25 research outputs found

    Why Are Outcomes Different for Registry Patients Enrolled Prospectively and Retrospectively? Insights from the Global Anticoagulant Registry in the FIELD-Atrial Fibrillation (GARFIELD-AF).

    Get PDF
    Background: Retrospective and prospective observational studies are designed to reflect real-world evidence on clinical practice, but can yield conflicting results. The GARFIELD-AF Registry includes both methods of enrolment and allows analysis of differences in patient characteristics and outcomes that may result. Methods and Results: Patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) and ≥1 risk factor for stroke at diagnosis of AF were recruited either retrospectively (n = 5069) or prospectively (n = 5501) from 19 countries and then followed prospectively. The retrospectively enrolled cohort comprised patients with established AF (for a least 6, and up to 24 months before enrolment), who were identified retrospectively (and baseline and partial follow-up data were collected from the emedical records) and then followed prospectively between 0-18 months (such that the total time of follow-up was 24 months; data collection Dec-2009 and Oct-2010). In the prospectively enrolled cohort, patients with newly diagnosed AF (≤6 weeks after diagnosis) were recruited between Mar-2010 and Oct-2011 and were followed for 24 months after enrolment. Differences between the cohorts were observed in clinical characteristics, including type of AF, stroke prevention strategies, and event rates. More patients in the retrospectively identified cohort received vitamin K antagonists (62.1% vs. 53.2%) and fewer received non-vitamin K oral anticoagulants (1.8% vs . 4.2%). All-cause mortality rates per 100 person-years during the prospective follow-up (starting the first study visit up to 1 year) were significantly lower in the retrospective than prospectively identified cohort (3.04 [95% CI 2.51 to 3.67] vs . 4.05 [95% CI 3.53 to 4.63]; p = 0.016). Conclusions: Interpretations of data from registries that aim to evaluate the characteristics and outcomes of patients with AF must take account of differences in registry design and the impact of recall bias and survivorship bias that is incurred with retrospective enrolment. Clinical Trial Registration: - URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov . Unique identifier for GARFIELD-AF (NCT01090362)

    Risk profiles and one-year outcomes of patients with newly diagnosed atrial fibrillation in India: Insights from the GARFIELD-AF Registry.

    Get PDF
    BACKGROUND: The Global Anticoagulant Registry in the FIELD-Atrial Fibrillation (GARFIELD-AF) is an ongoing prospective noninterventional registry, which is providing important information on the baseline characteristics, treatment patterns, and 1-year outcomes in patients with newly diagnosed non-valvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF). This report describes data from Indian patients recruited in this registry. METHODS AND RESULTS: A total of 52,014 patients with newly diagnosed AF were enrolled globally; of these, 1388 patients were recruited from 26 sites within India (2012-2016). In India, the mean age was 65.8 years at diagnosis of NVAF. Hypertension was the most prevalent risk factor for AF, present in 68.5% of patients from India and in 76.3% of patients globally (P < 0.001). Diabetes and coronary artery disease (CAD) were prevalent in 36.2% and 28.1% of patients as compared with global prevalence of 22.2% and 21.6%, respectively (P < 0.001 for both). Antiplatelet therapy was the most common antithrombotic treatment in India. With increasing stroke risk, however, patients were more likely to receive oral anticoagulant therapy [mainly vitamin K antagonist (VKA)], but average international normalized ratio (INR) was lower among Indian patients [median INR value 1.6 (interquartile range {IQR}: 1.3-2.3) versus 2.3 (IQR 1.8-2.8) (P < 0.001)]. Compared with other countries, patients from India had markedly higher rates of all-cause mortality [7.68 per 100 person-years (95% confidence interval 6.32-9.35) vs 4.34 (4.16-4.53), P < 0.0001], while rates of stroke/systemic embolism and major bleeding were lower after 1 year of follow-up. CONCLUSION: Compared to previously published registries from India, the GARFIELD-AF registry describes clinical profiles and outcomes in Indian patients with AF of a different etiology. The registry data show that compared to the rest of the world, Indian AF patients are younger in age and have more diabetes and CAD. Patients with a higher stroke risk are more likely to receive anticoagulation therapy with VKA but are underdosed compared with the global average in the GARFIELD-AF. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION-URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT01090362

    Comparison of international normalized ratio audit parameters in patients enrolled in GARFIELD-AF and treated with vitamin K antagonists

    Full text link
    Vitamin K antagonist (VKA) therapy for stroke prevention in atrial fibrillation (AF) requires monitoring of the international normalized ratio (INR). We evaluated the agreement between two INR audit parameters, frequency in range (FIR) and proportion of time in the therapeutic range (TTR), using data from a global population of patients with newly diagnosed non-valvular AF, the Global Anticoagulant Registry in the FIELD\u2013Atrial Fibrillation (GARFIELD-AF). Among 17\ua0168 patients with 1-year follow-up data available at the time of the analysis, 8445 received VKA therapy (\ub1antiplatelet therapy) at enrolment, and of these patients, 5066 with 653 INR readings and for whom both FIR and TTR could be calculated were included in the analysis. In total, 70\ua0905 INRs were analysed. At the patient level, TTR showed higher values than FIR (mean, 56\ub70% vs 49\ub78%; median, 59\ub77% vs 50\ub70%). Although patient-level FIR and TTR values were highly correlated (Pearson correlation coefficient [95% confidence interval; CI], 0\ub7860 [0\ub7852\u20130\ub7867]), estimates from individuals showed widespread disagreement and variability (Lin's concordance coefficient [95% CI], 0\ub7829 [0\ub7821\u20130\ub7837]). The difference between FIR and TTR explained 17\ub74% of the total variability of measurements. These results suggest that FIR and TTR are not equivalent and cannot be used interchangeably

    International trends in clinical characteristics and oral anticoagulation treatment for patients with atrial fibrillation: Results from the GARFIELD-AF, ORBIT-AF I, and ORBIT-AF II registries

    Full text link
    Background Atrial fibrillation (AF) is the most common cardiac arrhythmia in the world. We aimed to provide comprehensive data on international patterns of AF stroke prevention treatment

    Vitamin K antagonist control in patients with atrial fibrillation in Asia compared with other regions of the world: Real-world data from the GARFIELD-AF registry

    Full text link
    Objective: To compare the distribution of international normalized ratios (INRs) in patients receiving vitamin K antagonist (VKA) for newly diagnosed atrial fibrillation in Eastern and Southeastern Asia and in other regions of the world (ORW) represented in the ongoing, global observational study GARFIELD-AF

    Evolving antithrombotic treatment patterns for patients with newly diagnosed atrial fibrillation

    Full text link
    Objective We studied evolving antithrombotic therapy patterns in patients with newly diagnosed non-valvular atrial fibrillation (AF) and >= 1 additional stroke risk factor between 2010 and 2015

    Two-year outcomes of patients with newly diagnosed atrial fibrillation: results from GARFIELD-AF

    Full text link
    The relationship between outcomes and time after diagnosis for patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF) is poorly defined, especially beyond the first year

    Evolving quality standards for large-scale registries: the GARFIELD-AF experience

    Full text link
    Aim

    Early Risks of Death, Stroke/Systemic Embolism, and Major Bleeding in Patients With Newly Diagnosed Atrial Fibrillation Results From the GARFIELD-AF Registry

    Full text link
    BACKGROUND: Atrial fibrillation is associated with increased risks of death, stroke/systemic embolism, and bleeding (incurred by antithrombotic therapy), which may occur early after diagnosis

    Does sex affect anticoagulant use for stroke prevention in nonvalvular atrial fibrillation? The prospective global anticoagulant registry in the FIELD-Atrial Fibrillation.

    Get PDF
    BACKGROUND: Among patients with atrial fibrillation (AF), women are at higher risk of stroke than men. Using prospective cohort data from a large global population of patients with nonvalvular AF, we sought to identify any differences in the use of anticoagulants for stroke prevention in women and men. METHODS AND RESULTS: This was a prospective multicenter observational registry with 858 randomly selected sites in 30 countries. A total of 17 184 patients with newly diagnosed (≤6 weeks) nonvalvular AF and ≥1 additional investigator-defined stroke risk factor(s) were recruited (March 2010 to June 2013). The main outcome measure was the use of anticoagulants (vitamin K antagonists, factor Xa inhibitors, and direct thrombin inhibitors) for stroke prevention at AF diagnosis. Of 17 184 patients enrolled, 43.8% were women. More women than men were at moderate-to-high risk of stroke (CHADS2 score ≥2: 65.1% versus 54.7%). Rates of anticoagulant use were not different overall (60.9% of men versus 60.8% of women) and in patients with a CHADS2 score ≥2 (adjusted odds ratio for women versus men, 1.00; 95% confidence interval, 0.92-1.09). In patients at low risk (CHA2DS2-VASc of 0 in men and 1 in women), 41.8% of men and 41.1% of women received an anticoagulant. In patients at high risk (CHA2DS2-VASc score ≥2), 35.4% of men and 38.4% of women did not receive an anticoagulant. CONCLUSIONS: These contemporary global data show that anticoagulant use for stroke prevention is no different in men and women with nonvalvular AF. Thromboprophylaxis was, however, suboptimal in substantial proportions of men and women, with underuse in those at moderate-to-high risk of stroke and overuse in those at low risk. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT01090362
    corecore