Improved risk stratification of patients with atrial fibrillation: an integrated GARFIELD-AF tool for the prediction of mortality, stroke and bleed in patients with and without anticoagulation

Keith A A Fox, Joseph E Lucas, Karen S Pieper, Jean-Pierre Bassand, A John Camm, David A Fitzmaurice, Samuel Z Goldhaber, Shinya Goto, Sylvia Haas, Werner Hacke, Gloria Kayani, Ali Oto, Lorenzo G Mantovani, Frank Misselwitz, Jonathan P Piccini, Alexander G G Turpie, Freek W A Verheugt, Ajay K Kakkar, GARFIELD-AF Investigators, Keith A A Fox, Joseph E Lucas, Karen S Pieper, Jean-Pierre Bassand, A John Camm, David A Fitzmaurice, Samuel Z Goldhaber, Shinya Goto, Sylvia Haas, Werner Hacke, Gloria Kayani, Ali Oto, Lorenzo G Mantovani, Frank Misselwitz, Jonathan P Piccini, Alexander G G Turpie, Freek W A Verheugt, Ajay K Kakkar, GARFIELD-AF Investigators

Abstract

Objectives: To provide an accurate, web-based tool for stratifying patients with atrial fibrillation to facilitate decisions on the potential benefits/risks of anticoagulation, based on mortality, stroke and bleeding risks.

Design: The new tool was developed, using stepwise regression, for all and then applied to lower risk patients. C-statistics were compared with CHA2DS2-VASc using 30-fold cross-validation to control for overfitting. External validation was undertaken in an independent dataset, Outcome Registry for Better Informed Treatment of Atrial Fibrillation (ORBIT-AF).

Participants: Data from 39 898 patients enrolled in the prospective GARFIELD-AF registry provided the basis for deriving and validating an integrated risk tool to predict stroke risk, mortality and bleeding risk.

Results: The discriminatory value of the GARFIELD-AF risk model was superior to CHA2DS2-VASc for patients with or without anticoagulation. C-statistics (95% CI) for all-cause mortality, ischaemic stroke/systemic embolism and haemorrhagic stroke/major bleeding (treated patients) were: 0.77 (0.76 to 0.78), 0.69 (0.67 to 0.71) and 0.66 (0.62 to 0.69), respectively, for the GARFIELD-AF risk models, and 0.66 (0.64-0.67), 0.64 (0.61-0.66) and 0.64 (0.61-0.68), respectively, for CHA2DS2-VASc (or HAS-BLED for bleeding). In very low to low risk patients (CHA2DS2-VASc 0 or 1 (men) and 1 or 2 (women)), the CHA2DS2-VASc and HAS-BLED (for bleeding) scores offered weak discriminatory value for mortality, stroke/systemic embolism and major bleeding. C-statistics for the GARFIELD-AF risk tool were 0.69 (0.64 to 0.75), 0.65 (0.56 to 0.73) and 0.60 (0.47 to 0.73) for each end point, respectively, versus 0.50 (0.45 to 0.55), 0.59 (0.50 to 0.67) and 0.55 (0.53 to 0.56) for CHA2DS2-VASc (or HAS-BLED for bleeding). Upon validation in the ORBIT-AF population, C-statistics showed that the GARFIELD-AF risk tool was effective for predicting 1-year all-cause mortality using the full and simplified model for all-cause mortality: C-statistics 0.75 (0.73 to 0.77) and 0.75 (0.73 to 0.77), respectively, and for predicting for any stroke or systemic embolism over 1 year, C-statistics 0.68 (0.62 to 0.74).

Conclusions: Performance of the GARFIELD-AF risk tool was superior to CHA2DS2-VASc in predicting stroke and mortality and superior to HAS-BLED for bleeding, overall and in lower risk patients. The GARFIELD-AF tool has the potential for incorporation in routine electronic systems, and for the first time, permits simultaneous evaluation of ischaemic stroke, mortality and bleeding risks.

Clinical trial registration: URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier for GARFIELD-AF (NCT01090362) and for ORBIT-AF (NCT01165710).

Keywords: CHA2DS2-VASc; atrial fibrillation; risk stratification.

Conflict of interest statement

Competing interests: KAAF reports grants and personal fees from Bayer, and Johnson and Johnson, personal fees from Lilly, grants and personal fees from AstraZeneca and personal fees from Sanofi/Regeneron outside the submitted work. JEL and KSP have provided statistical support and thought leadership for the Thrombosis Research Institute, during the conduct of the study, and KSP has received personal fees from Bayer outside the submitted work. J-PB reports personal fees from Aspen outside the submitted work. AJC is an advisor to Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Pfizer/BMS and Daiichi Sankyo. DAF reports personal fees from Bayer outside the submitted work. SZG reports grants from BiO2 Medical, Boehringer-Ingelheim, Bristol Meyers Squibb, BTG EKOS, Daiichi Sankyo, National Heart Lung and Blood Institute of the National Institutes of Health, Janssen and Thrombosis Research Group and personal fees from Bayer, Boehringer-Ingelheim, Bristol Meyers Squibb, Daiichi Sankyo, Janssen and Portola outside the submitted work. SG reports personal fees from Bayer, grants from Sanofi, grants from Pfizer, personal fees from Daiichi-Sankyo, personal fees from AstraZeneca during the conduct of the study and grants from Bayer outside the submitted work. SH reports personal fees from Aspen, Bayer AG, BMS, Daiichi-Sankyo, Pfizer and Sanofi outside the submitted work. WH reports personal fees from Bayer during the conduct of the study. GK reports grants from Bayer during the conduct of the study. LGM reports grants and personal fees from Bayer AG during the conduct of the study, and grants from Boehringer Ingelheim, grants and personal fees from Pfizer and personal fees from Daiichi Sankyo outside the submitted work. FM reports grants and other from Bayer AG during the conduct of the study, and other from Bayer AG outside the submitted work. FM is an employee of Bayer AG. JP has nothing to disclose. AGGT reports consultant fees from Bayer AG during the conduct of the study. FWAV reports personal fees from Boehringer-Ingelheim, Bayer AG, BMS/Pfizer and Daiichi-Sankyo during the conduct of the study and personal fees from AstraZeneca outside the submitted work. AKK reports grants and personal fees from Bayer AG, Boehringer-Ingelheim Pharma, Daiichi Sankyo Europe, Sanofi SA and Janssen Pharma outside the submitted work.

© Article author(s) (or their employer(s) unless otherwise stated in the text of the article) 2017. All rights reserved. No commercial use is permitted unless otherwise expressly granted.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
One-year Kaplan-Meier event rates by CHA2DS2-VASc score for all-cause mortality, ischaemic stroke/systemic embolism and haemorrhagic stroke/major bleed. F, female.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Receiver operating characteristic curves and 1 year Kaplan-Meier curves, dividing the data at median predicted risk, in: (A) all GARFIELD-AF patients and (B) very low to low risk patients (CHA2DS2-VASc of 0 or 1 for men and 1 or 2 for women). The sample sizes for the three groups in the overall population are 39 898, 39 898 and 25 677, respectively. Eighty-five per cent of patients were still in the cohort by the end of the 1-year period. The median 1 year risk for the three overall KM figures are 2.7% death, 0.95% ischaemic stroke/SE, 0.92% haemorrhagic stroke or major bleed. The median 1 year risk for the three lower risk KM figures are: 0.92% death, 0.43% ischaemic stroke/SE, 0.35% haemorrhagic stroke or major bleed. SE, systemic embolism.
Figure 3
Figure 3
Calibration of GARFIELD-AF risk model for each end point in the GARFIELD-AF population. GARFIELD-AF, Global Anticoagulant Registry in the FIELD-Atrial Fibrillation; SE, systemic embolism.

References

    1. Camm AJ, Lip GY, De Caterina R, et al. . 2012 focused update of the ESC Guidelines for the management of atrial fibrillation: an update of the 2010 ESC Guidelines for the management of atrial fibrillation. Developed with the special contribution of the European Heart Rhythm Association. Eur Heart J 2012;33:2719–47. 10.1093/eurheartj/ehs253
    1. You JJ, Singer DE, Howard PA, et al. . Antithrombotic therapy for atrial fibrillation: antithrombotic therapy and prevention of thrombosis, 9th ed: American College of Chest Physicians Evidence-Based Clinical Practice Guidelines. Chest 2012;141:e531S–75. 10.1378/chest.11-2304
    1. January CT, Wann LS, Alpert JS, et al. . AHA/ACC/HRS guideline for the management of patients with atrial fibrillation: a report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on practice guidelines and the Heart Rhythm Society. Circulation 2014;130:e199–e267. 10.1161/CIR.0000000000000041
    1. Lip GYH, Nieuwlaat R, Pisters R, et al. . Refining clinical risk stratification for predicting stroke and thromboembolism in atrial fibrillation using a novel risk factor-based approach: the euro heart survey on atrial fibrillation. Chest 2010;137:263–72. 10.1378/chest.09-1584
    1. Gage BF, Waterman AD, Shannon W, et al. . Validation of clinical classification schemes for predicting stroke: results from the National Registry of Atrial Fibrillation. JAMA 2001;285:2864–70.
    1. Kirchhof P, Benussi S, Kotecha D, et al. . 2016 ESC Guidelines for the management of atrial fibrillation developed in collaboration with EACTS. Eur Heart J 2016;37:2893–962. 10.1093/eurheartj/ehw210
    1. Camm AJ, Accetta G, Ambrosio G, et al. . Evolving antithrombotic treatment patterns for patients with newly diagnosed atrial fibrillation. Heart 2017;103:307–14. 10.1136/heartjnl-2016-309832
    1. Kakkar AK, Mueller I, Bassand J-P, et al. . International longitudinal registry of patients with atrial fibrillation at risk of stroke: Global Anticoagulant Registry in the FIELD (GARFIELD). Am Heart J 2012;163:13–19. 10.1016/j.ahj.2011.09.011
    1. Granger CB, et al. . Predictors of hospital mortality in the global registry of acute coronary events. Arch Intern Med 2003;163:2345–53. 10.1001/archinte.163.19.2345
    1. Liu L, Forman S, Barton B. Fitting Cox model using PROC PHREG and beyond in SAS. 2009.
    1. Piccini JP, Fraulo ES, Ansell JE, et al. . Outcomes registry for better informed treatment of atrial fibrillation: Rationale and design of ORBIT-AF. Am Heart J 2011;162:606–12. 10.1016/j.ahj.2011.07.001
    1. Golwala H, Jackson LR, Simon DN, et al. . Racial/ethnic differences in atrial fibrillation symptoms, treatment patterns, and outcomes: Insights from Outcomes Registry for Better Informed Treatment for Atrial Fibrillation Registry. Am Heart J 2016;174:29–36. 10.1016/j.ahj.2015.10.028
    1. Gundlund A, Fosbøl EL, Kim S, et al. . Family history of atrial fibrillation is associated with earlier-onset and more symptomatic atrial fibrillation: Results from the Outcomes Registry for Better Informed Treatment of Atrial Fibrillation (ORBIT-AF) registry. Am Heart J 2016;175:28–35. 10.1016/j.ahj.2016.01.020
    1. O’Brien EC, Kim S, Thomas L, et al. . Clinical characteristics, oral anticoagulation patterns, and outcomes of medicaid patients with atrial fibrillation: insights from the Outcomes registry for better informed treatment of atrial fibrillation (ORBIT-AF I) registry. J Am Heart Assoc 2016;5:e002721 10.1161/JAHA.115.002721
    1. Henao R, Lucas JE. Efficient model-based clustering with coalescents: Application to multiple outcomes using medical records data. 2016. .
    1. Motwani M, Dey D, Berman DS, et al. . Machine learning for prediction of all-cause mortality in patients with suspected coronary artery disease: a 5-year multicentre prospective registry analysis. Eur Heart J 2017;38:500–7. 10.1093/eurheartj/ehw188
    1. Marinigh R, Lip GY, Fiotti N, et al. . Age as a risk factor for stroke in atrial fibrillation patients: implications for thromboprophylaxis. J Am Coll Cardiol 2010;56:827–37. 10.1016/j.jacc.2010.05.028
    1. Pisters R, Lane DA, Nieuwlaat R, et al. . A novel user-friendly score (HAS-BLED) to assess 1-year risk of major bleeding in patients with atrial fibrillation: the Euro Heart Survey. Chest 2010;138:1093–100. 10.1378/chest.10-0134
    1. Fox KAA, Gersh BJ, Traore S, et al. . Evolving quality standards for large-scale registries – The GARFIELD-AF experience. Eur Heart J Qual Care Clin Outcomes 2017;3:144–22.
    1. National Kidney Foundation. K/DOQI clinical practice guidelines for chronic kidney disease: evaluation, classification, and stratification. Am J Kidney Dis 2002;39(2 Suppl 1):S1–266.
    1. Piccini JP, Hellkamp AS, Lokhnygina Y, et al. . Relationship between time in therapeutic range and comparative treatment effect of rivaroxaban and warfarin: results from the ROCKET AF trial. J Am Heart Assoc 2014;3:e000521 10.1161/JAHA.113.000521
    1. Piccini JP, Garg J, Patel MR, et al. . Management of major bleeding events in patients treated with rivaroxaban vs. warfarin: results from the ROCKET AF trial. Eur Heart J 2014;35:1873–80. 10.1093/eurheartj/ehu083
    1. Coppens M, Synhorst D, Eikelboom JW, et al. . Efficacy and safety of apixaban compared with aspirin in patients who previously tried but failed treatment with vitamin K antagonists: results from the AVERROES trial. Eur Heart J 2014;35:1856–63. 10.1093/eurheartj/ehu048
    1. Connolly SJ, Ezekowitz MD, Yusuf S, et al. . Dabigatran versus warfarin in patients with atrial fibrillation. N Engl J Med Overseas Ed 2009;361:1139–51. 10.1056/NEJMoa0905561
    1. Giugliano RP, Ruff CT, Braunwald E, et al. . Edoxaban versus warfarin in patients with atrial fibrillation. N Engl J Med Overseas Ed 2013;369:2093–104. 10.1056/NEJMoa1310907
    1. O’Donoghue ML, Ruff CT, Giugliano RP, et al. . Edoxaban vs. warfarin in vitamin K antagonist experienced and naive patients with atrial fibrillation†. Eur Heart J 2015;36:1470–7. 10.1093/eurheartj/ehv014
    1. Granger CB, Alexander JH, McMurray JJV, et al. . Apixaban versus warfarin in patients with atrial fibrillation. N Engl J Med Overseas Ed 2011;365:981–92. 10.1056/NEJMoa1107039
    1. Patel MR, Mahaffey KW, Garg J, et al. . Rivaroxaban versus warfarin in nonvalvular atrial fibrillation. N Engl J Med Overseas Ed 2011;365:883–91. 10.1056/NEJMoa1009638
    1. Olesen JB, Lip GYH, Hansen ML, et al. . Validation of risk stratification schemes for predicting stroke and thromboembolism in patients with atrial fibrillation: nationwide cohort study. BMJ 2011;342:d124 10.1136/bmj.d124
    1. Friberg L, Rosenqvist M, Lip GYH. Evaluation of risk stratification schemes for ischaemic stroke and bleeding in 182 678 patients with atrial fibrillation: the Swedish Atrial Fibrillation cohort study. Eur Heart J 2012;33:1500–10. 10.1093/eurheartj/ehr488
    1. Friberg L, Skeppholm M, Terént A. Benefit of anticoagulation unlikely in patients with atrial fibrillation and a CHA2DS2-VASc score of 1. J Am Coll Cardiol 2015;65:225–32. 10.1016/j.jacc.2014.10.052
    1. Ruff CT, Giugliano RP, Braunwald E, et al. . Cardiovascular biomarker score and clinical outcomes in patients with atrial fibrillation: a subanalysis of the ENGAGE AF-TIMI 48 randomized clinical trial. JAMA cardiology 2016;1:999–1006.

Source: PubMed

3
Sottoscrivi