Fondazione Arianna Anticoagulazione, Bologna, Italy.
Fondazione Arianna Anticoagulazione, Bologna, Italy.
Curr Probl Cardiol. 2025 Jan;50(1):102913. doi: 10.1016/j.cpcardiol.2024.102913. Epub 2024 Oct 30.
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.
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.
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.
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.
衰弱影响房颤(AF)患者抗凝治疗的有效性和安全性。年龄加权 Charlson 合并症指数可能是评估接受直接口服抗凝剂(DOAC)治疗的 AF 患者不良事件风险的有用工具。这项 MAS 试验数据的亚分析旨在评估是否使用 Charlson 指数而非标准标准会导致不同的剂量,并改善治疗期间不良事件的发生。
MAS 研究旨在寻找基线时 DOAC 水平与随访期间不良事件之间的关系。该研究在别处有详细描述。
在研究的 1657 名患者中,832 名(50.2%)Charlson 指数相对较低(最高 6,一般中位数),其中 132 名(15.9%)接受了减少剂量的治疗。相反,在 825 名 Charlson 指数较高(≥7)的患者中,257 名(31.1%)接受了标准剂量。观察到 Charlson 分类增加与 DOAC 水平之间存在微弱但具有统计学意义的正相关(r = 0.1413,方差分析 p < 0.0001),标准化以允许药物结果之间的可比性。然而,在随访期间不良事件的发生率或数量或其他参数方面,Charlson 评分低和高的患者之间没有发现显著差异。
与标准标准相比,使用 Charlson 指数将导致 DOAC 剂量的显著差异。然而,我们没有发现证据表明它的使用可以改善 MAS 研究中招募的 AF 患者不良事件的预测。