The Changing Landscape for Stroke\ua0Prevention in AF: Findings From the GLORIA-AF Registry Phase 2

Background GLORIA-AF (Global Registry on Long-Term Oral Antithrombotic Treatment in Patients with Atrial Fibrillation) is a prospective, global registry program describing antithrombotic treatment patterns in patients with newly diagnosed nonvalvular atrial fibrillation at risk of stroke. Phase 2 began when dabigatran, the first non\u2013vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulant (NOAC), became available. Objectives This study sought to describe phase 2 baseline data and compare these with the pre-NOAC era collected during phase 1. Methods During phase 2, 15,641 consenting patients were enrolled (November 2011 to December 2014); 15,092 were eligible. This pre-specified cross-sectional analysis describes eligible patients\u2019 baseline characteristics. Atrial fibrillation disease characteristics, medical outcomes, and concomitant diseases and medications were collected. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics. Results Of the total patients, 45.5% were female; median age was 71 (interquartile range: 64, 78) years. Patients were from Europe (47.1%), North America (22.5%), Asia (20.3%), Latin America (6.0%), and the Middle East/Africa (4.0%). Most had high stroke risk (CHA2DS2-VASc [Congestive heart failure, Hypertension, Age  6575 years, Diabetes mellitus, previous Stroke, Vascular disease, Age 65 to 74 years, Sex category] score  652; 86.1%); 13.9% had moderate risk (CHA2DS2-VASc = 1). Overall, 79.9% received oral anticoagulants, of whom 47.6% received NOAC and 32.3% vitamin K antagonists (VKA); 12.1% received antiplatelet agents; 7.8% received no antithrombotic treatment. For comparison, the proportion of phase 1 patients (of N = 1,063 all eligible) prescribed VKA was 32.8%, acetylsalicylic acid 41.7%, and no therapy 20.2%. In Europe in phase 2, treatment with NOAC was more common than VKA (52.3% and 37.8%, respectively); 6.0% of patients received antiplatelet treatment; and 3.8% received no antithrombotic treatment. In North America, 52.1%, 26.2%, and 14.0% of patients received NOAC, VKA, and antiplatelet drugs, respectively; 7.5% received no antithrombotic treatment. NOAC use was less common in Asia (27.7%), where 27.5% of patients received VKA, 25.0% antiplatelet drugs, and 19.8% no antithrombotic treatment. Conclusions The baseline data from GLORIA-AF phase 2 demonstrate that in newly diagnosed nonvalvular atrial fibrillation patients, NOAC have been highly adopted into practice, becoming more frequently prescribed than VKA in Europe and North America. Worldwide, however, a large proportion of patients remain undertreated, particularly in Asia and North America. (Global Registry on Long-Term Oral Antithrombotic Treatment in Patients With Atrial Fibrillation [GLORIA-AF]; NCT01468701

Prognostic assessment of different lymph node staging methods for pancreatic cancer with R0 resection: pN staging, lymph node ratio, log odds of positive lymph nodes.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Survival after surgical resection of pancreatic adenocarcinoma is poor. Several prognostic factors such as the status of the resection margin, lymph node status, or tumour grading have been identified. The aims of the present study were to evaluate and compare the prognostic assessment of different lymph nodes staging methods: standard lymph node (pN) staging, metastatic lymph node ratio (LNR), and log odds of positive lymph nodes (LODDS) in pancreatic cancer after pancreatic resection. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Data were retrospectively collected from 143 patients who had undergone R0 pancreatic resection for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma. Survival curves (Kaplan-Meier and Cox proportional hazard models), accuracy, and homogeneity of the 3 methods (LNR, LODDS, and pN) were compared to evaluate the prognostic effects. RESULTS: Multivariate analysis demonstrated that LODDS and LNR were an independent prognostic factors, but not pN classification. The scatter plots of the relationship between LODDS and the LNR suggested that the LODDS stage had power to divide patients with the same ratio of node metastasis into different groups. For patients in each of the pN or LNR classifications, significant differences in survival could be observed among patients in different LODDS stages. CONCLUSION: LODDS and LNR are more powerful predictors of survival than the lymph node status in patients undergoing pancreatic resection for ductal adenocarcinoma. LODDS allows better prognostic stratification comparing LNR in node negative patients