Sean D Pokorney1, DaJuanicia N Simon2, Laine Thomas2, Gregg C Fonarow3, Peter R Kowey4, Paul Chang5, Daniel E Singer6, Jack Ansell7, Rosalia G Blanco2, Bernard Gersh8, Kenneth W Mahaffey9, Elaine M Hylek10, Alan S Go11, Jonathan P Piccini1, Eric D Peterson12. 1. Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC; Duke Clinical Research Institute, Durham, NC. 2. Duke Clinical Research Institute, Durham, NC. 3. Division of Cardiology, University of California, Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA. 4. Lankenau Institute for Medical Research, Wynnewood, PA. 5. Janssen Scientific Affairs, Raritan, NJ. 6. Harvard Medical School, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA. 7. Lenox Hill Hospital, New York, NY. 8. Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN. 9. Department of Medicine, Stanford University School of Medicine, Palo Alto, CA. 10. Boston University School of Medicine, Boston, MA. 11. Kaiser Permanente, Oakland, CA. 12. Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC; Duke Clinical Research Institute, Durham, NC. Electronic address: eric.peterson@duke.edu.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Time in therapeutic range (TTR) of international normalized ratio (INR) of 2.0 to 3.0 is important for the safety and effectiveness of warfarin anticoagulation. There are few data on TTR among patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) in community-based clinical practice. METHODS: Using the US Outcomes Registry for Better Informed Treatment of Atrial Fibrillation (ORBIT-AF), we examined TTR (using a modified Rosendaal method) among 5,210 patients with AF on warfarin and treated at 155 sites. Patients were grouped into quartiles based on TTR data. Multivariable logistic regression modeling with generalized estimating equations was used to determine patient and provider factors associated with the lowest (worst) TTR. RESULTS: Overall, 59% of the measured INR values were between 2.0 and 3.0, with an overall mean and median TTR of 65% ± 20% and 68% (interquartile range [IQR] 53%-79%). The median times below and above the therapeutic range were 17% (IQR 8%-29%) and 10% (IQR 3%-19%), respectively. Patients with renal dysfunction, advanced heart failure, frailty, prior valve surgery, and higher risk for bleeding (ATRIA score) or stroke (CHA2DS2-VASc score) had significantly lower TTR (P < .0001 for all). Patients treated at anticoagulation clinics had only slightly higher median TTR (69%) than those not (66%) (P < .0001). CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with AF in US clinical practices, TTR on warfarin is suboptimal, and those at highest predicted risks for stroke and bleeding were least likely to be in therapeutic range.
BACKGROUND: Time in therapeutic range (TTR) of international normalized ratio (INR) of 2.0 to 3.0 is important for the safety and effectiveness of warfarin anticoagulation. There are few data on TTR among patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) in community-based clinical practice. METHODS: Using the US Outcomes Registry for Better Informed Treatment of Atrial Fibrillation (ORBIT-AF), we examined TTR (using a modified Rosendaal method) among 5,210 patients with AF on warfarin and treated at 155 sites. Patients were grouped into quartiles based on TTR data. Multivariable logistic regression modeling with generalized estimating equations was used to determine patient and provider factors associated with the lowest (worst) TTR. RESULTS: Overall, 59% of the measured INR values were between 2.0 and 3.0, with an overall mean and median TTR of 65% ± 20% and 68% (interquartile range [IQR] 53%-79%). The median times below and above the therapeutic range were 17% (IQR 8%-29%) and 10% (IQR 3%-19%), respectively. Patients with renal dysfunction, advanced heart failure, frailty, prior valve surgery, and higher risk for bleeding (ATRIA score) or stroke (CHA2DS2-VASc score) had significantly lower TTR (P < .0001 for all). Patients treated at anticoagulation clinics had only slightly higher median TTR (69%) than those not (66%) (P < .0001). CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with AF in US clinical practices, TTR on warfarin is suboptimal, and those at highest predicted risks for stroke and bleeding were least likely to be in therapeutic range.
Authors: Jenna M Faircloth; Kristin M Miner; Tarek Alsaied; Nicole Nelson; Julie Ciambarella; Tomoyuki Mizuno; Joseph S Palumbo; Alexander A Vinks; Gruschen R Veldtman Journal: J Thromb Thrombolysis Date: 2017-07 Impact factor: 2.300
Authors: Nita A Limdi; Todd M Brown; Aditi Shendre; Nianjun Liu; Charles E Hill; Timothy M Beasley Journal: Pharmacogenet Genomics Date: 2017-10 Impact factor: 2.089
Authors: Jacob E Kurlander; Geoffrey D Barnes; Michelle A Anderson; Brian Haymart; Eva Kline-Rogers; Scott Kaatz; Sameer D Saini; Sarah L Krein; Caroline R Richardson; James B Froehlich Journal: J Thromb Thrombolysis Date: 2018-04 Impact factor: 2.300
Authors: Keaton S Smetana; Jessie Dunne; Kevin Parrott; George A Davis; Amy C Schmelzer Collier; Mary Covell; Susan Smyth Journal: J Thromb Thrombolysis Date: 2017-11 Impact factor: 2.300
Authors: Felix Yang; Jessica A Hellyer; Claire Than; Aditya J Ullal; Daniel W Kaiser; Paul A Heidenreich; Donald D Hoang; Wolfgang C Winkelmayer; Susan Schmitt; Susan M Frayne; Ciaran S Phibbs; Mintu P Turakhia Journal: Heart Date: 2016-11-15 Impact factor: 5.994
Authors: Scott Davis; Jane Gralla; Patrick Klem; Suhong Tong; Gina Wedermyer; Brian Freed; Alexander Wiseman; James E Cooper Journal: Am J Transplant Date: 2017-10-24 Impact factor: 8.086
Authors: Utibe R Essien; DaJuanicia N Holmes; Larry R Jackson; Gregg C Fonarow; Kenneth W Mahaffey; James A Reiffel; Benjamin A Steinberg; Larry A Allen; Paul S Chan; James V Freeman; Rosalia G Blanco; Karen S Pieper; Jonathan P Piccini; Eric D Peterson; Daniel E Singer Journal: JAMA Cardiol Date: 2018-12-01 Impact factor: 14.676