Key result
ABC pathway-based care reduces major composite events selectively in older AF patients predicted to benefit.
Why the study?
Does ABC pathway-based integrated care demonstrate heterogeneity of treatment effect on the composite of all-cause mortality, ischaemic stroke, intracranial haemorrhage, heart failure, acute coronary syndrome, or major bleeding in patients aged ≥65 years with atrial fibrillation?
RCT (n=3,209)
cluster-randomised
Yes
Does ABC pathway-based integrated care demonstrate heterogeneity of treatment effect on the composite of all-cause mortality, ischaemic stroke, intracranial haemorrhage, heart failure, acute coronary syndrome, or major bleeding in patients aged ≥65 years with atrial fibrillation?
ABC pathway-based integrated care demonstrates clinically meaningful treatment heterogeneity among older patients with atrial fibrillation, supporting the use of causal machine learning to guide personalised implementation of care.
May support individualized ABC care in older AF patients; leaves open optimal transportability across settings.
Integrated care based on the Atrial fibrillation Better Care (ABC) pathway improves outcomes in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF), but whether treatment effects differ across older patients remains unclear. To evaluate heterogeneity of treatment effect (HTE) of ABC pathway-based care and assess its transportability across healthcare settings using causal machine learning (ML). Individual participant data from the cluster-randomised mAFA-II and MIRACLE-AF trials were analysed, including 3,209 patients aged ≥65 years. Three causal ML models were developed in mAFA-II and externally validated in MIRACLE-AF. The primary outcome was a composite of all-cause mortality, ischaemic stroke, intracranial haemorrhage, heart failure, acute coronary syndrome, or major bleeding. The uplift random forest demonstrated the best performance and identified meaningful HTE. In the mAFA-II testing cohort, ABC pathway-based care was associated with a lower risk of the primary outcome in patients predicted to benefit, whereas no benefit and possible harm were observed in those predicted to derive harm (P-interaction=0.002). In external validation, benefit was preserved in the predicted benefit group but not in the predicted harm group, although treatment discrimination was attenuated. Patients predicted to derive limited benefit had greater clinical complexity, including higher comorbidity burden and CHA2DS2-VASc scores. Sex, heart failure, and hypertension were the strongest predictors of treatment effect. ABC pathway-based integrated care demonstrates clinically meaningful treatment heterogeneity among older patients with AF. These findings support more personalised implementation of integrated care and highlight the potential of causal ML to guide precision management in AF. MAFA-II trial (ChiCTR-OOC-17014138 || http://www.chictr.org.cn/, registered on 26 December 2017), MIRACLE-AF trial (NCT04622514 || https://clinicaltrials.gov/, registered on 10 November 2020).
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Chen et al. (2026) conducted an RCT in Atrial fibrillation (n=3,209). Atrial fibrillation Better Care (ABC) pathway-based integrated care was evaluated on Composite of all-cause mortality, ischaemic stroke, intracranial haemorrhage, heart failure, acute coronary syndrome, or major bleeding (p=0.002). ABC pathway-based care showed significant treatment heterogeneity in older AF patients, lowering primary outcome risk in those predicted to benefit vs harm (P-interaction=0.002).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: