Mahaffey, Kenneth W.

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.

Objective: Time in the therapeutic range (TTR) of INR 2.0-3.0 is an important measurement of warfarin anticoagulation quality. There are few reports on TTR in United States (US) clinical practice. Methods: Using the US ORBIT AF registry, we analyzed TTR for patients on warfarin with at least 5 recorded INR measurements. The Rosendaal method of linear interpolation was used between each pair of measured INR values. Patients were stratified into quartiles based on TTR. Results: We studied 5,451 patients treated at 169 US sites with 48% of patients being followed at an anticoagulation clinic. Patients had a median age of 76 years [interquartile range (IQR) 68-82 years] and median follow-up was 18.9 months [IQR 12.7-23.3 months], and patients were 42% women. The median number of INR draws was 21 [IQR 12-30]. Patients had an overall median TTR of 68% [IQR 52-80%]. The median TTR by quartile was 40%, 60%, 73%, and 87%. Patients were more likely to be subtherapeutic (median time of 17%) than supratherapeutic (median time of 10%). Patients age 61-80 years and those with a college education had the highest TTRs. Patients with their INR followed at an anticoagulation clinic were more likely to be in the highest TTR quartile than in the lowest (27% vs 23%, p=0.0002). Patients with worsening renal function and higher risk for bleeding (ATRIA) or stroke (CHADS2 score) had lower TTR (p<0.0001 for all) (Figure). Conclusions: In US clinical practices, warfarin patients have therapeutic INR levels about 2/3 of the time. Those at highest risk for stroke and bleeding paradoxically were the least likely to be in the therapeutic range.

Background Oral anticoagulation (OAC) can reduce stroke risk at the cost of increased bleeding risk in those with atrial fibrillation (AF). Observational data have shown that higher-risk patients with AF most likely to benefit from OAC are less likely to receive OAC at hospital discharge. Methods We used data from ORBIT-AF Registry, a cohort of 9,589 AF patients enrolled among 173 participating outpatient practices. OAC was defined as warfarin or dabigatran use at study enrollment. Stroke and bleeding risk were calculated using the CHADS2 and ATRIA scores, respectively. Results The study population had a mean age of 73.5 years; 57.8% were men. Overall, 76.4% of patients received OAC. Use of OAC rose with increasing CHADS2 stroke risk, from 67% for CHADS2 <1 to 80% for CHADS2 ≥2 (p<0.0001). OAC use fell slightly with increasing ATRIA bleeding risk, from 77% for ATRIA score ≤3 to 74% with ≥5 (p=0.002 for trend). Among patients with low bleeding risk, rates of OAC increased commensurate with stroke risk (p<0.0001 for interaction; see figure). Higher bleeding risk tended to decrease rates of OAC among patients with a CHADS2 score ≥2 (p=0.13 for interaction). Conclusions In community-based outpatients with AF, use of OAC rose with increasing thromboembolic risk and declined with higher bleeding risk. These findings suggest that the risk-treatment paradox may be less that previously reported. Provision of OAC in community practice appears to appropriately consider patients' stroke and bleeding risks. Further research is required to understand how quality improvement initiatives can further improve stroke prevention.

Background: Oral anticoagulation (OAC) is effective at preventing stroke in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF), yet warfarin is often poorly tolerated. Non-vitamin K oral anticoagulants (NOACs) are as or more effective as warfarin, yet their tolerance and persistence in clinical practice is not known. Methods: We assessed patterns of persistent OAC use among 2,345 AF patients starting on therapy in the ORBIT-AF II registry (71% starting on a NOAC, and 29% on warfarin). Results: By 6 months, 364 (22%) patients started on a NOAC had discontinued or changed initial therapy versus 143 (21%) started on warfarin initially (p=0.5). Among warfarin users, patients who switched or discontinued therapy were of similar age (median ages 72 and 74 vs. 74 for stable users, p=0.7) and CHA2DS2-VASc scores (mean 98 and 3.66 vs. 3.84, p=0.4). Among NOAC users, those who discontinued treatment were younger (median age 68 vs. 73 for those who switched and 72 for stable users; p=0.0004), and lower CHA2DS2-VASc scores (3.02 vs. 3.58 and 3.47, respectively; p=0.0008). The median time to change or discontinuation was more rapid in those started on a NOAC vs warfarin (97 days vs. 122 days, p=0.003). Among those on warfarin at baseline, 7.6% (n=52) were switched to a NOAC within 6 months, whereas transitions from NOAC to warfarin was 2.5% (n=42).Transitions among NOACs occurred in 9.8%, 3.2%, and 5.5% of patients on baseline dabigatran, rivaroxaban, and apixaban, respectively. Physician preference was the most common reason for both OAC and warfarin changes (Table). Drug cost was the primary reason for change of therapy in 15% of NOAC users (vs. 0 for warfarin). Conclusions: At 6-month follow-up, one in five newly started on OAC had discontinued or changed. These rates of change were similar among warfarin and NOAC treated patients. Cost concerns drove discontinuation in a modest number of patients, however, cost concerns were more prevalent in NOAC-treated patients.

Background: Non-vitamin K oral anticoagulants (NOACs) are effective at preventing stroke in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF). However, little is known about the frequency of major bleeds on NOACs and how these events are managed in clinical practice. Methods: We assessed the rates, management, and outcomes of ISTH major bleeding events among AF patients in the ORBIT-AF II registry (mean follow-up 213 days). Results: Overall, 103 patients experienced 110 major bleeding events during follow-up n=90/4986 (1.8%) on NOAC, and n=20/1320 (1.5%) on warfarin. Patients with bleeding events on NOAC were slightly younger than those on warfarin (median age 76 vs. 80; p=0.2). Among mutually-exclusive bleeding types, intracranial bleeding was more common in warfarin treated patients than NOAC-treated (15% vs 6.7%), whereas GI bleeding was more common on NOACs (56% vs. 40%, overall p=0.1 for bleeding type). Management of bleeding differed by anticoagulation type: blood products and reversal agents were more commonly used in patients on warfarin (Table). No patient received prothrombin complexes, recombinant factor VIIa, aminocaproic acid, tranexamic acid, aprotinin, or desmopressin. Out of 90 major bleeding events in NOAC patients, only 1 was fatal (1%). Within 30 days following bleeding, there were no strokes and 1 TIA (NOAC). Following a major bleed, the recurrent bleeding rate in NOAC patients in the next 30-days was 4% and the death rate was 4%. Conclusions: Rates of major bleeding with NOACs in clinical practice are comparable to those reported in clinical trials. Compared with warfarin, bleeding among NOAC users was less likely intracranial and more likely to be GI. Management of bleeding in the setting of NOAC rarely includes reversal agents.

Background: Patients with sinus node dysfunction (SND) are at increased risk of atrial tachyarrhythmias, including atrial fibrillation (AF). Whether the presence of SND is also associated with worse outcomes among those with AF has not been well described. Methods: The ORBIT-AF registry enrolled patients with AF from a range of clinical practices across the US. SND was defined clinically, based on the presence of sinus bradycardia, severe sinus bradycardia, sinus arrest, sinoatrial exit block, or features of tachycardia-bradycardia syndrome. Descriptive statistics and multivariable logistic regression analysis were used to describe treatment patterns and outcomes for patients with and without SND and AF. Results: Overall, 1,710 (17.7%) patients had SND at enrollment. Patients with SND had lower left-ventricular ejection fractions, higher CHA 2 DS 2 -VASc risk scores, and more prior cerebrovascular events. Patients with SND had more severe symptoms (EHRA class IV: 17.5% vs. 13.9%; p=0.007) and poorer quality of life (median AFEQT 77.5 vs. 81.1; p=0.008) as compared to those without. SND patients were more frequently treated with oral anticoagulants (79.2% vs. 75.9%, p=0.004) and had more often received interventional therapy for AF (16.1% vs. 10.5%, p<0.0001). There were no differences in the current AF management strategy between patients with SND and those without [rate control (69.7% vs. 67.7%), rhythm control (30.0% vs. 32.0%); P=0.11]. After adjustment, significantly more patients with SND had progressed from paroxysmal AF at baseline to persistent or permanent AF at any follow-up or persistent AF at baseline to permanent AF at any follow-up than those without (OR 1.23, 95% CI 1.01-1.49, p=0.035). Conclusion: Sinus node dysfunction is associated worse symptoms, lower quality of life, and higher risk of progression to permanent AF. However, SND is not associated with increased risk of all-cause hospitalization, incident stroke, or all-cause death.

Objective: Diabetes is a common among patients with atrial fibrillation (AF). However, little is known on the impact of diabetes on symptoms, health status, care and outcomes among AF patients. We assessed whether symptoms, health status, care and outcomes differ between AF patients with and without diabetes. Methods: This observational cohort study included 9,749 patients with AF from the Outcomes Registry for Better Informed Treatment of Atrial Fibrillation registry, a prospective, nationwide, multicenter outpatient registry of patients with incident and prevalent AF enrolled at 174 sites between June 2010 and August 2011. The outcomes were symptoms, health status, and AF treatment, as well as 2-year risks of death, readmission, thrombomebolic events, heart failure (HF) and AF progression. Results: Among AF patients; those with diabetes (29.5%) were younger and more likely to have hypertension, chronic kidney disease, HF, coronary heart disease, and stroke. Patients with diabetes had a lower Atrial Fibrillation Effects on Quality of Life score (80.6 [IQR: 62.5 - 92.6] vs. 82.4 [IQR: 67.6 -93.5]; P = 0.025), but a higher CHA 2 DS 2 -VASc score (5 [IQR: 4 - 6] vs. 4 [2 - 5]; P <0.0001) and were more likely to receive anticoagulation ( P <0.001). Diabetes was associated with higher mortality, with a greater overall (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR]: 1.63 [95% CI: 1.04-2.56] for age<70 vs. 1.25 [1.09-1.44] for age ≥70) and cardiovascular (2.20 [1.22-3.98] for age<70 vs. 1.24 [1.02-1.51] for age ≥70) mortality risks before age 70 years. Diabetes conferred a higher risk of non-cardiovascular (CV) death (1.29 [1.06-1.56]), sudden cardiac death (1.53 [1.04-2.26]), hospitalization (1.15 [1.09-1.22]), CV hospitalization (1.13 [1.05-1.22]) and non-CV and non-bleeding-related hospitalization (1.19 [1.10-1.30]); but no increase in risks of thromboembolic events, bleeding related hospitalization, new-onset HF, and AF progression. The use of oral anticoagulants (OAC) modifies the relation of diabetes and all-cause hospitalization, with a higher risk among those on OAC (1.21 [1.12-1.29]). Conclusions: Among patients with AF, diabetes was associated with worse AF symptoms and lower quality of life, as well an increased risk of death and hospitalizations, but not with the risk of thromboembolic or bleeding events.

Introduction: Patient understanding of available therapies for atrial fibrillation (AF) is foundational to shared medical decision making and long term medication adherence. Yet, there is a paucity of data regarding the extent to which patients newly diagnosed with AF in routine community practice understand their options. Hypotheses: 1) Understanding of warfarin, novel oral anticoagulants (NOAC), rhythm control therapy, cardioversion and radio frequency ablation changes little from baseline to 6 months and 2) treatment rates at 6 months are associated with patient understanding of therapies at baseline. Methods: We analyzed survey data from SATELLITE, a substudy of new-onset AF patients enrolled at 56 US sites participating in the ORBIT-AF registry. Patients were surveyed at the baseline and 6 month follow up clinic visit using Likert scales. Agreement between time points was assessed with the McNemar test, and the relationship between understanding and treatment was assessed only for the subset not on treatment at baseline. Results: Of 1000 patients enrolled in SATELLITE, 506 had 6-month survey data (data collection is continuing). Among these, the median age was 69.0 years (IQR 63.0 - 76.0) and 93.7% (474 of 506) were white. There was evidence of improvement in the self-reported understanding of warfarin and NOACs from baseline to 6 months, but not for rhythm control, ablation or cardioversion. The proportion reporting high understanding improved significantly for warfarin (p<.0001) and NOACs (p<.0001) from 47% (223 of 474) and 51% (245 of 481) at baseline to 60% (284 of 474) and 69% (332 of 481) at 6 months respectively (Figure 1). Patients with high understanding of the benefits of ablation (p=0.0005) and options for ablation (p=0.0093) at baseline were more likely to have this therapy at the 6 month follow up (N=590), but improved understanding was not associated with increased use of warfarin/NOACs (N=83) or rhythm control (N=444). Conclusions: Patients with new-onset AF had improved self-reported understanding of some treatment options over the first 6-months from diagnosis; however, factors other than patient understanding may influence AF treatments received at 6 months. Patient understanding of AF treatments remains suboptimal at 6 months, and our results suggest a need for ongoing patient education.

Abstract Patients hospitalized for pneumonia are at high risk for mortality. Effective therapies are therefore needed. Recent randomized clinical trials suggest that systemic steroids can reduce the length of hospital stays among patients hospitalized for pneumonia. Furthermore, preliminary findings from a feasibility study demonstrated that early treatment with a combination of an inhaled corticosteroid and a bronchodilator can improve oxygenation and reduce risk of respiratory failure in patients at risk of acute respiratory distress syndrome. Whether such a combination administered early is effective in reducing acute respiratory failure (ARF) among patients hospitalized with pneumonia is unknown. Here we describe the ARREST Pneumonia (Arrest Respiratory Failure due to Pneumonia) trial designed to address this question. ARREST Pneumonia is a two-arm, randomized, double-blinded, placebo-controlled trial designed to test the efficacy of a combination of an inhaled corticosteroid and a β-agonist compared with placebo for the prevention of ARF in hospitalized participants with severe pneumonia. The primary outcome is ARF within 7 days of randomization, defined as a composite endpoint of intubation and mechanical ventilation; need for high-flow nasal cannula oxygen therapy or noninvasive ventilation for &gt;36 hours (each alone or combined); or death within 36 hours of being placed on respiratory support. The planned enrollment is 600 adult participants at 10 academic medical centers. In addition, we will measure selected plasma biomarkers to better understand mechanisms of action. The trial is funded by the U.S. National Heart Lung and Blood Institute. Clinical trial registered with www.clinicaltrials.gov (NCT 04193878).