P4748HASBLED score, frailty index or comorbidity index for bleeding risk assessment in patients with atrial fibrillation?

Abstract

Abstract Background Charlson comorbidity index (CCI) is a tool to measure comorbid disease status and a strong estimator of mortality. The quantifiable frailty phenotype has also been validated as predictive of mortality and disability. Claims data can be used to classify individuals as frail and non-frail using the Claims-based Frailty Index (CFI). We evaluated whether these tools may help to predict the risk of bleeding in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF). Methods All patients with AF seen in an academic institution were identified and followed up for mortality, stroke and bleeding events. HAS-BLED, HEMORR2HAGES, ATRIA and ORBIT scores, CCI and CFI were calculated for each patient. Hazard ratios were calculated and predictive abilities of the scores were compared using the c-statistic in the whole population and then separately in elderly patients (>75 yo). Results Among 8962 patients with AF, 274 major bleeding events were recorded during a follow-up of 874±1054 days. Bleeding occurred more commonly in patients with higher bleeding risk scores, CCI and CFI. The 4 bleeding risk scores significantly had lower c-statistics than CCI and CFI for predicting major bleeding (table). Results were similar whether patients were treated with OAC or no OAC. In elderly patients, the c-statistics were all lower and were not significantly different for the 4 scores, CCI and CFI scores (0.594, 0,572, 0.595, 0.594, 0.616 and 0.591 for HAS-BLED, HEMORR2HAGES, ATRIA, ORBIT, CCI and CFI, respectively). Predictive values for major bleeding ROC Area 95% Conf. Interval P value vs CCI/CFI HASBLED 0.588 0.555–0.621 0.002/0.003 HEMORR2HAGES 0.564 0.531–0.598 <0.0001/<0.0001 ATRIA 0.559 0.522–0.595 <0.0001/<0.0001 ORBIT 0.577 0.542–0.612 0.0002/0.0003 Charlson, CCI 0.652 0.619–0.684 –/0.58 Frailty index, CFI 0.648 0.615–0.681 0.58/– Conclusion Comorbidities and frailty, respectively assessed with CCI and CFI, demonstrated statistically better performances in predicting major bleeding than the 4 established bleeding risk scores in AF, although all c-indexes were broadly similar. The 4 bleeding risk scores, CCI and CFI showed lower performance in predicting bleeding within elderly patients in whom they all performed equally to predict bleeding events. Given their simplicity and similar performances, the user-friendly bleeding risk scores remain attractive tools for the estimation of bleeding risk in elderly patients with AF.