Comparative validation of HAS‐BLED, GARFIELD‐AF and ORBIT bleeding risk scores in Asian people with atrial fibrillation treated with oral anticoagulant: A report from the COOL‐AF registry

Author:

Chichareon Ply1ORCID,Winijkul Arjbordin2,Lip Gregory Y. H.34,Krittayaphong Rungroj2

Affiliation:

1. Cardiology Unit, Division of Internal Medicine, Faculty of Medicine Prince of Songkla University Songkhla Thailand

2. Division of Cardiology, Department of Medicine, Faculty of Medicine Siriraj Hospital Mahidol University Bangkok Thailand

3. Liverpool Centre for Cardiovascular Science at University of Liverpool Liverpool John Moores University and Liverpool Heart & Chest Hospital Liverpool UK

4. Department of Clinical Medicine Aalborg University Denmark

Abstract

AimsComparative data between the HAS‐BLED, GARFIELD‐AF and ORBIT score are limited in anticoagulated Asian patients with atrial fibrillation (AF). We compared the performance of the 3 scores in a nationwide registry.MethodsAF patients treated with oral anticoagulants in the COOL‐AF registry were studied. We fitted the variables of the HAS‐BLED, GARFIELD‐AF and ORBIT score to major bleeding in Cox model. We explored a modified HAS‐BLED by addition of sex and body weight. Discrimination, calibration, net reclassification index (NRI) and decision curve analysis were used to compare the performance of the 3 models.ResultsOf 3402 patients in the registry, 2568 patients who received oral anticoagulant at baseline were studied. Majority of patients (91.1%) received warfarin. The rate of major bleeding was 2.11 per 100 person‐years. The C‐statistics of the GARFIELD‐AF, HAS‐BLED, modified HAS‐BLED and ORBIT score were 0.65 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.63–0.67), 0.66 (95%CI 0.64–0.68), 0.69 (95%CI 0.67–0.71) and 0.64 (95%CI 0.62–0.66) respectively. There was good agreement between predicted and observed bleeding in the deciles of HAS‐BLED and GARFIELD‐AF scores, while the modified HAS‐BLED score and ORBIT score overestimated the risk in the last decile. The modified HAS‐BLED score had superior NRI than the HAS‐BLED score (26.9%, 95%CI 9.7%–42.2%) and the ORBIT score (31.9%, 95%CI 9.0–53.6%). The NRI between the modified HAS‐BLED and GARFIELD‐AF score was similar. The net benefit curve of the 4 models were overlapping among different thresholds.ConclusionsThe clinical utility for bleeding prediction of GARFIELD‐AF, HAS‐BLED, modified HAS‐BLED and ORBIT scores were similar in anticoagulated Asian patients with AF participating in the COOL‐AF registry. We found no advantage of the ORBIT over HAS‐BLED score for bleeding risk prediction, even in direct oral anticoagulant users.

Publisher

Wiley

Subject

Pharmacology (medical),Pharmacology

Cited by 1 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3