Artificial intelligence-derived risk score for mortality in secondary mitral regurgitation treated by transcatheter edge-to-edge repair: the EuroSMR risk score.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Risk stratification for mitral valve transcatheter edge-to-edge repair (M-TEER) is paramount in the decision-making process to appropriately select patients with severe secondary mitral regurgitation (SMR). This study sought to develop and validate an artificial intelligence-derived risk score (EuroSMR score) to predict 1-year outcomes (survival or survival + clinical improvement) in patients with SMR undergoing M-TEER. METHODS: An artificial intelligence-derived risk score was developed from the EuroSMR cohort (4172 and 428 patients treated with M-TEER in the derivation and validation cohorts, respectively). The EuroSMR score was validated and compared with established risk models. RESULTS: The EuroSMR risk score, which is based on 18 clinical, echocardiographic, laboratory, and medication parameters, allowed for an improved discrimination of surviving and non-surviving patients (hazard ratio 4.3, 95% confidence interval 3.7-5.0; P < .001), and outperformed established risk scores in the validation cohort. Prediction for 1-year mortality (area under the curve: 0.789, 95% confidence interval 0.737-0.842) ranged from <5% to >70%, including the identification of an extreme-risk population (2.6% of the entire cohort), which had a very high probability for not surviving beyond 1 year (hazard ratio 6.5, 95% confidence interval 3.0-14; P < .001). The top 5% of patients with the highest EuroSMR risk scores showed event rates of 72.7% for mortality and 83.2% for mortality or lack of clinical improvement at 1-year follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: The EuroSMR risk score may allow for improved prognostication in heart failure patients with severe SMR, who are considered for a M-TEER procedure. The score is expected to facilitate the shared decision-making process with heart team members and patients.

Prevalence and prognostic significance of malnutrition in patients with secondary mitral regurgitation undergoing transcatheter edge-to-edge repair.

BACKGROUND: Malnutrition is associated with poor prognosis in several cardiovascular diseases; however, its role in patients with secondary mitral regurgitation (SMR) is poorly known. AIMS: To evaluate the impact of nutritional status, assessed using different scores, on clinical outcomes in patients with SMR undergoing transcatheter edge-to-edge repair (TEER) in a real-world setting. METHODS: A total of 658 patients with SMR and complete nutritional data were identified from the MIVNUT registry. Nutritional status has been assessed using controlling nutritional status index (CONUT), prognostic nutritional index (PNI), and geriatric nutritional risk index (GNRI) scores. Outcomes of interest were all-cause mortality and all-cause mortality or heart failure (HF) hospitalization. RESULTS: Any malnutrition grade was observed in 79.4%, 16.7%, and 47.9% of patients by using CONUT, PNI, and GNRI, respectively, while moderate to severe malnutrition was noted in 24.7%, 16.7%, and 25.6% of patients, respectively. At a median follow-up of 2.2 years, 212 patients (32.2%) died. Moderate-severe malnutrition was associated with a higher rate of all-cause mortality (HR: 2.46 [95% CI: 1.69-3.58], HR: 2.18 [95% CI: 1.46-3.26], HR: 1.97 [95% CI: 1.41-2.74] for CONUT, PNI, and GNRI scores, respectively). The combined secondary endpoint of all-cause mortality and HF rehospitalization occurred in 306 patients (46.5%). Patients with moderate-severe malnutrition had a higher risk of the composite endpoint (HR: 1.56 [95% CI: 1.20-2.28], HR: 1.55 [95% CI: 1.01-2.19], HR: 1.36 [95% CI: 1.02-1.80] for CONUT, PNI, and GNRI scores, respectively). After adjustment for multiple confounders, moderate-severe malnutrition remained independently associated with clinical outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: Moderate-severe malnutrition was common in patients with SMR undergoing TEER. It was independently associated with poor prognosis regardless of the different scores used.

Extended use of dual antiplatelet therapy among older adults with acute coronary syndromes and associated variables: a cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Current guidelines recommend extending the use of dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) beyond 1 year in patients with an acute coronary syndrome (ACS) and a high risk of ischaemia and low risk of bleeding. No data exist about the implementation of this strategy in older adults from routine clinical practice. METHODS: We conducted a Spanish multicentre, retrospective, observational registry-based study that included patients with ACS but no thrombotic or bleeding events during the first year of DAPT after discharge and no indication for oral anticoagulants. High bleeding risk was defined according to the Academic Research Consortium definition. We assessed the proportion of cases of extended DAPT among patients 65 ≥ years that went beyond 1 year after hospitalisation for ACS and the variables associated with the strategy. RESULTS: We found that 48.1% (928/1,928) of patients were aged ≥ 65 years. DAPT was continued beyond 1 year in 32.1% (298/928) of patients ≥ 65; which was a similar proportion as with their younger counterparts. There was no significant correlation between a high bleeding risk and DAPT duration. Contrastingly, there was a strong correlation between the extent of coronary disease and DAPT duration (p < 0.001). Other variables associated with extended DAPT were a higher left ventricle ejection fraction, a history of heart failure and a prior stent thrombosis. CONCLUSION: There was no correlation between age and extended use of DAPT beyond 1 year in older patients with ACS. DAPT was extended in about one-third of patients ≥ 65 years. The severity of the coronary disease, prior heart failure, left ventricle ejection fraction and prior stent thrombosis all correlated with extended DAPT.

Machine learning-based prediction of adverse events following an acute coronary syndrome (PRAISE): a modelling study of pooled datasets.

BACKGROUND: The accuracy of current prediction tools for ischaemic and bleeding events after an acute coronary syndrome (ACS) remains insufficient for individualised patient management strategies. We developed a machine learning-based risk stratification model to predict all-cause death, recurrent acute myocardial infarction, and major bleeding after ACS. METHODS: Different machine learning models for the prediction of 1-year post-discharge all-cause death, myocardial infarction, and major bleeding (defined as Bleeding Academic Research Consortium type 3 or 5) were trained on a cohort of 19 826 adult patients with ACS (split into a training cohort [80%] and internal validation cohort [20%]) from the BleeMACS and RENAMI registries, which included patients across several continents. 25 clinical features routinely assessed at discharge were used to inform the models. The best-performing model for each study outcome (the PRAISE score) was tested in an external validation cohort of 3444 patients with ACS pooled from a randomised controlled trial and three prospective registries. Model performance was assessed according to a range of learning metrics including area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC). FINDINGS: The PRAISE score showed an AUC of 0·82 (95% CI 0·78-0·85) in the internal validation cohort and 0·92 (0·90-0·93) in the external validation cohort for 1-year all-cause death; an AUC of 0·74 (0·70-0·78) in the internal validation cohort and 0·81 (0·76-0·85) in the external validation cohort for 1-year myocardial infarction; and an AUC of 0·70 (0·66-0·75) in the internal validation cohort and 0·86 (0·82-0·89) in the external validation cohort for 1-year major bleeding. INTERPRETATION: A machine learning-based approach for the identification of predictors of events after an ACS is feasible and effective. The PRAISE score showed accurate discriminative capabilities for the prediction of all-cause death, myocardial infarction, and major bleeding, and might be useful to guide clinical decision making. FUNDING: None.

Chronic Oral Anticoagulation Therapy and Prognosis of Patients Admitted to Hospital for COVID-19: Insights from the HOPE COVID-19 Registry.

Background: Most evidence regarding anticoagulation and COVID-19 refers to the hospitalization setting, but the role of oral anticoagulation (OAC) before hospital admission has not been well explored. We compared clinical outcomes and short-term prognosis between patients with and without prior OAC therapy who were hospitalized for COVID-19. Methods: Analysis of the whole cohort of the HOPE COVID-19 Registry which included patients discharged (deceased or alive) after hospital admission for COVID-19 in 9 countries. All-cause mortality was the primary endpoint. Study outcomes were compared after adjusting variables using propensity score matching (PSM) analyses. Results: 7698 patients were suitable for the present analysis (675 (8.8%) on OAC at admission: 427 (5.6%) on VKAs and 248 (3.2%) on DOACs). After PSM, 1276 patients were analyzed (638 with OAC; 638 without OAC), without significant differences regarding the risk of thromboembolic events (OR 1.11, 95% CI 0.59-2.08). The risk of clinically relevant bleeding (OR 3.04, 95% CI 1.92-4.83), as well as the risk of mortality (HR 1.22, 95% CI 1.01-1.47; log-rank p value = 0.041), was significantly increased in previous OAC users. Amongst patients on prior OAC only, there were no differences in the risk of clinically relevant bleeding, thromboembolic events, or mortality when comparing previous VKA or DOAC users, after PSM. Conclusion: Hospitalized COVID-19 patients on prior OAC therapy had a higher risk of mortality and worse clinical outcomes compared to patients without prior OAC therapy, even after adjusting for comorbidities using a PSM. There were no differences in clinical outcomes in patients previously taking VKAs or DOACs. This trial is registered with NCT04334291/EUPAS34399.

Renin-angiotensin system inhibitors effect before and during hospitalization in COVID-19 outcomes: Final analysis of the international HOPE COVID-19 (Health Outcome Predictive Evaluation for COVID-19) registry.

BACKGROUND: The use of Renin-Angiotensin system inhibitors (RASi) in patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has been questioned because both share a target receptor site. METHODS: HOPE-COVID-19 (NCT04334291) is an international investigator-initiated registry. Patients are eligible when discharged after an in-hospital stay with COVID-19, dead or alive. Here, we analyze the impact of previous and continued in-hospital treatment with RASi in all-cause mortality and the development of in-stay complications. RESULTS: We included 6503 patients, over 18 years, from Spain and Italy with data on their RASi status. Of those, 36.8% were receiving any RASi before admission. RASi patients were older, more frequently male, with more comorbidities and frailer. Their probability of death and ICU admission was higher. However, after adjustment, these differences disappeared. Regarding RASi in-hospital use, those who continued the treatment were younger, with balanced comorbidities but with less severe COVID19. Raw mortality and secondary events were less frequent in RASi. After adjustment, patients receiving RASi still presented significantly better outcomes, with less mortality, ICU admissions, respiratory insufficiency, need for mechanical ventilation or prone, sepsis, SIRS and renal failure (p<0.05 for all). However, we did not find differences regarding the hospital use of RASi and the development of heart failure. CONCLUSION: RASi historic use, at admission, is not related to an adjusted worse prognosis in hospitalized COVID-19 patients, although it points out a high-risk population. In this setting, the in-hospital prescription of RASi is associated with improved survival and fewer short-term complications.

Anticoagulation Therapy in Patients With Coronavirus Disease 2019: Results From a Multicenter International Prospective Registry (Health Outcome Predictive Evaluation for Corona Virus Disease 2019 [HOPE-COVID19]).

OBJECTIVES: No standard therapy, including anticoagulation regimens, is currently recommended for coronavirus disease 2019. Aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of anticoagulation in coronavirus disease 2019 hospitalized patients and its impact on survival. DESIGN: Multicenter international prospective registry (Health Outcome Predictive Evaluation for Corona Virus Disease 2019). SETTING: Hospitalized patients with coronavirus disease 2019. PATIENTS: Five thousand eight hundred thirty-eight consecutive coronavirus disease 2019 patients. INTERVENTIONS: Anticoagulation therapy, including prophylactic and therapeutic regimens, was obtained for each patient. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Five thousand four hundred eighty patients (94%) did not receive any anticoagulation before hospitalization. Two-thousand six-hundred one patients (44%) during hospitalization received anticoagulation therapy and it was not associated with better survival rate (81% vs 81%; p = 0.94) but with higher risk of bleeding (2.7% vs 1.8%; p = 0.03). Among patients admitted with respiratory failure (49%, n = 2,859, including 391 and 583 patients requiring invasive and noninvasive ventilation, respectively), anticoagulation started during hospitalization was associated with lower mortality rates (32% vs 42%; p < 0.01) and nonsignificant higher risk of bleeding (3.4% vs 2.7%; p = 0.3). Anticoagulation therapy was associated with lower mortality rates in patients treated with invasive ventilation (53% vs 64%; p = 0.05) without increased rates of bleeding (9% vs 8%; p = 0.88) but not in those with noninvasive ventilation (35% vs 38%; p = 0.40). At multivariate Cox' analysis mortality relative risk with anticoagulation was 0.58 (95% CI, 0.49-0.67) in patients admitted with respiratory failure, 0.50 (95% CI, 0.49-0.67) in those requiring invasive ventilation, 0.72 (95% CI, 0.51-1.01) in noninvasive ventilation. CONCLUSIONS: Anticoagulation therapy in general population with coronavirus disease 2019 was not associated with better survival rates but with higher bleeding risk. Better results were observed in patients admitted with respiratory failure and requiring invasive ventilation.

Ticagrelor or Clopidogrel After an Acute Coronary Syndrome in the Elderly: A Propensity Score Matching Analysis from 16,653 Patients Treated with PCI Included in Two Large Multinational Registries.

PURPOSE: Higher risk of bleeding with ticagrelor over clopidogrel in elderly patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) who underwent percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) has been suggested. We assessed the incidence of major bleedings (MB), reinfarction (re-MI), and all-cause death to evaluate safety and efficacy of ticagrelor versus clopidogrel in such population. METHODS: Real-world registries RENAMI and BleeMACS were merged. The pooled cohort was divided into two groups, clopidogrel versus ticagrelor. Statistical analysis considered patients <75 versus ≥75 years old. Endpoints were BARC 3-5 MB, re-MI, and all-cause death at 1-year follow-up. The study included 16,653 patients (13,153 < 75 and 3500 ≥ 75 years). Ticagrelor was underused in elderly patients (16.3% versus 20.8%, P < 0.001). Using propensity score matching (PSM), two treatment groups of 1566 patients were included in the final analysis. RESULTS: Ticagrelor was able to prevent re-MI (hazard ratio [HR], 0.31; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.2-0.6; P < 0.001) and all-cause death (HR, 0.60; 95% CI, 0.4-0.9; P = 0.026) irrespective of age. In patients ≥75 years, ticagrelor reduced all-cause death (HR, 0.32; 95% CI, 0.1-0.8; P = 0.012) and re-MI (HR, 0.25; 95% CI, 0.1-1.1, P = 0.072). Moreover, even with the limit of the low number of events, ticagrelor did not significantly increase the incidence of MB (HR, 1.49; 95% CI, 0.70-3.0; P = 0.257). At multiple Cox regression, age (HR, 1.03; 95% CI, 1.02-1.05; P < 0.001) resulted an independent risk factor for bleeding. CONCLUSION: In our study, reflecting the results from two large retrospective, real-world registries, Ticagrelor did not significantly increase MB compared with clopidogrel in elderly patients with ACS treated with PCI, while significantly improving 1-year survival. Further studies on elderly patients are suggested.

Clinical profile and predictors of in-hospital mortality among older patients hospitalised for COVID-19.

BACKGROUND: the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is characterized by poor outcomes and mortality, particularly in older patients. METHODS: post hoc analysis of the international, multicentre, 'real-world' HOPE COVID-19 registry. All patients aged ≥65 years hospitalised for COVID-19 were selected. Epidemiological, clinical, analytical and outcome data were obtained. A comparative study between two age subgroups, 65-74 and ≥75 years, was performed. The primary endpoint was all cause in-hospital mortality. RESULTS: about, 1,520 patients aged ≥65 years (60.3% male, median age of 76 [IQR 71-83] years) were included. Comorbidities such as hypertension (69.2%), dyslipidaemia (48.6%), cardiovascular diseases (any chronic heart disease in 38.4% and cerebrovascular disease in 12.5%), and chronic lung disease (25.3%) were prevalent, and 49.6% were on ACEI/ARBs. Patients aged 75 years and older suffered more in-hospital complications (respiratory failure, heart failure, renal failure, sepsis) and a significantly higher mortality (18.4 vs. 48.2%, P < 0.001), but fewer admissions to intensive care units (11.2 vs. 4.8%). In the overall cohort, multivariable analysis demonstrated age ≥75 (OR 3.54), chronic kidney disease (OR 3.36), dementia (OR 8.06), peripheral oxygen saturation at admission <92% (OR 5.85), severe lymphopenia (<500/mm3) (OR 3.36) and qSOFA (Quick Sequential Organ Failure Assessment Score) >1 (OR 8.31) to be independent predictors of mortality. CONCLUSION: patients aged ≥65 years hospitalised for COVID-19 had high rates of in-hospital complications and mortality, especially among patients 75 years or older. Age ≥75 years, dementia, peripheral oxygen saturation <92%, severe lymphopenia and qSOFA scale >1 were independent predictors of mortality in this population.

Non-invasive ventilation for SARS-CoV-2 acute respiratory failure: a subanalysis from the HOPE COVID-19 registry.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic has seriously challenged worldwide healthcare systems and limited intensive care facilities, leading to physicians considering the use of non-invasive ventilation (NIV) for managing SARS-CoV-2-related acute respiratory failure (ARF). METHODS: We conducted an interim analysis of the international, multicentre HOPE COVID-19 registry including patients admitted for a confirmed or highly suspected SARS-CoV-2 infection until 18 April 2020. Those treated with NIV were considered. The primary endpoint was a composite of death or need for intubation. The components of the composite endpoint were the secondary outcomes. Unadjusted and adjusted predictors of the primary endpoint within those initially treated with NIV were investigated. RESULTS: 1933 patients who were included in the registry during the study period had data on oxygen support type. Among them, 390 patients (20%) were treated with NIV. Compared with those receiving other non-invasive oxygen strategy, patients receiving NIV showed significantly worse clinical and laboratory signs of ARF at presentation. Of the 390 patients treated with NIV, 173 patients (44.4%) met the composite endpoint. In-hospital death was the main determinant (147, 37.7%), while 62 patients (15.9%) needed invasive ventilation. Those requiring invasive ventilation had the lowest survival rate (41.9%). After adjustment, age (adjusted OR (adj(OR)) for 5-year increase: 1.37, 95% CI 1.15 to 1.63, p<0.001), hypertension (adj(OR) 2.95, 95% CI 1.14 to 7.61, p=0.03), room air O2 saturation <92% at presentation (adj(OR) 3.05, 95% CI 1.28 to 7.28, p=0.01), lymphocytopenia (adj(OR) 3.55, 95% CI 1.16 to 10.85, p=0.03) and in-hospital use of antibiotic therapy (adj(OR) 4.91, 95% CI 1.69 to 14.26, p=0.003) were independently associated with the composite endpoint. CONCLUSION: NIV was used in a significant proportion of patients within our cohort, and more than half of these patients survived without the need for intubation. NIV may represent a viable strategy particularly in case of overcrowded and limited intensive care resources, but prompt identification of failure is mandatory to avoid harm. Further studies are required to better clarify our hypothesis. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBERS: NCT04334291/EUPAS34399.

Average daily ischemic versus bleeding risk in patients with ACS undergoing PCI: Insights from the BleeMACS and RENAMI registries.

BACKGROUND: The risk of recurrent ischemia and bleeding after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for acute coronary syndrome (ACS) may vary during the first year of follow-up according to clinical presentation, and medical and interventional strategies. METHODS: BleeMACS and RENAMI are 2 multicenter registries enrolling patients with ACS treated with PCI and clopidogrel, prasugrel, or ticagrelor. The average daily ischemic and bleeding risks (ADIR and ADBR) in the first year after PCI were the primary end points. The difference between ADBR and ADIR was calculated to estimate the potential excess of bleeding/ischemic events in a given period or specific subgroup. RESULTS: A total of 19,826 patients were included. Overall, in the first year after PCI, the ADBR was 0.008085%, whereas ADIR was 0.008017% (P = .886). In the first 2 weeks ADIR was higher than ADBR (P = .013), especially in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction or incomplete revascularization. ADIR continued to be, albeit non-significantly, greater than ADBR up to the third month, whereas ADBR became higher, although not significantly, afterward. Patients with incomplete revascularization had an excess in ischemic risk (P = .003), whereas non-ST-segment elevation ACS patients and those on ticagrelor had an excess of bleeding (P = .012 and P = .022, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: In unselected ACS patients, ADIR and ADBR occurred at similar rates within 1 year after PCI. ADIR was greater than ADBR in the first 2 weeks, especially in ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction patients and those with incomplete revascularization. In the first year, ADIR was higher than ADBR in patients with incomplete revascularization, whereas ADBR was higher in non-ST-segment elevation ACS patients and in those discharged on ticagrelor.

Impact of malnutrition in the embolic-haemorrhagic trade-off of elderly patients with atrial fibrillation.

AIMS: Nutrition is an important determinant of health above the age of 80 years. Malnutrition in the elderly is often underdiagnosed. The aim of this study was to report the prevalence and prognostic value of malnutrition in patients ≥80 years old with atrial fibrillation (AF) with and without anticoagulant therapy. METHODS AND RESULTS: We assessed the nutritional status of 4724 octogenarian patients with diagnoses of AF in a single centre from Spain between 2014 and 2017 with the CONUT score. Malnutrition was confirmed in 2036 patients (43.1%). Anticoagulation prescription was more frequent in patients with good nutrition than in those malnourished (79.5% vs. 71.7%, P < 0.001). The impact of malnutrition on mortality was evaluated by Cox regression, whereas its association with ischaemic stroke and major bleeding was studied through competing risk analysis. After multivariate adjusting, malnutrition was associated with mortality [hazard ratio (HR) 1.36, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.24-1.49], stroke [sub-distribution HR (sHR) 1.37, 95% CI 1.10-1.69], and major bleeding (sHR 1.29, 95% CI 1.02-1.64). In anticoagulated patients, the embolic-haemorrhagic trade-off event was virtually neutral for those who had normal nutritional status [average daily rates (ADRs) for stroke and bleeding: 4.70 and 4.69 per 100 000 patients/day, respectively; difference = +0.01 per 100 000 patients/day; P = 0.99] and negative for those with malnutrition (ADR for stroke and bleeding: 5.38 and 7.61 per 100 000 patients/day, respectively; difference = -2.23 per 100 000 patients/day; P = 0.07). CONCLUSION: Malnutrition is very common in octogenarian patients with AF, being a clinical predictor for poor prognosis. For anticoagulated patients, malnutrition was associated with a negative embolic-haemorrhagic balance.

Protective, repairing and fibrinolytic effects of rivaroxaban on vascular endothelium.

AIMS: Rivaroxaban, a direct inhibitor of activated factor X (FXa), is the only new oral anticoagulant approved for secondary prevention after acute coronary syndrome. Our objective was to identify the possible molecular mechanisms of rivaroxaban that contribute to endothelial function. METHODS: Cell viability and growth of human umbilical vein endothelial cells (HUVEC) were registered. Gene expression studies comparing the effects of rivaroxaban and FXa were conducted by a selective RNA array and confirmed by protein quantification. Wound-healing experiments on HUVEC, platelet adhesion, enzymatic activity, and cell-based assays for fibrin formation were performed with rivaroxaban. RESULTS: Rivaroxaban (50 nM) only altered (>2 fold change) the expression of matrix metallopeptidase 2 and urokinase plasminogen activator (u-PA), but counteracted the FXa (9 nM)-induced upregulation of several pro-inflammatory genes (P < 0.05) and FXa-enhanced platelet adhesion over HUVEC. Rivaroxaban increased u-PA protein expression in HUVEC supernatants and enhanced u-PA activity (up to 4 IU ng-1 of u-PA). Rivaroxaban (1 nM-1 µM) showed a significant and dose-dependent positive effect on HUVEC growth that was inhibited by BC-11-hydroxibromide, an inhibitor of u-PA. Healing properties after a wound on HUVEC cultures, and fibrinolytic properties were also shown by rivaroxaban. Both effects were reversed by BC-11-hydroxibromide. CONCLUSIONS: Rivaroxaban enhanced viability, growth and migration of HUVEC, mainly by u-PA activation and upregulation, which also participate in the rivaroxaban-induced fibrinolytic activity at endothelial level. Rivaroxaban also protected from the pro-inflammatory effects of FXa on HUVEC. Altogether may improve endothelial functionality and could contribute to the cardiovascular benefits of rivaroxaban.

Nonparametric estimation of time-dependent ROC curves conditional on a continuous covariate.

The receiver-operating characteristic (ROC) curve is the most widely used measure for evaluating the performance of a diagnostic biomarker when predicting a binary disease outcome. The ROC curve displays the true positive rate (or sensitivity) and the false positive rate (or 1-specificity) for different cut-off values used to classify an individual as healthy or diseased. In time-to-event studies, however, the disease status (e.g. death or alive) of an individual is not a fixed characteristic, and it varies along the study. In such cases, when evaluating the performance of the biomarker, several issues should be taken into account: first, the time-dependent nature of the disease status; and second, the presence of incomplete data (e.g. censored data typically present in survival studies). Accordingly, to assess the discrimination power of continuous biomarkers for time-dependent disease outcomes, time-dependent extensions of true positive rate, false positive rate, and ROC curve have been recently proposed. In this work, we present new nonparametric estimators of the cumulative/dynamic time-dependent ROC curve that allow accounting for the possible modifying effect of current or past covariate measures on the discriminatory power of the biomarker. The proposed estimators can accommodate right-censored data, as well as covariate-dependent censoring. The behavior of the estimators proposed in this study will be explored through simulations and illustrated using data from a cohort of patients who suffered from acute coronary syndrome.

[Impact of concomitant use of P2Y12 inhibitors and proton pump inhibitors on ischemia events in patients with acute coronary syndrome in real world].

Objective: The study aimed to analyze the impact of concomitant administration of P2Y12 inhibitors and PPIs on ischemia events in patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). Methods: We retrospectively analyzed data from a international, multi-center registry between 2003 and 2014 in patients with ACS after PCI, grouped the cohort into patients receiving PPIs or no PPIs and assessed 1-year clinical endpoint (all-cause death/re-infarction). Meanwhile, we grouped the cohort into patients receiving clopidogrel or ticagrelor, and compared the impact of concomitant administration of PPIs and clopidogrel or ticagrelor on 1-year clinical endpoint. Results: Of 9 429 patients in the final cohort, 54.8% (n=5 165) was prescribed a PPI at discharge. Patients receiving a PPI were more likely to have comorbidities. No association was observed between PPI use and the clinical endpoint (HR 1.00, 95% CI 0.86-1.18). Meanwhile, no association was found between PPI use and the clinical endpoint in patients receiving either clopidogrel or ticagrelor. And the clinical endpoint in patients administrated of clopidogrel and PPIs had no difference with that of ticagrelor and PPIs. Conclusions: In patients with ACS following PCI, increased risk of ischemia event was not found in the concomitant use of PPIs and P2Y12 inhibitors, and especially, compared with ticagrelor, clopidogrel was found no association with ischemia events when concomitant administrated with PPIs.

Evaluation of SAMe-TT2R2 risk score for predicting the quality of anticoagulation control in a real-world cohort of patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation on vitamin-K antagonists.

AIMS: Clinicians need to get better at identifying patients who would have poor quality of anticoagulation control with vitamin-K antagonists (VKAs). We assessed the predictive ability of SAMe-TT2R2 score, recently conceived for the prior purpose, and examined its relationship with major bleeding, thromboembolic (TE) complications, and death. METHODS AND RESULTS: Retrospectively, 911 consecutive patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF) started on VKAs within 8 months were studied. The percentage of international normalized ratios in therapeutic range (PINRR) at different levels was used as a metric of anticoagulation quality. We also tested the SAMe-TT2R2 predictability for major bleeding, TE complications, and death throughout 10 ± 3 months. The PINRR decreased from 62% at zero point to 53% at ≥4 points of SAMe-TT2R2. 82.1% of patients who achieved PINRR ≥ 70% had 0 or 1 point of SAMe-TT2R2. SAMe-TT2R2 performed significantly better at PINRR 70% than at 65 and 60% (c-statistic = 0.60 vs. c-statistic = 0.56). The calibration of SAMe-TT2R2 was excellent (Hosmer-Lemeshow test P-values ≥ 0.6). SAMe-TT2R2 showed significant association with the composite outcome of major bleeding, TE complications, and death [n = 98; hazard ratio (HR) = 1.32; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.08-1.60]; the c-statistic was 0.57 (95% CI: 0.51-0.62) and P = 0.03. As individual outcomes, SAMe-TT2R2 was significantly associated with death (n = 60; HR = 1.3; 95% CI: 1.03-1.69), but not with either major bleeding (n = 30; HR = 1.2; 95% CI: 0.85-1.76) or TE complications (n = 15; HR = 1.01; 95% CI: 0.58-1.77). CONCLUSION: Among NVAF patients, SAMe-TT2R2 could represent a useful clinical tool to identify patients who would have poor quality of anticoagulation control with VKAs. SAMe-TT2R2 successfully predicts the composite outcome of major bleeding, TE complications, and death.

Comparison between CHA2DS2-VASc and the new R2CHADS2 and ATRIA scores at predicting thromboembolic event in non-anticoagulated and anticoagulated patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation.

BACKGROUND: Accurate risk stratification is considered the first and most important step in the management of patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF). We compared the performance of the widely used CHA2DS2-VASc and the recently developed R2CHADS2 and ATRIA scores, for predicting thromboembolic (TE) event in either non-anticoagulated or anticoagulated patients with NVAF. METHODS: The non-anticoagulated cohort was comprised of 154 patients, whereas 911 patients formed the cohort of patients on vitamin-K-antagonist. The scores were computed using the criteria mentioned in their developmental cohorts. Measures of performance for the risk scores were evaluated at predicting TE event. RESULTS: In the non-anticoagulated cohort, 9 TE events occurred during 11 ± 2.7 months. CHA2DS2-VASc showed significant association with TE occurrence: hazard ratio (HR) = 1.58 (95 % confidence interval [95 % IC] 1.01-2.46), but R2CHADS2 and ATRIA did not (HR = 1.23 (95 % CI 0.86-1.77) and 1.20 (95 % CI 0.93-1.56), respectively. In the anticoagulated cohort, after 10 ± 3 months of follow up, 18 TE events were developed. In that cohort, the three scores showed similar association with TE risk: HR = 1.49 (95 % CI 1.13-1.97), 1.41 (95 % CI 1.13-1.77) and 1.37 (95 % CI 1.12-1.66) for CHA2DS2-VASc, R2CHADS2 and ATRIA, respectively. In both cohorts, no TE event occurred in patients classified in the low risk category according to CHA2DS2-VASc or R2CHADS2. CONCLUSIONS: In this study of NVAF patients, CHA2DS2-VASc has better association with TE events than the new R2CHADS2 and ATRIA risk scores in the non-anticoagulated cohort. CHA2DS2-VASc and R2CHADS2 can identify patients at truly low risk regardless of the anticoagulation status.