MO514: Cardiorenal Outcomes Associated With Oral Anticoagulant Use in Patients With Atrial Fibrillation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract BACKGROUND AND AIMS Novel oral anticoagulants (NOAC) are currently the first-line choice for stroke prevention in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF), as they have a better risk/benefit profile compared with vitamin K antagonists (VKA). Secondary analyses of trials suggest that NOAC also reduces kidney outcomes, but this has been less explored. METHOD Observational study from the SCREAM project comparing clinical outcomes of all persons with AF and eGFR ≥15 mL/min/1.73 m2 that initiated NOAC or VKA in Stockholm, Sweden, during 2011–18. The primary outcomes were acute kidney injury (AKI, by diagnosis or sudden creatinine elevation) and the composite of kidney failure and >30% eGFR decline. Secondary outcomes were major bleeding and the composite of hospital admission with stroke or systemic embolism. Inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) was used to balance 51 baseline confounders. Sensitivity analyses included falsification endpoints (pneumonia and cataract surgery), subgroups and evaluation of per-protocol effects. RESULTS A total of 32 699 patients initiated oral anticoagulants (median age, 75 years, 45% women, median eGFR 73 mL/min/1.73 m2), of which 18 323 (56%) used NOAC. Compared with VKA, initiation of NOAC was associated with a 13% lower relative risk of experiencing the composite kidney outcome (HR: 0.87; 95% CI 0.78–0.98) and a 12% relative risk reduction on AKI occurrence (HR: 0.88; 95% CI 0.80–0.97). Compared with VKA, NOAC use was associated with a lower risk of major bleeding (HR 0.77; 95% CI 0.67–0.89), but a similar risk of stroke/systemic embolism (HR: 0.93; 95% CI 0.78–1.11). Results were similar across subgroups, including patients with chronic kidney disease (eGFR <60 mL/min/1.73 m2) and when censoring patients at treatment discontinuation or switch. CONCLUSION Compared with VKA, and regardless of baseline kidney function, initiation of NOAC was associated with a lower risk of CKD progression, AKI and major bleeding, but a similar risk of the composite of stroke and systemic embolism.
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 | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".