Impact of gender: Rivaroxaban for patients with atrial fibrillation in the <scp>XANTUS</scp> real‐world prospective study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The XANTUS study (NCT01606995) demonstrated low rates of stroke and major bleeding in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) receiving rivaroxaban in clinical practice for the prevention of thromboembolic events (N = 6784). HYPOTHESIS: Because previous real-world studies have not reported gender-dependent responses to rivaroxaban treatment, this sub-analysis of the XANTUS study investigated the effect of gender on outcomes. METHODS: The centrally adjudicated outcomes were compared between genders. Primary outcomes were major bleeding and all-cause death. Secondary outcomes included symptomatic thromboembolic events. Multivariable Cox regression analysis was performed to assess the effect of risk factors on outcomes between genders. RESULTS: A total of 2765 female and 4016 male patients were included in the analysis. Baseline characteristics were generally similar. No nominally significant interaction between gender and risk factors for the study outcomes was observed. Rates of major bleeding, all-cause death and symptomatic thromboembolic events in patients with non-valvular AF receiving rivaroxaban for stroke prevention were similar in men and women; no significant differences in risk factors for these outcomes were observed between genders. CONCLUSIONS: Further research is needed to better characterize the relative importance of different risk factors on outcomes in men vs women and to determine whether gender differences exist in patients treated with non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants.
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 | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".