C67A BLITZ-AF CANCER REGISTRY: BASELINE CHARACTERISTICS OF PATIENTS WITH ATRIAL FIBRILLATION AND CANCER
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Abstract Background Evidences on atrial fibrillation (AF) in patients with cancer are limited, specifically with respect to antithrombotic therapy. Methods BLITZ-AF Cancer is a prospective, non-interventional study of the epidemiology and management of AF in patients with cancer. Patients were included from 112 cardiology units in Italy, Belgium, Netherlands, Spain, Portugal, and Ireland, based on the following criteria: age ≥18 years; documented cancer other than basal-cell or squamous-cell carcinoma of the skin diagnosed within 3 years; electrocardiographically confirmed AF within 1 year; no concomitant interventional study. Follow-up is ongoing. Results From June 26th, 2019 to Sep. 30th, 2021, 1,514 subjects were enrolled. The most frequent cancer locations were lung (14.9%), colorectal (14.1%), breast (13.9%), prostate (8.8%), and non-Hodgkin lymphoma (8.1%); 463 (30.6%) of participants had metastases. AF was first-detected in 323 (21.3%), paroxysmal in 460 (30.4%), persistent in 192 (12.7%), long-standing persistent in 33 (2.2%), and permanent in 506 (33.4%); 590 (39.0%) patients had symptoms attributable to AF. Baseline characteristics are presented in the Table. Males were more than women and almost half of the subjects was >75 years-old. Cardiovascular risk factors were common and approximately 31% had heart failure or coronary artery disease. Previous thromboembolic and haemorrhagic events had occurred in 14% and 10% of subjects, respectively. The median CHA2DS2VASc score was 3. As shown in the Figure, the prescription of oral anticoagulants, especially direct-acting ones (DOACs), rose after the cardiology assessment, while the percentage of participants without any antithrombotic therapy declined. Among 1,427 patients with non-valvular AF (i.e., no mitral stenosis or prosthetic mechanical valve), 997 (69.9%) were prescribed on DOACs at discharge/after consultation. At multivariable logistic regression analysis, variables associated with DOAC use were female sex (OR 1.58, 95% CI 1.22-2.05), age (OR 2.00, 95% CI 1.39-2.88 and OR 2.63, 95%CI 1.84-3.76, respectively, for 65-74 years and ≥75 years vs <65 years), hypertension (OR 1.43, 95%CI 1.10-1.87), long-standing persistent or permanent AF (OR 1.36, 95%CI 1.05-1.78). Haemoglobin <12 g/dL (OR 0.57, 95%CI 0.45-0.73), and planned cancer treatment (OR 0.72, 95%CI 0.57-0.92) were independently associated with a lower prescription of DOACs. Conclusions BLITZ-AF Cancer provides extensive information on a large, contemporary cohort of individuals with AF and cancer. This baseline snapshot indicates that cardiologists pursue the implementation of DOACs in these patients, although residual use of other antithrombotic therapies or lack of any thrombo-prophylaxis remains substantial.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,004 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».