MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4323653534 · doi:10.1161/jaha.122.026605

Variability in Nonvitamin K Oral Anticoagulant Dose Eligibility and Adjustment According to Renal Formulae and Clinical Outcomes in Patients With Atrial Fibrillation With and Without Chronic Kidney Disease: Insights From ORBIT‐AF II

2023· article· en· W4323653534 on OpenAlexaff
Ren Jie Robert Yao, DaJuanicia N. Holmes, Jason G. Andrade, Adeera Levin, Jonathan P. Piccini, Christopher B. Fordyce

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the American Heart Association · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAtrial Fibrillation Management and Outcomes
Canadian institutionsCentre for Advancing Health OutcomesUniversité de MontréalMontreal Heart InstituteBC Innovation CouncilUniversity of British Columbia
FundersDuke Clinical Research Institute
KeywordsMedicineRivaroxabanKidney diseaseAtrial fibrillationRenal functionInternal medicineDabigatranStroke (engine)DosingHazard ratioApixabanPopulationIntensive care medicineCardiologyWarfarinConfidence interval

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background Nonvitamin K oral anticoagulants require dose adjustment based on kidney function.The most common estimate of kidney function employed in clinical practice is estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR); however, product monographs recommend the use of the Cockcroft‐Gault estimated creatinine clearance (eCrCl) for dose adjustment. Methods and Results The authors included patients enrolled in the ORBIT‐AF II (Outcomes Registry for Better Informed Treatment of Atrial Fibrillation AF II) trial. Dosing was considered inappropriate when use of eGFR resulted in a lower (undertreatment) or higher (overtreatment) dose than that recommended by the eCrCl. The primary outcome of major adverse cardiovascular and neurological events was a composite of cardiovascular death, stroke or systemic embolism, new‐onset heart failure, and myocardial infarction. Among 8727 in the overall cohort, agreement between eCrCl and eGFR was observed in 93.5% to 93.8% of patients. Among 2184 patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD), the agreement between eCrCl and eGFR was 79.9% to 80.7%. Dosing misclassification was more frequent in the CKD population (41.9% of rivaroxaban users, 5.7% of dabigatran users, and 4.6% apixaban users). At 1 year, undertreated patients in the CKD group had significantly greater major adverse cardiovascular and neurological events (adjusted hazard ratio, 2.93 [95% CI, 1.08–7.92]) compared with the group with appropriate nonvitamin K oral anticoagulants dosing ( P =0.03). Conclusions The prevalence of misclassification of nonvitamin K oral anticoagulants dosing was high when using eGFR, particularly among patients with CKD. Among patients with CKD, potential undertreatment due to inappropriate and off‐label renal formulae may result in worse clinical outcomes. These findings highlight the importance of using eCrCl, and not eGFR, for dose adjustment in all patients with AF receiving nonvitamin K 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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.025
GPT teacher head0.345
Teacher spread0.320 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations7
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the American Heart Association→Same topicAtrial Fibrillation Management and Outcomes→French-language works237,207→