4
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: not found

      Predicting performance of the HAS-BLED and ORBIT bleeding risk scores in patients with atrial fibrillation treated with Rivaroxaban: Observations from the prospective EMIR Registry

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisher
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Background

          Assessing bleeding risk during the decision-making process of starting oral anticoagulation (OAC) therapy in atrial fibrillation (AF) patients is essential. Several bleeding risk scores have been proposed for vitamin K antagonist users but, few studies have focused on validation of these bleeding risk scores in patients taking direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs). The aim was to compare the predictive ability of HAS-BLED and ORBIT bleeding risk scores in AF patients taking rivaroxaban in the EMIR (‘Estudio observacional para la identificación de los factores de riesgo asociados a eventos cardiovasculares mayores en pacientes con fibrilación auricular no valvular tratados con un anticoagulante oral directo [Rivaroxaban]) Study.

          Methods and results

          EMIR Study was an observational, multicenter, post-authorization, and prospective study that involved AF patients under OAC with rivaroxaban at least 6 months before enrolment. We analysed baseline clinical characteristics and adverse events after 2.5 years of follow-up and validated the predictive ability of HAS-BLED and ORBIT scores for major bleeding (MB) events.

          We analysed 1433 patients with mean age of 74.2 ± 9.7 (44.5% female). Mean HAS-BLED score was 1.6 ± 1.0 and ORBIT score was 1.1 ± 1.2. The ORBIT score categorised a higher proportion of patients as ‘low-risk’ (87.1%) compared with 53.5% using the HAS-BLED score. There were 33 MB events (1.04%/year) and 87 patients died (2.73%/year). Both HAS-BLED and ORBIT had a good predictive ability for MB{Area under the curve (AUC) 0.770, [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.693–0.847; P <0.001] and AUC 0.765 (95% CI 0.672–0.858; P <0.001), respectively}. There was a non-significant difference for discriminative ability of the two tested scores (P = 0.930) and risk reclassification in terms of net reclassification improvement (NRI) −5.7 (95% CI −42.4–31.1; P = 0.762). HAS-BLED score showed the best calibration and ORBIT score showed the largest mismatch in calibration, particularly in higher predicted risk patients.

          Conclusion

          In a prospective real-world AF population under rivaroxaban from EMIR registry, the HAS-BLED score had good predictive performance and calibration compared with ORBIT score for MB events. ORBIT score presented worse calibration than HAS-BLED in this DOAC treated population.

          Related collections

          Most cited references44

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: not found
          • Article: not found

          Comparing the Areas under Two or More Correlated Receiver Operating Characteristic Curves: A Nonparametric Approach

            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: not found
            • Article: not found

            OUP accepted manuscript

            (2020)
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Rivaroxaban versus warfarin in nonvalvular atrial fibrillation.

              The use of warfarin reduces the rate of ischemic stroke in patients with atrial fibrillation but requires frequent monitoring and dose adjustment. Rivaroxaban, an oral factor Xa inhibitor, may provide more consistent and predictable anticoagulation than warfarin. In a double-blind trial, we randomly assigned 14,264 patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation who were at increased risk for stroke to receive either rivaroxaban (at a daily dose of 20 mg) or dose-adjusted warfarin. The per-protocol, as-treated primary analysis was designed to determine whether rivaroxaban was noninferior to warfarin for the primary end point of stroke or systemic embolism. In the primary analysis, the primary end point occurred in 188 patients in the rivaroxaban group (1.7% per year) and in 241 in the warfarin group (2.2% per year) (hazard ratio in the rivaroxaban group, 0.79; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.66 to 0.96; P<0.001 for noninferiority). In the intention-to-treat analysis, the primary end point occurred in 269 patients in the rivaroxaban group (2.1% per year) and in 306 patients in the warfarin group (2.4% per year) (hazard ratio, 0.88; 95% CI, 0.74 to 1.03; P<0.001 for noninferiority; P=0.12 for superiority). Major and nonmajor clinically relevant bleeding occurred in 1475 patients in the rivaroxaban group (14.9% per year) and in 1449 in the warfarin group (14.5% per year) (hazard ratio, 1.03; 95% CI, 0.96 to 1.11; P=0.44), with significant reductions in intracranial hemorrhage (0.5% vs. 0.7%, P=0.02) and fatal bleeding (0.2% vs. 0.5%, P=0.003) in the rivaroxaban group. In patients with atrial fibrillation, rivaroxaban was noninferior to warfarin for the prevention of stroke or systemic embolism. There was no significant between-group difference in the risk of major bleeding, although intracranial and fatal bleeding occurred less frequently in the rivaroxaban group. (Funded by Johnson & Johnson and Bayer; ROCKET AF ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00403767.).
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                (View ORCID Profile)
                (View ORCID Profile)
                Journal
                European Heart Journal - Cardiovascular Pharmacotherapy
                Oxford University Press (OUP)
                2055-6837
                2055-6845
                January 2023
                December 15 2022
                November 01 2022
                January 2023
                December 15 2022
                November 01 2022
                : 9
                : 1
                : 38-46
                Article
                10.1093/ehjcvp/pvac060
                ffb3c5b1-1cd6-4261-9907-4087adda3f13
                © 2022

                https://academic.oup.com/journals/pages/open_access/funder_policies/chorus/standard_publication_model

                History

                Comments

                Comment on this article