAS-BLED and ORBIT scores and should be useful as decision support on anticoagulation treatment in patients with atrial fibrillation. FUNDING: BMS, Pfizer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Roche Diagnostics.

Edoxaban versus enoxaparin-warfarin in patients undergoing cardioversion of atrial fibrillation (ENSURE-AF): a randomised, open-label, phase 3b trial.

BACKGROUND: Edoxaban, an oral factor Xa inhibitor, is non-inferior for prevention of stroke and systemic embolism in patients with atrial fibrillation and is associated with less bleeding than well controlled warfarin therapy. Few safety data about edoxaban in patients undergoing electrical cardioversion are available. METHODS: We did a multicentre, prospective, randomised, open-label, blinded-endpoint evaluation trial in 19 countries with 239 sites comparing edoxaban 60 mg per day with enoxaparin-warfarin in patients undergoing electrical cardioversion of non-valvular atrial fibrillation. The dose of edoxaban was reduced to 30 mg per day if one or more factors (creatinine clearance 15-50 mL/min, low bodyweight [≤60 kg], or concomitant use of P-glycoprotein inhibitors) were present. Block randomisation (block size four)-stratified by cardioversion approach (transoesophageal echocardiography [TEE] or not), anticoagulant experience, selected edoxaban dose, and region-was done through a voice-web system. The primary efficacy endpoint was a composite of stroke, systemic embolic event, myocardial infarction, and cardiovascular mortality, analysed by intention to treat. The primary safety endpoint was major and clinically relevant non-major (CRNM) bleeding in patients who received at least one dose of study drug. Follow-up was 28 days on study drug after cardioversion plus 30 days to assess safety. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02072434. FINDINGS: Between March 25, 2014, and Oct 28, 2015, 2199 patients were enrolled and randomly assigned to receive edoxaban (n=1095) or enoxaparin-warfarin (n=1104). The mean age was 64 years (SD 10·54) and mean CHA2DS2-VASc score was 2·6 (SD 1·4). Mean time in therapeutic range on warfarin was 70·8% (SD 27·4). The primary efficacy endpoint occurred in five (<1%) patients in the edoxaban group versus 11 (1%) in the enoxaparin-warfarin group (odds ratio [OR] 0·46, 95% CI 0·12-1·43). The primary safety endpoint occurred in 16 (1%) of 1067 patients given edoxaban versus 11 (1%) of 1082 patients given enoxaparin-warfarin (OR 1·48, 95% CI 0·64-3·55). The results were independent of the TEE-guided strategy and anticoagulation status. INTERPRETATION: ENSURE-AF is the largest prospective randomised clinical trial of anticoagulation for cardioversion of patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation. Rates of major and CRNM bleeding and thromboembolism were low in the two treatment groups. FUNDING: Daiichi Sankyo provided financial support for the study.