MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4403817256 · doi:10.1093/eurheartj/ehae666.605

Clinical outcomes in >10,000 Asian vs >61,000 Non-Asian race patients with AF randomized to Warfarin vs DOACs: a patient-level meta-analyses from COMBINE AF

2024· article· en· W4403817256 on OpenAlexaff
Tze‐Fan Chao, Eugene Braunwald, Michael G. Palazzolo, Elliott M. Antman, Anthony Carnicelli, Stuart J. Connolly, John W. Eikelboom, Christopher B. Granger, Manesh R. Patel, Christian T. Ruff, L Wallentin, Robert P. Giugliano

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Heart Journal · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAtrial Fibrillation Management and Outcomes
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineMeta-analysisInternal medicineWarfarinRandomized controlled trialCardiologyAtrial fibrillation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background Randomized data comparing clinical outcomes of atrial fibrillation (AF) patients with Asian vs non-Asian races are limited. Methods Using the COMBINE AF (A Collaboration Between Multiple Institutions to Better Investigate Non-Vitamin K Antagonist Oral Anticoagulant Use in Atrial Fibrillation) database (data from RE-LY, ROCKET AF, ARISTOTLE, and ENGAGE AF-TIMI 48), we performed an individual patient-level meta-analysis to investigate and compare clinical outcomes of AF patients with self-defined Asian and non-Asian races adjusted for baseline characteristics. Standard-dose direct oral anticoagulants (SD DOAC) were defined as dabigatran 150mg bid; rivaroxaban 20mg (15mg) QD, apixaban 5 mg (2.5 mg) bid, or edoxaban 60 mg (30 mg) QD. Low-dose DOACs (DOACs [LD]) were defined as dabigatran 110 mg bid or edoxaban 30 mg (15mg) QD. Results There were 10,212 pts of Asian race and 61,471 non-Asian races in the COMBINE AF database. Compared with non-Asians, Asians were on average 3.2 yrs younger, 20 kg lighter, had worse renal function (mean CrCl 64.9 vs. 77.3 mL/min), and higher rates of prior stroke/transient ischemic attack (37.2% vs 26.6%), P<0.001 for each. The median value of time in therapeutic range of patients randomized to warfarin was lower in Asians than non-Asians (57.7% vs. 66.2%, P<0.001). In the warfarin arm, Asians had a higher adjusted risk of stroke/systemic embolic events (SEE), major bleeding (MB), ICH, GI bleeding (GIB), and net clinical outcome (NCO: stroke/SEE, MB, or death)(Figure; Upper panel). Compared to warfarin, SD DOACs significantly reduced the risks of stroke/SEE, MB, and NCO to a greater degree in Asians than non-Asians (HR stroke/SEE: Asians 0.65 vs Non-Asians 0.86; HR MB: Asians 0.62 vs Non-Asians 0.91; HR NCO: Asians 0.76 vs non-Asians 0.94; Pint <0.02 for each), while SD DOACs increased GIB only in non-Asians (Asian HR 0.92 [0.69-1.23] vs Non-Asians HR 1.41 [1.25-1.58], Pint 0.009; Figure Lower panel). Conclusions The adjusted risks of stroke/SEE and major bleeding with warfarin were higher in Asians compared to non-Asians. The benefits of DOACs over warfarin in preventing stroke/SEE, MB, and net clinical outcomes were significantly greater in Asians than non-Asians.

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)0.010
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.016
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: Meta-analysis
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.055

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0100.016
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0100.037
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.223
GPT teacher head0.419
Teacher spread0.196 · 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 designMeta-analysis
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

Citations1
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEuropean Heart Journal→Same topicAtrial Fibrillation Management and Outcomes→French-language works237,207→