Abstract 18466: Anemia is Associated with an Adverse Outcome in Patients with Atrial Fibrillation: Insights Form the Re-ly Trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Anemia may predispose to cardiovascular events. While patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) may be particularly prone to anemia, the impact of anemia on outcome in patients with AF is unclear. Methods: We retrospectively analyzed the RE-LY trial that randomized 18,113 patients with AF to receive dabigatran or warfarin for a median follow-up of 2 years.The association between anemia (Hb <13.0 g/dL in men and <12.0 g/dL in women) and the incidence of cardiovascular and bleeding events was assessed with multivariable Cox regression analysis. Results: Anemia was present in 12% of the population at baseline and the presence of anemia was associated with an increased incidence of all cause mortality or myocardial infarction (adjusted hazard ratio (adj. HR) 1.50, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.32-1.71). Anemia was also associated with an increased incidence of the primary RE-LY endpoints of stroke or systemic embolism (adj. HR 1.41 95% CI (1.12-1.78)) and major bleeding (adj. HR 2.14, 95% CI 1.87-2.46). The association between anemia and outcome did not differ according to major cardiovascular comorbidities, treatment allocation or prior use of warfarin. After 6 months, anemia had resolved in 35% of anemic patients, while anemia had developed in 10% of patients without prior anemia. Resolution of anemia was associated with a more favorable outcome than sustained anemia (adj HR. 0.71, 95%CI 0.97-0.52), or new onset anemia (adj HR. 0.68, 95%CI 0.50-0.93) Conclusions: Anemia is associated with an increased risk of cardiovascular events and bleeding complications in patients with AF. Accordingly, resolution of anemia is associated with a more favourable outcome than sustained anemia.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".