Abstract 159: Evaluation of Clinical Outcomes among Nonvalvular Atrial Fibrillation Patients Treated With Warfarin or Rivaroxaban Stratified by Presence or Absence of CKD in a Claims Database
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction: Renal functional impairment is linked to an increased risk of thromboembolic and bleeding events in patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF) treated with warfarin and rivaroxaban. Anticoagulants such as warfarin and rivaroxaban are often recommended to reduce the risk of stroke in NVAF patients. The purpose of this study was to evaluate and compare thromboembolic and bleeding event rates for warfarin and rivaroxaban patients stratified by presence of chronic kidney disease (CKD). Methods: Claims from the IMS Health Real-World Data Adjudicated Claims database from 05/2011-6/2015 were analyzed. Adult patients with NVAF who had ≥6 months of baseline data prior to the first dispensing of warfarin or rivaroxaban after 11/2011 were included. Patients were followed until the end of index therapy or end of data availability/insurance coverage. Outcomes were stratified by presence of CKD for ischemic stroke, major bleeding, and a composite measure of thromboembolic events (ischemic stroke, myocardial infarction (MI) or venous thromboembolism (VTE)) and analyzed using hazard ratios (HRs). Adjustments for confounding were made with inverse probability of treatment weights (IPTW). Results: The analysis included 39,872 rivaroxaban (9.0% [3,572 of 39,872] with CKD) and 48,637 warfarin patients (16.9% [8,230 of 48,637] with CKD). As expected, thromboembolic and bleeding events were more common in patients with CKD than those without CKD. Rivaroxaban patients had significantly lower risk of ischemic stroke, both in the overall population (HR = 0.79 [0.68-0.90], p=0.0008) and for those with CKD (HR = 0.55 [0.40-0.77], p=0.0004). A composite of thromboembolic events were lower with rivaroxaban irrespective of CKD. Major bleeding rates were comparable across all groups. Table 1 reports incidence rates and HRs stratified by presence of CKD. Conclusions: This study suggests that, in an adult population with NVAF, rivaroxaban-treated patients had fewer ischemic strokes across all patients, including patients with renal impairment. Rivaroxaban-treated patients also had significantly better outcomes for the composite (VTE, MI, or stroke) measure across all groups. Bleeding rates were comparable across all groups.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".