Thomas, Laine

Introduction: Guidelines are increasingly recommending a goal LDL-C <55 mg/dL in persons with atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD). The proportion and characteristics of US adults with ASCVD with an LDL-C <55 mg/dL remains unclear. Aims: To evaluate lipid management in ASCVD patients and factors associated with achieving an LDL-C <55mg/dL. Methods: Using electronic health record data from 8 US health systems, we evaluated LDL-C levels and treatment patterns in persons with prevalent ASCVD seen as outpatients between 1/1/2021-12/31/2021 with an LDL-C level within the prior year. Multivariable logistic regression modeling with generalized estimating equations was used to evaluate factors associated with an LDL-C <55 mg/dL. Results: Among 178,240 eligible ASCVD patients, 43.5% (77,472) had an LDL- C <70 mg/dL and 22.0% (39,270) had an LDL-C <55 mg/dL. Older age was associated with higher odds of LDL-C <55 mg/dL (OR 1.10 per 10 years, 95% CI 1.07-1.13), while female sex (OR 0.71, 95% CI 0.68-0.64) Black race (OR 0.77, 95% CI 0.70-0.86), and non-coronary artery disease forms of ASCVD including peripheral artery disease (PAD, OR 0.61, 95% CI 0.58-0.64) and cerebrovascular disease (CeVD, OR 0.72, 95% CI 0.66-0.79) were associated with lower odds of LDL-C <55 mg/dL in multivariable modeling. Overall, while 75.0% were on a statin, only 36.9% were on a high-intensity statin, 5.7% were on ezetimibe, and 1.7% were on a PCSK9i. Combination therapy was rare: only 4.2% were on a statin+ezetimibe, 0.5% on statin+PCSK9i, and 0.3% on all three. Conclusions: Less than a quarter of US patients with ASCVD achieve an LDL <55 mg/dL. Achieving this goal is even less common among younger adults, women, Black persons, and those with PAD and CeVD. Current therapeutic regimens often fail to use high-intensity statins, and markedly underutilize combinations of statins with ezetimibe and/or PCSK9 inhibitors.

Objective: To compare 12-month post-treatment health-related quality of life (HR-QoL) and symptom severity (SS) changes among patients with symptomatic uterine fibroids (SUF) not seeking fertility and undergo a hysterectomy, abdominal myomectomy (AM), or uterine artery embolization (UAE). Materials and Methods: The Comparing Options for Management: Patient-Centered Results for Uterine Fibroids (COMPARE-UF) Registry is a multi-institutional prospective observational cohort study of patients treated for SUF. A subset of 1465 women 31–45 years of age, who underwent either hysterectomy ( n = 741), AM ( n = 446), or UAE ( n = 155) were included in this analysis. Demographics, fibroid history, and symptoms were obtained by baseline questionnaires and at 1 year post-treatment. Results were stratified by all treatments and propensity score weighting to adjust for differences in baseline characteristics. Results: Women undergoing UAE reported the lowest baseline HR-QoL and highest SS scores (mean = 40.6 [standard deviation (SD) = 23.8]; 62.3 [SD = 24.2]) followed by hysterectomy (44.3 [24.3]; 59.8 [SD = 24.1]). At 12 months, women who underwent a hysterectomy experienced the largest change in both HR-QoL (48.7 [26.2]) and SS (51.9 [25.6]) followed by other uterine-sparing treatments. Propensity score weighting revealed all treatments produced substantial improvement, with hysterectomy patients reporting the highest HR-QoL score (92.0 [17.8]) compared with myomectomy (86.7 [17.2]) and UAE (82.6 [21.5]) ( p < 0.0001). Similarly, hysterectomy patients reported the lowest SS scores (8.2 [15.1]) compared with myomectomy (16.5 [15.1]) and UAE (19.6 [17.5]) ( p < 0.0001). Conclusion: All procedures showed improvement in HR-QoL and reduction in SS score at 12 months, hysterectomy showing maximum improvement. Of importance, at 12 months, patients who underwent either a myomectomy or UAE reported comparable symptom relief and HR-QoL. Clinicaltrials.Gov Identifier: NCT02260752.

Introduction: Higher body mass index (BMI) is an independent risk factor for incident atrial fibrillation (AF). However, its impact on management strategies and clinical outcomes among patients with prevalent AF is unclear. Methods: The study cohort included patients with AF enrolled in the Outcomes Registry for Better Informed Treatment of Atrial Fibrillation (ORBIT-AF) registry from June 2010 through August 2011. Participants with BMI > 18.5 kg/m2 were stratified into normal (18.5 - 25 kg/m2), overweight (25 - 30 kg/m2), Class I obese (30 - 35 kg/m2), Class II obese (35 - 40 kg/m2), and Class III obese (>40 kg/m2) categories. Unadjusted and adjusted Cox frailty models were constructed to assess the categorical and continuous association of BMI with AF progression, mortality, and incidence of thromboembolic events. Results: We evaluated 9,606 patients with AF (mean age: 74 + 11 years; 42% women) from 174 US ORBIT participating practices. Patients in the higher BMI categories were younger and had a higher prevalence of comorbidities such as diabetes, hypertension, and obstructive sleep apnea. AF symptom burden was greatest among patients in extreme BMI categories. Proportional use of anticoagulation, antiarrhythmic drugs, and invasive rhythm control strategies was significantly greater among patients in higher BMI categories. Rates for mortality and stroke/non-CNS embolism decreased in a near linear fashion across successively higher BMI categories (P<0.001; Table). After multivariable adjustment, higher BMI categories were associated with lower risk for mortality (p = 0.0002), with the lowest risk observed among overweight patients [Hazard Ratio (HR) (95% CI): 0.65 (0.54 - 0.79) ref. group: normal weight]. For every 5-kg/m2 increase in BMI, the odds of risk-adjusted mortality were 6% lower [HR (95% CI): 0.94 (0.89 - 0.98)]. In contrast, the association between BMI and risk for stroke/non-CNS embolism was significant on unadjusted analysis (P <0.001) but attenuated after adjustment for risk factors (P = 0.78; Table). No significant association was observed between BMI and AF progression rates in either unadjusted (P = 0.35) or adjusted analyses (P = 0.17). Conclusion: Among patients with AF, higher BMI was associated with a greater use of anticoagulation, rhythm control strategies, and lower mortality risk.

Background: Interruption of OAC is often required for invasive procedures, yet the frequency, management, and outcomes of temporary interruptions (TIs) in community practice are unknown. Methods: We assessed the frequency and reasons for TI in outpatients with AF enrolled in the Outcomes Registry for Better Informed Treatment of AF (ORBIT-AF). Patient characteristics and use of bridging anticoagulants were analyzed. Endpoints included periprocedural adverse events (bleeding, thrombotic, or other) and cause-specific hospitalization within 30 days after TI. Results: Overall 7,372 patients were treated with OAC at baseline; 30% (n=2200) required at least 1 TI during median follow-up of 1 year. Patients requiring TI were similar in age (mean age 74 for both) and CHADS2 scores (mean 2.4 for both) to those not requiring TI. Among 3104 interruptions, the most commonly-identified reasons were for non-cardiac surgery (n=827, 27%), followed by endoscopic procedures (n=551, 18%) and cardiac catheterization (n=308, 10%). Bridging anticoagulants were used in 23% (n=709) of interruptions, including low-molecular weight heparin (n=512) or unfractionated heparin (n=109). Rates of bridging were highest during cardiac surgery (44%), cardiac catheterization (32%), and catheter ablation (33%). Patients with a prior stroke or TIA were significantly more likely to receive bridging (35% vs. 25%, p=0.0003), however there was no difference between patients with CHADS2 score >=2 vs. 0-1 (27% vs. 25%, p=NS). Adverse events during interruption were more common in bridged patients (5.1% vs. 2.9%, p=0.02), including bleeding events (3.6% vs. 1.8%, p=0.02); thrombotic events were uncommon (0.7 [n=4] vs. 0.5% [n=10], p=NS). After interruption, adverse events occurred early in follow-up (Figure), and bridged patients were more likely to experience any adverse event (13% vs. 6.3%, p<0.0001), cardiovascular hospitalization (4.3% vs. 2.3%, p=0.02), and bleeding hospitalization (2.2% vs. 0.7%, p=0.002) within 30 days. Conclusions: Temporary interruptions are common in patients receiving OAC for AF, however, bridging anticoagulation is used in a minority. Bleeding events following TI occurred significantly more often in patients receiving bridging anticoagulation.

Background: Dabigatran is a novel oral anticoagulant approved in October 2010 for thromboprophylaxis in atrial fibrillation (AF), yet patterns of adoption of this novel agent in clinical practice are unknown. Methods: Using the ORBIT-AF Registry, a national outpatient prospective AF registry involving 170 sites, we examined patterns of those switching to dabigatran from warfarin from 2010 to 2012. Results: Of 7,066 patients with AF receiving warfarin at baseline, 511 (7%) were switched to dabigatran during follow-up. Patients switched to dabigatran were younger (median age 73 vs. 76, p<0.0001), more likely to be White (94% vs. 89%, p=0.001), and had better kidney function (median creatinine clearance (CrCl) 77 mL/min vs. 69 mL/min, p<0.0001), but less likely to have a history of anemia, (14% vs. 18%, p=0.009) or history of any cerebrovascular disease (14% vs. 17%, p=0.04) or CAD (22% vs. 34%, p<0.0001) or be followed in an anticoagulation clinic (36% vs. 45%, p<0.0001). Patients switched to dabigatran were more likely to have been recently diagnosed with AF (5.3% vs. 3.0%, p=0.03), and their CHADS 2 scores were significantly lower (p<0.0001). Conclusions: Patients receiving warfarin who were switched to dabigatran were younger, with lower CHADS 2 scores, better kidney function, and less concomitant cardiovascular disease than those not switched. This conservative transition pattern suggests greater physician emphasis on bleeding avoidance than on stroke risk reduction.

Introduction: Randomized trials have not demonstrated significant differences in stroke, heart failure or mortality between rhythm and rate control strategies for management of atrial fibrillation (AF). The comparative outcomes in contemporary clinical practice are not well described. The objective of this study was to evaluate outcomes in clinical practice with rhythm control versus rate control strategy. Methods: Patients managed with a rhythm control strategy targeting maintenance of sinus rhythm were retrospectively compared with a strategy of rate control alone in a AF registry across various US practice settings. Unadjusted and adjusted (inverse-propensity weighted) outcomes were estimated. Results: The overall study population (n=6988) had a median age of 74 (25th, 75th percentile 65, 81) years, 56% were males, 77% had first detected or paroxysmal AF and 89% had CHA2DS2-VASc score ≥2. In unadjusted analyses, rhythm control was associated with lower all-cause death, cardiovascular death, first stroke/non-central nervous system systemic embolization/transient ischemic attack, or first major bleeding event (all p<0.05); however, rhythm control was associated with more cardiovascular hospitalizations (HR 1.24, 95% CI 1.10-1.39, p=0.0003; Figure). Conclusion: Among patients with AF in clinical practice, rhythm control was not superior to rate control strategy for outcomes of stroke, heart failure, or mortality, but was associated with more cardiovascular hospitalizations.

Background: The Atrial Fibrillation Effect on QualiTy-of-Life (AFEQT) survey has recently been validated to measure the impact of atrial fibrillation on patients’ quality of life, but a clinically important difference (CID) in AFEQT score has not been defined. Knowing the CID is needed to interpret the meaningfulness of differences between treatments in clinical trials; or patient populations for quality assessment. Objectives: To calculate CID values in AFEQT in the ORBIT registry. Methods: ORBIT-AF is a US-based outpatient AF registry that measured disease-specific QoL with the AFEQT tool (score range= 0 (worst) to 100) at baseline and at 1 year follow-up. Two anchor-based methods were used to relate changes in AFEQT to clinically important differences in the more established European Heart Rhythm Association (EHRA) measure of functional status. Ranging from 1 (no symptoms) to 4 (disabling), a change of 1 EHRA class was defined as an important change in the anchor. Both the mean change and receiver operating characteristics (ROC) methods were then used to identify CIDs in AFEQT at 1 year follow-up. This was done for both improvement and worsening on the anchor. The mean change method defines a CID as the mean change in AFEQT score among patients with a 1 EHRA class change. The ROC method identifies a CID as the point on the ROC curve that best discriminates patients who experienced an important change in the anchor (≥ 1 EHRA class change) from those who experienced no change. Results: AFEQT was assessed in 2008 AF patients at baseline and 1347 patients at 1 year from 99 US sites participating in ORBIT-AF. CIDs and 95% confidence intervals (CI) corresponding to an improvement in EHRA for the mean change method were 5.4 (3.6, 7.2) AFEQT points and 1.9 (0.4, 9.3) AFEQT points for the ROC method. CIDs corresponding to worsening in EHRA for the mean change method were -4.2 (-6.9,-1.5) AFEQT points and -7.4 (-13.9,-4.6) AFEQT points for the ROC method. Conclusions: Changes in AFEQT as small as 2 points may be clinically relevant, although CIDs vary depending on the method of calculation. The variability suggests identifying a single universal CID to assess improvement in quality of life in AF patients may not be ideal and improvement may relate to the nature of a patient’s symptoms and their baseline level of activity.

Introduction: Warfarin and non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants (NOACs) such as dabigatran are effective for the prevention of stroke and systemic embolism in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF). However, few analyses have compared persistence rates of warfarin vs. dabigatran-treated patients. Methods: The ORBIT-AF registry enrolled patients with AF from 173 clinical practices across the US. One-year persistence of warfarin vs. dabigatran was defined as treatment at baseline visit and at 1-year follow-up. Multivariable logistic regression analysis was used to identify characteristics associated with warfarin or NOAC persistent use. Results: At baseline, 6.4% (N=459/7,150) were treated with dabigatran and 93.6% (N=6,691/7,150) with warfarin. Patients treated with warfarin at baseline were older (74 vs. 71, p<.0001), had more NYHA class III/IV heart failure (7 vs. 5, p=.0007), lower creatinine clearance (77 vs. 88, p<.0001), higher CHA2DS2-VASc risk scores, and more prior CVA/TIA events (16 vs. 11, p=.003). Patients treated with dabigatran had more severe symptoms (EHRA class III: 20 vs. 14, p<.0001), higher rates of treatment with a rhythm control strategy (42.7 vs. 28.2, p<.0001), more attempts at cardioversion (38.3 vs. 32.1, p<.006), and catheter ablation of AF (9.8 vs. 5.2, p<.0001). At 12 months, adjusted persistence rates for warfarin were higher than dabigatran [82% (80-84) vs. 67% (61-73) p<.0001]. Factors independently associated with one year persistence were: African American race (OR 1.53, 95% C.I. 1.07-2.19, p=0.02), Hispanic race (OR 1.66, 95% C.I. 1.06-2.60), paroxysmal AF (vs. new onset) (OR 1.68, 95% C.I. 1.21-2.33, p=.002), LVH (OR 1.40, 95% C.I. 1.08-1.81, p=.01), persistent AF (vs. new onset) (OR 1.91, 95% C.I. 1.35-2.69, p=.0002), and CHA2DS2-VASc risk scores ≥ 2 (OR 1.94, 95% C.I. 1.18-3.19, p=.009). Conclusion: Persistence rates for warfarin were higher at one year than those on dabigatran. In addition, factors associated with persistence of warfarin include: African American and Hispanic race, type of AF including permanent and persistent, LVH, and CHA2DS2-VASc risk scores ≥ 2.

Background: Little is known about whether insurance status affects the presentation and treatment of patients with atrial fibrillation (AF). Methods: We used data from the ORBIT-AF Registry (2010 - 2011), a national, large outpatient registry, to evaluate clinical characteristics and oral anticoagulation (OAC) use. We examined differences in comorbidities and receipt of OAC among patients enrolled in the Medicaid program at baseline compared with those not enrolled in Medicaid. After restricting to patients who were taking OAC, we compared receipt of novel oral anticoagulants (dabigatran or rivaroxaban) versus warfarin by Medicaid status during 2 years of followup. We used logistic regression models adjusting for demographic and clinical covariates to evaluate baseline OAC receipt by Medicaid status. Results: Of 10,133 patients, N=470 (4.6%) were classified as having Medicaid insurance. Compared with those with other insurance, Medicaid patients were younger (70.0 years; IQR=61.0 - 79.0 vs. 75.0 years; IQR=67.0 - 82.0), more likely to be female (53.0% vs. 41.8%), and less likely to be white (58.7% vs. 90.7%; all p<0.001). Medicaid patients had higher rates of smoking, prior stroke/TIA, diabetes, hypertension, and HF. Medicaid patients were less likely to be taking OAC at baseline, a difference that was particularly pronounced for high stroke risk patients (CHADS2>=2, p<0.001; Table). Among those on anticoagulation, Medicaid patients were less likely to receive NOAC over 2 years of followup. In adjusted analyses, Medicaid patients were less likely to receive OAC at baseline, but this difference was not statistically significant (HR = 0.82; 95% CI = 0.61, 1.09). Among untreated patients with CHADS2>=2, Medicaid patients were more likely than patients with other insurance to have “unable to adhere/monitor” listed as a contraindication to OAC (p<0.001). Conclusions: In a contemporary, community-based AF cohort, Medicaid patients had a greater comorbidity burden and higher stroke risk, yet were less likely to receive OAC compared with those with other forms of insurance.

Background: Novel therapies for stroke prevention in atrial fibrillation (AF) are emerging. However, data on use and outcomes of these agents in the community are limited, particularly in patients newly diagnosed with AF or recently transitioned to a novel anticoagulant. Methods: Phase II of the Outcomes Registry for Better Informed Treatment of Atrial Fibrillation (ORBIT-AF II) is a multicenter, national, AF registry. We are enrolling 15,000 patients with new-onset AF, or those with known AF recently-transitioned to a novel anticoagulant. The primary objective is to evaluate the safety of novel anticoagulants, with specific focus on use, transitions, and management around invasive procedures and bleeding events. An adaptive design is used to ensure diversity of enrollment across geographic, provider, and treatment groups. The primary outcomes are major bleeding and thromboembolic events. Results: Of 1,011 patients in ORBIT-AF II, the median age was 73, 44% were female, 23% had a history of heart failure, 34% had a prior MI, and 11% had a prior stroke/TIA. The mean CHADS2 score was 2. Overall, 76% had AF new-onset, and a range of anticoagulant strategies was used in these patients (Figure). Among the 24% with known AF transitioned to a novel agent, 66% received rivaroxaban, versus 8.1% dabigatran, and 26% apixaban. Compared with patients having new-onset AF, those with known AF recently-transitioned to a novel anticoagulant were slightly older (median age 74 vs. 72), had higher CHADS2 scores (>2 in 70% vs. 62%), but less severe kidney disease (0 vs. 1.7%). Conclusions: Patients with new-onset AF are frequently treated with novel anticoagulants and these patients have lower risk scores than those with known AF transitioned to a novel drug. These data will provide insights into clinical management and patient centered outcomes among those treated with novel anticoagulants in real world practice settings.