Summary
- The CHADS2 score classification is a validated scale used to estimate the risk of stroke for subjects who have atrial fibrillation.1
- In ROCKET AF, the mean and median CHADS2 scores were 3.5 and 3.0, respectively.2
- According to the ROCKET AF protocol, the proportion of patients who did not fit the criteria of having a previous thromboembolism or a CHADS2 score ≥2 was limited to 10% of the cohort for each region. The remainder of patients were required to have had a previous thromboembolism or three or more risk factors for stroke.2
BACKGROUND
The CHADS2 score classification is a validated scale used to estimate the risk of stroke for subjects who have atrial fibrillation. The CHADS2 score ranges from 0 to 6 and is based upon assignment of points for each of the following: 1 point each for the presence of congestive heart failure, hypertension, age 75 years or older, and diabetes mellitus, and 2 points for history of stroke or transient ischemic attack (TIA), thus CHADS2 is an acronym for the risk factors of stroke in this population.1
CLINICAL STUDIES
ROCKET AF was a randomized, double-blind, double-dummy, active-controlled, parallel-group, multi-center, event-driven, non-inferiority study conducted to compare efficacy and safety between oral fixed-dose XARELTO 20 mg once daily (15 mg for patients with creatinine clearance [CrCl] 30-49 ml/min) and dose-adjusted warfarin (target international normalized ratio [INR] 2.0-3.0) for the prevention of stroke and non-central nervous system (CNS) systemic embolism in patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation.2
Patients were included, but not limited to the following in this study:2,3
- Age ≥18 years with documented paroxysmal, persistent, or permanent atrial fibrillation with moderate to high risk of stroke
- History of prior stroke, TIA, or systemic embolism, or had ≥2 of the following risk factors (CHADS2 ≥2)
- Heart failure or left ventricular ejection fraction ≤35%
- Hypertension (use of antihypertensive medications within 6 months before the screening visit or persistent systolic blood pressure above 140 mmHg or diastolic blood pressure above 90 mmHg)
- Age ≥75 years
- Diabetes mellitus
According to the protocol, the proportion of patients who did not fit the criteria of having a previous thromboembolism or a CHADS2 score ≥2 was limited to 10% of the cohort for each region. The remainder of patients were required to have had a previous thromboembolism or three or more risk factors for stroke.
Baseline characteristics of the 14,264 patients randomized in the study were similar between treatment groups. The mean and median CHADS2 scores were 3.5 and 3.0, respectively. Please see Table: Characteristics of the Intention-to-Treat Population at Baseline.
Characteristics of the Intention-to-Treat Population at Baseline
|
|
|
---|
Age - yr
|
|
|
Median
| 73
| 73
|
Interquartile range
| 65–78
| 65–78
|
Coexisting condition - no. (%)
|
|
|
Previous stroke, systemic embolism, or transient ischemic attack
| 3916 (54.9)
| 3895 (54.6)
|
Congestive heart failure
| 4467 (62.6)
| 4441 (62.3)
|
Hypertension
| 6436 (90.3)
| 6474 (90.8)
|
Diabetes mellitus
| 2878 (40.4)
| 2817 (39.5)
|
CHADS2 risk of stroke†
|
|
|
Mean score (±SD)
| 3.48±0.94
| 3.46±0.95
|
Score — no. (%)
|
|
|
2
| 925 (13.0)
| 934 (13.1)
|
3
| 3058 (42.9)
| 3158 (44.3)
|
4
| 2092 (29.3)
| 1999 (28.0)
|
5
| 932 (13.1)
| 881 (12.4)
|
6‡
| 123 (1.7)
| 159 (2.2)
|
Abbreviation: SD, standard deviation. †The CHADS2 score for the risk of stroke ranges from 1 to 6, with higher scores indicating an increased risk. Three patients (one in the XARELTO group and two in the warfarin group) had a CHADS2 score of 1. ‡ P<0.05 for the between-group comparison. Adapted from: Patel et al. NEJM 2011;365:883-891.
|
Overall efficacy and major and non-major clinically relevant bleeding while on treatment by CHADS2 score are presented in Table: Overall Efficacy by CHADS2 Score and Table: Major and Non-Major Clinically Relevant Bleeding While on Treatment by CHADS2 Score. The outcomes of patients with a CHADS2 score of <2 were not noted in the publication.
Overall Efficacy by CHADS2 Score (ITT to Site Notification Population)3
|
|
|
|
|
---|
|
|
|
|
|
---|
2
| 30/924 (3.25%)
| 36/933 (3.86%)
| 0.85 (0.52, 1.38)
| 0.603
|
3
| 81/3036 (2.67%)
| 109/3133 (3.48%)
| 0.76 (0.57, 1.01)
|
4
| 104/2078 (5%)
| 105/1989 (5.28%)
| 0.95 (0.72, 1.24)
|
5
| 43/920 (4.67%)
| 47/877 (5.36%)
| 0.88 (0.58, 1.34)
|
6
| 11/122 (9.02%)
| 9/156 (5.77%)
| 1.49 (0.62, 3.59)
|
Abbreviation: CI, confidence interval. *P-Value for Interaction. Adapted from: Supplement for: Patel et al. NEJM 2011;365:883-891.
|
Major and Non-Major Clinically Relevant Bleeding While on Treatment by CHADS2 Score (Safety On-Treatment Population)3
|
|
|
|
|
---|
|
|
|
|
|
---|
2
| 241 (26.11)
| 208 (22.32)
| 1.24 (1.03, 1.50)
| 0.121
|
3
| 632 (20.74)
| 636 (20.15)
| 1.03 (0.92, 1.15)
|
4
| 389 (18.64)
| 402 (20.12)
| 0.92 (0.80, 1.06)
|
5
| 187 (20.11)
| 165 (18.77)
| 1.09 (0.89, 1.35)
|
6
| 26 (21.14)
| 38 (24.05)
| 0.87 (0.53, 1.44)
|
Abbreviation: CI, confidence interval. *P-Value for Interaction. Adapted from: Supplement for: Patel et al. NEJM 2011;365:883-891.
|
Piccini et al (2013)4 performed an analysis to identify factors associated with stroke and systemic embolism in the ROCKET AF trial. After accounting for factors that constituted the CHADS2 score, CrCl was strongly associated with stroke and systemic embolism, secondary only to prior stroke of TIA. The hazard ratio (HR) increased 12% per 10-mL/min decrease in renal function (HR, 1.12; 95% CI, 1.07-1.16; χ2 score = 26.38) when CrCl was included as a continuous variable. The authors added renal function (CrCl <60 mL/min, 2 points) to the CHADS2 score and designated it as the R2CHADS2 score. This model improved net reclassification index by 8.2% compared with CHADS2 (C statistic=0.575). When this model was applied to an external population taking and not taking warfarin, net stroke reclassification improved 17.4% (95% CI, 12.1%-22.5%) compared with CHADS2.
LITERATURE SEARCH
A literature search of MEDLINE®, EMBASE®, BIOSIS Previews®, and DERWENT® (and/or other resources, including internal/external databases) was conducted on 08 October 2024.
1 | Gage BF, Waterman AD, Shannon W, et al. Validation of clinical classification schemes for predicting stroke: results from the national registry of atrial fibrillation. Jama. 2001;285(22):2864-2870. |
2 | Patel MR, Mahaffey KW, Garg J, et al. Rivaroxaban versus warfarin in nonvalvular atrial fibrillation. N Engl J Med. 2011;365(10):883-891. |
3 | Patel MR, Mahaffey KW, Garg J, et al. Supplement to: Rivaroxaban versus warfarin in nonvalvular atrial fibrillation. N Engl J Med. 2011;365(10):883-891. |
4 | Piccini JP, Stevens SR, Chang Y, et al. Renal dysfunction as a predictor of stroke and systemic embolism in patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation: validation of the R2CHADS2 Index in the ROCKET AF (Rivaroxaban Once-daily, oral, direct factor Xa inhibition Compared with vitamin K antagonism for prevention of stroke and Embolism Trial in Atrial Fibrillation) and ATRIA (AnTicoagulation and Risk factors In Atrial fibrillation) study cohorts. Circulation. 2013;127(2):224-232. |