» Articles » PMID: 27513986

Can We Predict Individual Combined Benefit and Harm of Therapy? Warfarin Therapy for Atrial Fibrillation As a Test Case

Overview
Journal PLoS One
Date 2016 Aug 12
PMID 27513986
Citations 2
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Objectives: To construct and validate a prediction model for individual combined benefit and harm outcomes (stroke with no major bleeding, major bleeding with no stroke, neither event, or both) in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) with and without warfarin therapy.

Methods: Using the Kaiser Permanente Colorado databases, we included patients newly diagnosed with AF between January 1, 2005 and December 31, 2012 for model construction and validation. The primary outcome was a prediction model of composite of stroke or major bleeding using polytomous logistic regression (PLR) modelling. The secondary outcome was a prediction model of all-cause mortality using the Cox regression modelling.

Results: We included 9074 patients with 4537 and 4537 warfarin users and non-users, respectively. In the derivation cohort (n = 4632), there were 136 strokes (2.94%), 280 major bleedings (6.04%) and 1194 deaths (25.78%) occurred. In the prediction models, warfarin use was not significantly associated with risk of stroke, but increased the risk of major bleeding and decreased the risk of death. Both the PLR and Cox models were robust, internally and externally validated, and with acceptable model performances.

Conclusions: In this study, we introduce a new methodology for predicting individual combined benefit and harm outcomes associated with warfarin therapy for patients with AF. Should this approach be validated in other patient populations, it has potential advantages over existing risk stratification approaches as a patient-physician aid for shared decision-making.

Citing Articles

A decision-analytical perspective on incorporating multiple outcomes in the production of clinical prediction models: defining a taxonomy of risk estimands.

Martin G, Pate A, Bladon S, Sperrin M, Riley R BMC Med. 2025; 23(1):142.

PMID: 40050803 PMC: 11887178. DOI: 10.1186/s12916-025-03978-3.


Anemia and iron deficiency in patients with atrial fibrillation.

Hanna-Rivero N, Tu S, Elliott A, Pitman B, Gallagher C, Lau D BMC Cardiovasc Disord. 2022; 22(1):204.

PMID: 35508964 PMC: 9066804. DOI: 10.1186/s12872-022-02633-6.


Enhancing research publications and advancing scientific writing in health research collaborations: sharing lessons learnt from the trenches.

Li G, Jin Y, Mbuagbaw L, Dolovich L, Adachi J, Levine M J Multidiscip Healthc. 2018; 11:245-254.

PMID: 29844676 PMC: 5961639. DOI: 10.2147/JMDH.S152681.

References
1.
McCrory D, Matchar D, Samsa G, Sanders L, Pritchett E . Physician attitudes about anticoagulation for nonvalvular atrial fibrillation in the elderly. Arch Intern Med. 1995; 155(3):277-81. View

2.
Olesen J, Lip G, Lindhardsen J, Lane D, Ahlehoff O, Hansen M . Risks of thromboembolism and bleeding with thromboprophylaxis in patients with atrial fibrillation: A net clinical benefit analysis using a 'real world' nationwide cohort study. Thromb Haemost. 2011; 106(4):739-49. DOI: 10.1160/TH11-05-0364. View

3.
Ansell J . Warfarin versus new agents: interpreting the data. Hematology Am Soc Hematol Educ Program. 2011; 2010:221-8. DOI: 10.1182/asheducation-2010.1.221. View

4.
Hart R, Halperin J, Pearce L, Anderson D, Kronmal R, McBride R . Lessons from the Stroke Prevention in Atrial Fibrillation trials. Ann Intern Med. 2003; 138(10):831-8. DOI: 10.7326/0003-4819-138-10-200305200-00011. View

5.
Ho W, Lee K, Chen H, Ho T, Chiu H . Disease-free survival after hepatic resection in hepatocellular carcinoma patients: a prediction approach using artificial neural network. PLoS One. 2012; 7(1):e29179. PMC: 3250424. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0029179. View