PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
August 11, 2026The Lancet490 citations

The novel biomarker-based ABC (age, biomarkers, clinical history)-bleeding risk score for patients with atrial fibrillation: a derivation and validation study

View Full Paper
ZHZiad HijaziJOJonas OldgrenJLJohan Lindbäck

Key Result

The ABC-bleeding score yielded a higher c-index for predicting major bleeding than the HAS-BLED (0.68 vs 0.61; P<0.0001) and ORBIT scores in patients with atrial fibrillation.

Key Points

  • To develop and validate a novel biomarker-based risk score for major bleeding in atrial fibrillation patients.
  • Derived and validated a risk score in 14,537 and 8,468 atrial fibrillation patients from ARISTOTLE and RE-LY trials, respectively.
  • Used Cox regression models to assess predictive values of biomarkers and clinical variables.
  • Calculated c-index for ABC-bleeding score against conventional HAS-BLED and ORBIT scores.
  • ABC-bleeding score had a c-index of 0.68 in the derivation cohort, significantly better than HAS-BLED (0.61) and ORBIT (0.65).
  • In external validation, ABC-bleeding score yielded a c-index of 0.71 versus 0.62 for HAS-BLED and 0.68 for ORBIT.
  • A modified ABC-bleeding score using alternative biomarkers also outperformed both HAS-BLED and ORBIT scores.

Study Design

Type

Observational (n=23,005)

Multicenter

Yes

Structured PICO

Does the ABC-bleeding score improve the prognostication of major bleeding compared to HAS-BLED and ORBIT scores in patients with atrial fibrillation receiving oral anticoagulation?

P
Population
23,005 patients with atrial fibrillation receiving anticoagulation therapy from the ARISTOTLE and RE-LY trials.
E
Exposure
ABC-bleeding score (age, biomarkers [GDF-15, cTnT-hs, and haemoglobin], and clinical history [previous bleeding])
C
Comparator
HAS-BLED and ORBIT scores
O
Outcome
Major bleeding eventssafety

The biomarker-based ABC-bleeding score outperforms conventional HAS-BLED and ORBIT scores for predicting major bleeding in patients with atrial fibrillation on oral anticoagulation.

Main Result

Effect estimate: c-index 0.68 (95% CI 0.66-0.70)

Absolute Event Rate: 0.68% vs 0.61%

p-value: p=<0.0001

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The benefit of oral anticoagulation in atrial fibrillation is based on a balance between reduction in ischaemic stroke and increase in major bleeding. We aimed to develop and validate a new biomarker-based risk score to improve the prognostication of major bleeding in patients with atrial fibrillation. METHODS: We developed and internally validated a new biomarker-based risk score for major bleeding in 14,537 patients with atrial fibrillation randomised to apixaban versus warfarin in the ARISTOTLE trial and externally validated it in 8468 patients with atrial fibrillation randomised to dabigatran versus warfarin in the RE-LY trial. Plasma samples for determination of candidate biomarker concentrations were obtained at randomisation. Major bleeding events were centrally adjudicated. The predictive values of biomarkers and clinical variables were assessed with Cox regression models. The most important variables were included in the score with weights proportional to the model coefficients. The ARISTOTLE and RE-LY trials are registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, numbers NCT00412984 and NCT00262600, respectively. FINDINGS: The most important predictors for major bleeding were the concentrations of the biomarkers growth differentiation factor-15 (GDF-15), high-sensitivity cardiac troponin T (cTnT-hs) and haemoglobin, age, and previous bleeding. The ABC-bleeding score (age, biomarkers GDF-15, cTnT-hs, and haemoglobin, and clinical history previous bleeding) score yielded a higher c-index than the conventional HAS-BLED and the newer ORBIT scores for major bleeding in both the derivation cohort (0·68 95% CI 0·66-0·70 vs 0·61 0·59-0·63 vs 0·65 0·62-0·67, respectively; ABC-bleeding vs HAS-BLED p<0·0001 and ABC-bleeding vs ORBIT p=0·0008). ABC-bleeding score also yielded a higher c-index score in the the external validation cohort (0·71 95% CI 0·68-0·73 vs 0·62 0·59-0·64 for HAS-BLED vs 0·68 0·65-0·70 for ORBIT; ABC-bleeding vs HAS-BLED p<0·0001 and ABC-bleeding vs ORBIT p=0·0016). A modified ABC-bleeding score using alternative biomarkers (haematocrit, cTnI-hs, cystatin C, or creatinine clearance) also outperformed the HAS-BLED and ORBIT scores. INTERPRETATION: The ABC-bleeding score, using age, history of bleeding, and three biomarkers (haemoglobin, cTn-hs, and GDF-15 or cystatin C/CKD-EPI) was internally and externally validated and calibrated in large cohorts of patients with atrial fibrillation receiving anticoagulation therapy. The ABC-bleeding score performed better than HAS-BLED and ORBIT scores and should be useful as decision support on anticoagulation treatment in patients with atrial fibrillation. FUNDING: BMS, Pfizer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Roche Diagnostics.

Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

Hijazi et al. (2016) conducted an observational in Atrial fibrillation (n=23,005). ABC-bleeding score vs. HAS-BLED and ORBIT scores was evaluated on Major bleeding (c-index 0.68, 95% CI 0.66-0.70, p=<0.0001). The ABC-bleeding score yielded a higher c-index for predicting major bleeding than the HAS-BLED (0.68 vs 0.61; P<0.0001) and ORBIT scores in patients with atrial fibrillation.

synapsesocial.com/papers/6a7b71ad4aa654994ddc2dachttps://doi.org/10.1016/s0140-6736(16)00741-8
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper