AI Article Synopsis

  • Frailty affects how well anticoagulant therapy works for patients with atrial fibrillation (AF), and the age-weighted Charlson comorbidity index may help assess risks in these patients treated with direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs).
  • In a sub-analysis of the MAS trial, researchers compared dosing based on the Charlson index with standard criteria and examined its impact on adverse events.
  • While the Charlson index influenced dosing decisions, it did not improve the prediction of adverse events in AF patients, indicating that the standard approach remains valid.

Article Abstract

Background: Frailty influences the effectiveness and safety of anticoagulant therapy in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF). The age-weighted Charlson comorbidity index may offer a valuable tool to assess the risk of adverse events in AF patients treated with direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs). This sub-analysis of MAS trial data aimed to assess whether using the Charlson index, instead of the standard criteria, would have led to different dosing and improved adverse event occurrence during treatment.

Methods: The MAS study looked for a relationship between DOAC levels assessed at baseline and adverse events during follow-up. The study is described in detail elsewhere.

Results: Among the 1,657 patients studied, 832 (50.2 %) had a relatively low Charlson index (up to 6, general median class), of whom 132 (15.9 %) were treated with reduced doses. Conversely, among the 825 patients with a high Charlson index (≥7), 257 (31.1 %) received standard doses. A weak but statistically significant positive correlation (r = 0.1413, p < 0.0001 by ANOVA) was observed between increasing Charlson classes and DOAC levels standardized to allow comparability among drug results. However, no significant differences were found in the incidence or number of adverse events during follow-up, or in other parameters, between patients with low and high Charlson's scores.

Conclusions: Utilizing the Charlson index would have led to notable differences in DOAC dosing compared to standard criteria. However, we found no evidence that its use would have improved the prediction of adverse events in AF patients enrolled in the MAS study.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cpcardiol.2024.102913DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

adverse events
16
mas study
12
charlson comorbidity
8
doac dosing
8
patients atrial
8
atrial fibrillation
8
events patients
8
standard criteria
8
doac levels
8
events follow-up
8

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!