Key result
Adding routine clinical variables to CHA2DS2-VASc improves ischemic stroke discrimination in AF/AFL patients.
Why the study?
How ischemic stroke risk scores perform in cohorts or patients with AF/AFL already receiving oral anticoagulation therapy was unclear.
Does the incorporation of routinely available clinical variables improve risk discrimination for ischemic stroke and major bleeding compared to the CHA₂DS₂-VASc model alone in patients with atrial fibrillation or flutter?
Cohort (n=214,749)
Yes
Does the incorporation of routinely available clinical variables improve risk discrimination for ischemic stroke and major bleeding compared to the CHA₂DS₂-VASc model alone in patients with atrial fibrillation or flutter?
Adding routinely available clinical variables to the CHA₂DS₂-VASc score substantially improves risk discrimination for ischemic stroke and major bleeding in patients with atrial fibrillation, regardless of their oral anticoagulation strategy.
BACKGROUND: Numerous risk scores exist to quantify the risk of ischemic stroke risk in patients with atrial fibrillation or flutter (AF/AFL). However, how these tools perform in cohorts or those already on oral anticoagulation (OAC) therapy is unclear. RESULTS: During the study period, 214,749 unique patients with AF/AFL were identified (DUHS-43,896 with median CHA₂DS₂-VASc score 3; PCORnet-170,853 with median CHA₂DS₂-VASc 3), of which 41.1% were not on OAC, 32.1% were on a direct oral anticoagulant (DOAC), and 26.8% were on warfarin. The CHA₂DS₂-VASc model alone demonstrated modest discrimination for ischemic stroke across OAC strategies (C-index range 64%-69%). Incorporation of routinely available clinical variables substantially improved discrimination for ischemic stroke (C-index 74%-76% for no OAC, 74%-75% for DOAC, and 70%-72% for warfarin) and for major bleeding (C-index 75%-76% for no OAC, 75%-76% for DOAC, and 72%-73% for warfarin). Several factors not captured by CHA₂DS₂-VASc, including race and prior major bleeding, were independently associated with ischemic stroke risk. CONCLUSIONS: The CHA₂DS₂-VASc score provides modest discrimination for ischemic stroke and major bleeding across AF/AFL populations, including patients already treated with OAC. Incorporation of routinely available clinical factors substantially improves risk discrimination and highlights important sources of residual risk not captured by existing models.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Gouda et al. (2026) conducted a cohort in atrial fibrillation or flutter (AF/AFL) (n=214,749). Incorporation of routinely available clinical variables vs. CHA2DS2-VASc model alone was evaluated on discrimination for ischemic stroke. Incorporating routinely available clinical variables improved discrimination for ischemic stroke (C-index 70%-76%) compared to the CHA2DS2-VASc model alone (C-index 64%-69%) in AF/AFL patients.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: