Currently the molecular classification of breast cancer is based on the study of hormone receptors, HER2 and the tumor cell proliferation index (Ki67). We have four fundamental types: Luminal (A: HR+, HER2- and low Ki67 and B: HR+, HER2+/ - and high Ki67), HER2 + (HR -, HER2 + and high Ki67) and Basal Like or triple negative (HR -, HER2 - and high Ki67).

A 67-year-old woman diagnosed with an infiltrating ductal carcinoma of the breast with no family history of neoplasia. What additional studies should be performed on the tumor because of its clinical and therapeutic implications:

Complete phenotypic study by flow cytometry.

Study of hormone receptors, ecadherin and study of first degree relatives.

BRCA l-2 study and study of first-degree relatives.

Clinical features and first degree relative breast cancer, their correlation with histological tumor grade: a 5-year retrospective case study of breast cancer in Mizoram, India.

The aim was to assess the association of histological tumor grade with other clinical features and epidemiological factors of women with invasive breast carcinoma. A retrospective study of 103 Mizo breast cancer patients visiting hospitals was made in Aizawl, Mizoram, Northeast India. With a prior consent, information on epidemiological factors and family history in relation to cancer was obtained. Clinical reports were obtained from their medical records. The frequency of distribution was calculated for age at diagnosis and tumor characteristics. Statistical analysis for different variables was done using a chi-square test. p < 0.05 was considered significant. The histological tumor grades in our studies were found to be associated with lymph node invasion (p < 0.021), different subtype of hormone receptor such as ER status (p < 0.004), ER/PR status (p < 0.007), HER2/neu status (p < 0.014), and ER/PR/HER2 status (p < 0.025). A patient with a family history of breast cancer in their 1st degree relative is also seen to have association in determining the tumor grade (p < 0.003). Reproductive history, lifestyle and dietary habits, tobacco, and alcohol consumption were found to have no influence on breast cancer tumor grade. Our results showing significant correlation between status of lymph node, ER, PR, and HER2/neu oncoprotein and family history with 1st degree relative breast cancer are the first time report to target and focus on the possible role of biomarkers for diagnosis among the Mizo tribal breast cancer patients.

The significance of family history for patients with carcinoma of the breast.

Since the risk of carcinoma of the breast is increased in women with a family history of the disease, new primary carcinomas of the breast may be increased after treatment. Women with several relatives with carcinoma of the breast are thought to be at higher risk of having a second primary carcinoma of the breast develop and mastectomy is more frequently recommended. The computerized registry of the Mount Sinai Medical Center Breast Service was used to identify 1,337 patients with complete information concerning family history. Three hundred fifty-nine patients with a family history of carcinoma of the breast were compared with women with no family history. Compared with patients with no family history of carcinoma of the breast, patients with a family history of carcinoma of the breast were significantly younger (54.0 versus 55.8 years of age, p < 0.01), were significantly more likely to have used oral contraceptives (26 versus 13 percent, p < 0.001), had significantly more ductal carcinoma in situ (10 versus 4 percent, p < 0.01), and were significantly more often treated with breast conservation (42 versus 31 percent, p < 0.001). Simultaneous contralateral carcinoma of the breast was diagnosed more frequently in patients with a family history (3 versus 1 percent, p < 0.025), but metachronous contralateral carcinomas were not increased. In comparing the two groups, there were no significant differences in proportion premenopausal, parity, use of postmenopausal hormones, tumor size, tumor differentiation, nodal involvement, TNM stage, estrogen receptor status, or use of adjuvant radiation, chemotherapy, or tamoxifen. Complete five-year follow-up evaluation for 748 patients, 179 with a family history, found no differences in local, distant, or disease-free survival rates for mastectomy or breast conservation in relation to family history. Outcome for patients with first-degree affected relatives and those with more than one affected relative was the same as those with no family history. These results indicate that women with a family history of carcinoma of the breast should be treated no differently than women with no family history.

BRCA mutation

Relative indications for testing for a mutation in BRCA1 or BRCA2 for newly diagnosed or family members include a family history among 1st (FDR), 2nd (SDR), or 3rd(TDR) degree relatives usually on the same side of the family but not limited: A known mutation (BRCA1 or BRCA2) in a cancer susceptibility gene within the family Women affected with any breast cancer diagnosed under the age of 30 Women affected with triple negative breast cancer (TNBC) (estrogen receptor negative, progesterone receptor negative, and HER2/neu negative) under the age of 50 Two relatives (FDR/SDR) diagnosed under the age of 45 Three relatives (FDR/SDR) diagnosed with average age of 50 or less Four relatives at any ages Ovarian cancer with either an additional diagnosed relative or a relative with male breast cancer A single family member with both breast and ovarian cancer Male breast cancer Pancreatic cancer with breast or ovarian cancer in the same individual or on the same side of the family

Family history of breast cancer in first-degree relatives and triple-negative breast cancer risk.

Triple-negative breast cancer accounts for less than 20% of breast cancers overall, but is the predominant subtype among carriers of mutations in BRCA1. However, few studies have assessed the association between breast cancer family history and risk of triple-negative breast cancer. We examined the relationship between having a family history of breast cancer in first-degree relatives and risk of triple-negative breast cancer, and risk of two other breast cancer subtypes defined by tumor marker expression. We evaluated data collected by the Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium from 2,599,946 mammograms on 1,054,466 women, among whom 15% reported a first-degree family history of breast cancer. Using Cox regression in this cohort, we evaluated subtype-specific associations between family history and risk of triple-negative (N = 705), estrogen receptor-positive (ER+, N = 10,026), and hormone receptor-negative/HER2-expressing (ER-/PR-/HER2+, N = 308) breast cancer among women aged 40-84 years. First-degree family history was similarly and significantly associated with an increased risk of all the subtypes [hazard ratio (HR) = 1.73, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.43-2.09, HR = 1.62, 95% CI: 1.54-1.70, and HR = 1.56, 95% CI: 1.15-2.13, for triple-negative, ER+, and ER-/PR-/HER2+, respectively]. Risk of all the subtypes was most pronounced among women with at least two affected first-degree relatives (versus women with no affected first-degree relatives, HR(triple-negative) = 2.66, 95% CI: 1.66-4.27, HR(ER+) = 2.05, 95% CI: 1.79-2.36, HR(ER)-(/PR)-(/HER2+) = 2.25, 95% CI: 0.99-5.08). Having a first-degree family history of breast cancer was associated with an increased risk of triple-negative breast cancer with a magnitude of association similar to that for the predominant ER+ subtype and ER-/PR-/HER2+ breast cancer.

Influence of young age at diagnosis and family history of breast or ovarian cancer on breast cancer outcomes in a population-based cohort study.

The objective of this study was to examine the association of: (i) diagnosis at age </=35, (ii) first-degree family history of breast or ovarian cancer (BOC) and (iii) a research based definition of genetic risk, with tumor characteristics, treatment and survival in breast cancer (BC). Consenting female participants in the population-based Ontario Familial Breast Cancer Registry diagnosed with primary invasive BC between 1996 and 1998 were followed prospectively until 2005. Among 967 women, 105 were </=35 years old at diagnosis and 686 were classified as genetic risk cases, including 349 with a first-degree family history. Individuals diagnosed at age </=35 were more likely to self-detect tumors, to present with inflammatory BC, to have invasive ductal carcinoma of no special type, high T stage, and tumors with lymphovascular invasion (LVI), high grade and negative estrogen receptors. Younger women were more likely to receive chemotherapy and less likely to receive hormonal therapy. Diagnosis </=35 years old was associated with significantly reduced distant recurrence free survival, an effect that did not persist after adjustment for tumor and treatment related variables. Poor outcomes were restricted to younger women with hormone responsive BC. Family history was associated with increased rates of mammographic detection of BC, lower tumor stage and less frequent inflammatory BC, but had no association with BC outcomes. Women diagnosed with BC at age </=35 have more aggressive tumors; these adverse tumor characteristics, rather than age, lead to poor outcomes. Family history was not associated with survival.

Breast cancer and family history: a multivariate analysis of levels of tumor HER2 protein and family history of cancer in women who have breast cancer.

The HER2 gene, located on the long arm of chromosome 17, codes for a protein with the characteristics of a growth factor receptor. In a preliminary study, we reported that high levels of tumor HER2 (erbB-2/neu) protein are associated with a family history of breast cancer (that is, one or more female blood relatives with breast cancer). We have now collected a larger number of subjects (94) and performed a multivariate analysis of the independent variables family history of breast cancer, tumor estrogen receptor, age, and tumor DNA index. Family history of breast cancer was assessed by questioning the patient, in many cases by telephone. HER2 levels were significantly higher in women with a family history of breast cancer (p = 0.015, two-tailed t-test). The 27 women with family history were predominantly postmenopausal, mean age 61 +/- 2.3 (mean +/- SEM), versus a mean age of 56 +/- 1.7 for the 67 women with no family history. Of the 27 women with a family history of breast cancer, 13 had a first-degree relative (mother or sister) with the disease. The remaining 14 women had other relatives (grandmothers, aunts, cousins, or a niece) with breast cancer. The results of multiple linear regression analysis, with HER2 as the dependent variable, showed that family history of breast cancer was significantly associated with elevated HER2 levels in the tumors (p = 0.0038), after controlling for the effects of age, tumor estrogen receptor, and DNA index. The association of family history of breast cancer and elevated tumor HER2 protein suggests that postmenopausal familial breast cancer may be associated with altered HER2 expression.

Four new cases of double heterozygosity for BRCA1 and BRCA2 gene mutations: clinical, pathological, and family characteristics.

Double heterozygosity (DH) for BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations is a very rare finding, particularly in non-Ashkenazi individuals, and only a few cases have been reported to date. In addition, little is known on the pathological features of the tumors that occur in DH cases and on their family history of cancer. Four carriers of pathogenic mutations in both BRCA1 and BRCA2 were identified among women who underwent genetic counseling for hereditary susceptibility to breast and ovarian carcinoma at three different Italian institutions. Clinical, pathological, and family history data were collected from medical records and during genetic counseling sessions. All identified DH cases developed breast carcinoma and three of them were also diagnosed with ovarian carcinoma. Mean ages of breast and ovarian cancer diagnosis were 42.7 and 48.6 years, respectively. The majority of breast cancers showed a BRCA1-related phenotype, being negative for hormone receptors and HER2. Two cases reported different gastrointestinal tumors among relatives. Although the individuals described in this study show more severe clinical features in comparison to previously reported BRCA1 and BRCA2 DH cases, our observations support the hypothesis of a non specific phenotype of DH cases in terms of age of disease onset. In addition, our observations indicate that in DH patients breast carcinogenesis appears to be driven mainly by the mutations in BRCA1. The possible association of DH for BRCA gene mutations with gastrointestinal tumors is in keeping with previous reports, but needs to be confirmed by further analyses.

The relationship between family history, exposure to exogenous hormones, and estrogen receptor protein in breast cancer.

Eight-hundred and thirteen patients were prospectively studied to examine the influence of family history and the prior use of exogenous hormones as covariables in the subsequent expression of estrogen receptor protein (ERP) in the primary tumor of patients with breast cancer. Cases were divided by menstrual status; there were 385 pre- and perimenopausal and 428 postmenopausal patients. The influence of prior exposure to estrogen replacement therapy (ERT) in postmenopausal patients or oral contraceptives (OC) in pre- and perimenopausal patients on tumor ERP was analyzed controlling for family history: none, first degree (1 degree, mother or sister), second degree (2 degrees, grandmother or aunt), or both 1 degree and 2 degrees relatives. The results showed no influence of the prior use of ERT in postmenopausal women on subsequent tumor ERP. Among pre- and perimenopausal women, those with a family history of breast cancer in only a 1 degree relative, showed a borderline significant association between prior OC usage and subsequent tumor ERP. The use of OC was consistently associated with ERP negative tumors (9/9) whereas of 29 patients who had no prior OC exposure 17 had ERP negative tumors (P = 0.04, Fisher's Exact Test). Analysis of the prior exposure to OC, verified with the primary care physician or pharmacist, showed that these patients first used OC at the mean age of 32.2 years, had used OC for a mean duration of 41.9 months and stopped OC use a mean of 79.5 months before being diagnosed as having breast cancer. These results suggest that in a subset of patients with breast cancer, and a first degree relative only who had breast cancer, prior exposure to OC may influence the subsequent ERP status of the tumor. This is not due to exogenous estrogen saturation of receptors as there was a long latent period between exposure and diagnosis. Alternative hypotheses as to the mechanism of selection of subsequent tumor ERP may be either inhibition of ERP positive preneoplastic or tumor cell clones early in the evolution of the tumor or early selection of a tumor capable of endogenous estrogen synthesis with receptor saturation.

BRCA1/BRCA2 mutations in Japanese women with ductal carcinoma in situ.

Ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) is considered a component of the clinical spectrum of breast cancer even in those with BRCA1/2 mutation. The aim of this study was to report the feature of DCIS raised in Japanese women with BRCA1/2 mutations. A total of 325 Japanese women with breast cancer (BC) (with or without invasive cancer) were referred for genetic counseling and underwent genetic testing for mutations in the BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes in Showa University Hospital between December 2011 and August 2016. And 49 of them who were pathologically diagnosed as DCIS were included in this study. Logistic regression models were fit to determine the associations between potential predictive factors and BRCA status. A Cox proportional hazards model is used to predictive value of parameters for Ipsilateral breast tumor recurrence (IBTR) and contralateral breast tumor recurrence (CBTR). (a) Of 325 patients (with or without invasive cancer), 19.1% (62/325) tested positive for BRCA1/BRCA2 mutations. And 18.4% (9/49) was positive for BRCA1/BRCA2 mutations in DCIS, compared with 19.2% (53/276) in IDC (p = 1.000). Among BRCA mutations, 14.5% (9/62) had DCIS compared with nonmutations (15.2%, 40/263). Incidence of DCIS was 3.0% (1/33) of BRCA1 mutations and 27.5% (8/29) of BRCA2 mutation (p = 0.009). (b) Median age of diagnosis in BRCA mutation carriers was 39 years, compared with 46 years in noncarriers. Age, Family history (FH) of BC, FH of first or second BC and total number of relatives with BC diagnosis (DX) has significant difference between BRCA mutation carriers and noncarriers in univariate analysis. In a multivariate logistic model, total relatives with BC DX ≥ 2 (odds ratio [OR], 5.128; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.266-20.763; p = 0.022), age at diagnosis ≤35 years (OR 0.149, 95% CI 0.023-0.954, p = 0.045) and ER+/HER2+ status (OR 5.034, 95% CI 1.092-23.210, p = 0.038) remained as independent significant predictors for BRCA mutation. Ki67 index (cut off by 14% or 30%) did not differ between BRCA mutation carriers and noncarriers (p = 0.459 and p = 0.651). (c) There was a significant difference in ER-positive tumors among BRCA2 carriers and noncarriers (p = 0.042). Subgroup analysis showed BRCA2 carriers tend to be of higher grade (Grade 2 and 3), more frequently ER+/PR+ (p = 0.041) and lower proliferation (Ki67 index) than noncarriers, whereas differences in nuclear grade and ki67 index were not found significantly in our study. (d) BRCA mutation was not associated with an increased risk of IBTR and CBTR. DCIS is equally as prevalent in patients who were BRCA mutation carriers as in high familial-risk women who were noncarriers, but occurs at earlier age. BRCA2 carriers have higher incidence in DCIS than that of BRCA1 carriers, and tend to be higher grade and more frequently ER positive and lower proliferation. Total relatives with BC DX ≥2, age at diagnosis ≤35 years and ER+/HER2+ might be independent predictors for BRCA mutation in Japanese women with DCIS and patients of these risk factors should be recommended to receive genetic counseling and BRCA testing.

Somatostatin receptor 2

other components of the endocrine system and nervous system, so it can be drawn that the receptor family has great influence among these systems. The family was first discovered in a segment of a rat's pituitary gland known as the tumor cell line. A cell line is grown as a culture under controlled conditions, so the first discovery was found by culturing these cells in controlled conditions and in an environment outside of its norm. There, researchers found that the tumor cell line expresses a cell dividing inhibitor known as the transforming growth factor beta (TGF-beta) and also acts as an inhibitor to the milk producing hormone in female mammals, prolactin, and growth hormones. Researchers studied the activity of the receptors by conducting an assay with Ligand binding studies, which basically means they were conducting studies to see how prevalent the binding of the receptors occurred. Differences in how prevalently they receptors bonded revealed the existence of multiple

Does family history influence survival in breast cancer cases?

A few studies have suggested a relatively better prognosis for breast cancer (BC) cases reporting a positive family history (FH). We aimed at comparing the survival of patients according to FH in a large hospital-based series of 1,278 BC cases. Information on FH for BC was obtained at diagnosis by interview. All cases reporting a first- or second-degree FH for breast carcinoma were compared with cases without FH. Overall survival was estimated using a product-limit method. Hazard ratios (HRs) and the corresponding 95% confidence intervals (95% CIs), adjusted for confounding factors, were computed using proportional hazard models. Overall, 240 (18.8%) cases reporting, at diagnosis, a positive FH (156 with at least 1 first-degree relative and 84 with at least 1 second-degree relative) were compared with 1,038 patients without FH for BC. No significant differences were found in terms of distribution of age at diagnosis, tumor stage, nodal involvement, receptor status and histology. Cumulative survival rates at 5 years for cases without FH and with first-degree and second-degree FH for BC were 79.8 (95% CI 77.0-83.0), 78.6 (95% CI 70.0-88.0) and 80.2 (95% CI 68.0-92.0), respectively (log-rank test, chi(2) (2) = 0.02, p = 1.0). After adjustment for age, pathologic size and nodal involvement, the HR among cases of invasive cancer with a first-degree FH of BC was 0.91 (95% CI 0.55-1.48); however, the HR for cases with second-degree FH was 1.18 (95% CI 0.62-2.25) compared to cases without FH. Our study, based on a large series of consecutive invasive BC cases, did not find any significant survival differences associated with a positive FH for breast carcinoma, suggesting the existence of a large heterogeneity among BC cases with FH.

Combined small-cell lung carcinoma

Pemetrexed has been shown to improve survival in non-squamous cell NSCLC, and is the first drug to reveal differential survival benefit in large cell lung carcinoma. C-SCLC appear to express female hormone (i.e. estrogen and/or progesterone) receptors in a high (50–67%) proportion of cases, similar to breast carcinomas. However, it is at present unknown whether blockade of these receptors affects the growth of c-SCLC. Prognosis Current consensus is that the long-term prognosis of c-SCLC patients is determined by the SCLC component of their tumor, given that "pure" SCLC seems to have the worst long-term prognosis of all forms of lung cancer. Although data on c-SCLC is very sparse, some studies suggest that survival rates in c-SCLC may be even worse than that of pure SCLC, likely due to the lower rate of complete response to chemoradiation in c-SCLC, although not all studies have shown a significant difference in survival.

Clinical characteristics of breast cancer patients with family history.

This study was conducted to acquire information as to the clinicopathological characteristics of breast cancer patients with family history. Of 583 patients with breast cancer, 60 (10.3%) had family history in at least one relative within the second-degree. The affected family member was most frequently a sister (43%), followed by the mother (23%) and an aunt (20%). Comparison of the data for the patients between with and without family history revealed no significant differences for any of mean age, menopausal status, histological type, histological staging, and estrogen receptor status. Although the sample size was small, neither the survival rate nor the bilaterality of disease was influenced by the family history of breast cancer.

Risk of breast cancer and family history of other cancers in first-degree relatives in Chinese women: a case control study.

Few studies have systematically reported the relationship between the risk of breast cancer and family history of other cancers. This study was designed to systematically determine the relationship between breast cancer risk and family history of other cancers in first-degree relatives. Between January 2006 and June 2011, 823 women diagnosed with breast cancer were included, and age-matched women diagnosed with benign breast disease were selected as controls. Family history of other cancers in first-degree relatives was recorded by trained reviewers. Multivariate logistic regression was applied to analyze the relationships. A family history of esophagus cancer (OR: 2.70, 95% CI: 1.11 - 6.57), lung cancer (OR: 2.49 95% CI: 1.10 - 5.65), digestive system cancer (OR: 1.79, 95% CI: 1.14 - 2.79) and any cancer (OR: 2.13, 95% CI: 1.49 - 3.04) in first-degree relatives was directly associated with increased breast cancer risk. In subgroup analysis, the risk of hormone receptor positive breast cancer was increased in subjects with a family history of lung cancer (OR: 3.37, 95% CI: 1.45 - 7.82), while the risk of hormone receptor negative breast cancer was increased in subjects with a family history of esophagus cancer (OR: 6.19, 95% CI: 2.30 - 16.71), uterus cancer (OR: 6.92, 95% CI: 1.12 - 42.89), digestive tract cancer (OR: 2.05, 95% CI: 1.03 - 4.10) and gynecology cancer (OR: 6.79, 95% CI: 1.46 - 31.65). Additionally, a significant increase in breast cancer was observed with a family history of digestive system cancer for subjects 50 y and younger (OR: 1.88, 95% CI: 1.03 - 3.43), not for subjects 50 y older (OR: 1.67, 95% CI: 0.86 - 3.25). Breast cancer aggregates in families with several types of cancer especially for digestive system cancer. The influence of a family history of other cancers seems more likely to be limited to hormone receptor negative breast cancer.

Selective estrogen receptor modulator

Tamoxifen is a first-line hormonal treatment of ER-positive metastatic breast cancer. It is used for breast cancer risk reduction in women at high risk, and as adjuvant treatment of axillary node-negative and node-positive, ductal carcinoma in situ. Tamoxifen treatment is also useful in the treatment of bone density and blood lipids in postmenopausal women. Adverse effects include hot flushes and more serious is two to three times higher relative risk of developing endometrial cancer compared to women of an age-matched population. Toremifene, a chlorinated tamoxifen derivative, causes fewer DNA adducts in liver than seen with tamoxifen in preclinical studies and was developed to avoid hepatic carcinomas. It is used as endocrine therapy in women with ER/PR-positive stage 4 or recurrent metastatic breast cancer and has demonstrated similar efficacy compared to tamoxifen as adjuvant treatment of breast cancer and in the treatment of metastatic breast cancer.

Prognosis of breast cancer patients with familial history classified according to their menopausal status.

Breast cancer patients were classified in the family history positive (FHP) group when they had at least one second-degree relative who was a breast cancer patient. The results of a comparative study with patients classified in the family history negative (FHN) group showed the prognosis of the FHP group was significantly better than that of the FHN group. However, when those patients were classified according to their menopausal status at onset, there were no significant differences in survival rates between the FHP and FHN groups with onset before menopause, whereas the survival rate of the FHP group was significantly higher than that of the FHN group with onset after menopause. The same results were found when the FHP group was subgrouped into the FHP group with first-degree relatives and the FHP group with second-degree relatives. Further investigations on background factors revealed that the patients with onset before menopause showed no significant differences between the FHP and FHN groups in age at surgery, diameter of the tumor, histologic grade, the number of metastatic lymph nodes, body weight, estrogen receptor (ER) status, and the values of CEA and CA15-3 before surgery. On the other hand, the FHP patients with onset after menopause showed significantly lower numbers of metastatic lymph nodes and trends showing higher ER values and lower CA15-3-values. Therefore the favorable prognosis in the FHP group seems to be attributable to the higher survival rate of the FHP patients with onset after menopause.

Metaplastic carcinoma

Metaplastic carcinoma, otherwise known as metaplastic carcinoma of the breast (MCB), is a heterogeneous group of cancers that exhibit varied patterns of metaplasia and differentiation along multiple cell lines. This rare and aggressive form of breast cancer is characterized as being composed of a mixed group of neoplasms containing both glandular and non-glandular patterns with epithelial and/or mesenchymal components. It accounts for fewer than 1% of all breast cancer diagnoses. It is most closely associated with invasive ductal carcinoma of no special type. (IDC), and shares similar treatment approaches. Relative to IDC, MCB generally has higher histological grade and larger tumor size at time of diagnosis, with a lower incidence of axillary lymph node involvement. MCB tumors are typically estrogen receptor (ER), progesterone receptor (PR), and human epidermal growth factor-2 (HER-2) negative, meaning hormone therapy is generally not an effective treatment option, which correlates to

Abemaciclib

As of early 2016, abemaciclib was involved in 3 Phase III clinical trials: The JUNIPER Study is comparing abemaciclib against erlotinib in patients with stage IV non-small-cell lung carcinoma Due to collect data until September 2017. The MONARCH 2 study is investigating the effectiveness of abemaciclib in combination with fulvestrant for women with breast cancer. It is due to end in Feb 2017. In March 2017, Eli Lilly announced that it had met its primary endpoint of superior progression-free survival (PFS) over placebo plus fulvestrant in patients with estrogen receptor positive and HER2 negative advanced or metastatic breast cancer. This result led to the September 2017 FDA approval. The MONARCH 3 study is investigating the effectiveness of abemaciclib, plus either anastrozole or letrozole, as a first-line treatment for women with breast cancer. The trial is expected to end in June 2017.

Family History and Risk of Second Primary Breast Cancer after <i>In Situ</i> Breast Carcinoma.

<bBackground:</b Incidence rates of <iin situ</i breast carcinomas have increased due to widespread adoption of mammography. Very little is known about why some women with <iin situ</i breast cancer later develop second primary breast cancers.<bMethods:</b In this population-based nested case-control study among <iin situ</i breast cancer survivors, including 539 cases with a second primary breast cancer and 994 matched controls, we evaluated the association between first-degree family history of breast cancer and risk of developing a second primary breast cancer.<bResults:</b First-degree family history of breast cancer was associated with an increased risk of developing a second primary breast cancer among women with a previous <iin situ</i breast cancer [odds ratio (OR) = 1.33, 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.05-1.69] and those with two or more affected first-degree relatives had an even higher risk (OR = 1.94; 95% CI, 1.15-3.28). Those whose relative was diagnosed at less than 50 years old were more likely to develop a second primary breast cancer (OR = 1.78; 95% CI, 1.24-2.57). No difference in risks associated with number or age of affected relatives was observed by menopausal status.<bConclusions:</b Results from this study suggest that first-degree family history of breast cancer may be an important risk factor for development of a second primary breast cancer among women with a previous <iin situ</i breast cancer.<bImpact:</b Given the growing population of <iin situ</i breast cancer survivors, a better understanding of risk factors associated with development of a second primary breast cancer is needed to further understand risk. <iCancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev; 27(3); 315-20. ©2018 AACR</i.

Dynamic angiothermography

DATG is able to detect changes in blood flow that are indicative of breast cancer, may be used for younger patients, is completely non-invasive (no need for radiation or contrast agent, no need for compression of the breast) and is lower cost than alternatives requiring minimal facilities. This technology, performed quickly (5–6 minutes for visit) and very precise, is useful for screening and is also able to detect precancerous lesions. Studies have been conducted that have shown how it is possible, by means of this methodology, to diagnose invasive ductal carcinoma and infiltrating lobular carcinoma with the same accuracy. DATG can be strategic for young patients, or patients with dense breasts where the contrastive performance of mammography is challenged. Another application of DATG is the monitoring of at-risk patients with increased changes of breast cancer who take hormone replacement therapy (sometimes taken to reduce menopause symptoms) and participate in in-vitro

Retrospective analysis of clinicopathological characteristics and family history data of early-onset breast cancer: a single-institutional study of Hungarian patients.

Patients at young age (≤ 35 years) diagnosed with breast cancer (BC) are considered to have poor prognosis. The aim of the present study was to retrospectively analyse clinicopathological characteristics and prognosis in a group of young BC patients. We included women diagnosed with invasive breast carcinoma younger than/or at the age of 35 years. Between 1999 and 2009, 107 women with early-onset BC were selected from the database of the 2nd Department of Pathology at Semmelweis University. For clinicopathological comparison, 55 women (36-45 years), 214 women (46-65 years), 110 women (66-75 years) and 58 women (76 ≤ years) were also included in the analysis. Family history, clinicopathological and follow-up data were analysed. The tissue specimens were reviewed for histological type, nuclear grade, and estrogen receptor (ER), progesterone receptor (PgR), Ki67 and HER2 status (IHC4). The mean age in the study group was 31.6 years at the time of diagnosis. Histology showed a high incidence of grade III tumours in this group of patients (67.9 %), while only four cases (3.8 %) were considered grade I. According to the immunohistochemical results, 35.3 % of the study cases were considered as Luminal B (LumB: either being higly proliferative or co-expressing HER2) and 33.3 % as triple negative breast carcinomas (TNBC). The detailed questionnaire related to family history was completed and received in 49/107 cases (45.8 %). Analysis of these data revealed an affected family history of breast or ovarian carcinoma in first and second degree relatives in 51.0 %. A high proportion (52.0 %) of TNBC was observed among young women with a family history of the disease. Survival analysis of the 107 patients showed that 25 (23.3 %) women died until 31 December 2012. No significant difference in survival was detectable considering the regimen of systemic treatment (p = 0.188). Regarding clinicopathological parameters, the immunophenotypes, grade, pT and pN values differred substantially between the age groups (p = 0.001, for all), and the shortest relapse-free survival was seen among the youngest BC patients. This analysis illustrates that breast cancer arising in young women is characterized by the presence of less favorable subtypes such as LumB and TNBC. The increased proportion of TNBC was especially remarquable in the group of patients presenting with family history of the disease. The fact that a high rate of death occurred and no significant difference in OS were notable regarding the scheme of systemic therapies (neoadjuvant vs. adjuvant) highlight the necessity of the development of new treatment strategies.

A clinicopathological analysis of breast cancer in patients with a family history.

A study was conducted to investigate the clinical and pathological characteristics of breast cancer in patients with a family history (FH). Among 4,481 primary breast cancer patients, 394 (8.8%) had families which included two or more breast cancer patients within three generations (FH(+)group). This group was compared with the remaining 3,969 patients (FH(-) group) with the following results: (1) The tumor diameter in the FH(+) group was slightly less than that in the FH(-) group [not significant (NS)], with fewer lymph node metastases (P < 0.05); (2) the positive rates for the estrogen receptor were 52% (138/266) and 49% (1,216/2,481), respectively (NS); (3) expression of the c-erbB-2 protein was observed in 14 out of 40 (35%) and 32 out of 100 cases (32%), respectively (NS); (4) the relative risk of bilateral occurrence in the FH(+) group was 1.4, with a 95% confidence interval of 0.9-2.4; (5) the 15-year survival rate was 72% and 60%, respectively, suggesting a better prognosis for the FH(+) group (P < 0.01); and (6) multivariate analysis showed that the contribution of FH to postoperative survival was marginal (P = 0.07). Factors related to the hormonal environment such as age at menarche (P = 0.08) and age at menopause (P = 0.08) made a greater but non-significant contribution to the prognosis of the FH(+) group than to that of the FH(-) group. However, further genetic and molecular biological analyses of familial breast cancer are needed in order to clarify the mechanisms of cancer accumulation within families.

Parathyroid hormone 1 receptor

Interactions Parathyroid hormone 1 receptor has been shown to interact with Sodium-hydrogen exchange regulatory cofactor 2 and Sodium-hydrogen antiporter 3 regulator 1. Model organisms Model organisms have been used in the study of PTH1R function. A conditional knockout mouse line called Pth1rtm1a(EUCOMM)Hmgu was generated at the Wellcome Trust Sanger Institute. Male and female animals underwent a standardized phenotypic screen to determine the effects of deletion. Additional screens performed: - In-depth immunological phenotyping See also Parathyroid hormone receptor References Further reading External links G protein-coupled receptors

Eftilagimod alpha

Clinical Trials Ongoing Clinical Studies As of February 2020, three clinical studies are ongoing: Metastatic breast carcinoma (HER2− HR+) In the AIPAC study efti is administered in combination with paclitaxel to women with HER2− metastatic breast cancer whose disease progressed after endocrine therapy. This Phase IIb trial is a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study aiming to enroll 241 patients. It had an open run-in phase with 15 patients being treated and the results were published at the 2018 ASCO annual meeting. The study is ongoing and is expected to show results in the first half of 2020. Solid Tumors The INSIGHT Phase I study is investigating the feasibility and safety of different routes of drug delivery (e.g. intra-tumoral, intra-peritoneal, and subcutaneous).

Risk of second breast cancer according to estrogen receptor status and family history.

A recent study reported an increased risk of contralateral estrogen-negative breast cancer after a first primary estrogen-negative breast cancer. Our study aims to confirm this result and to evaluate how the risk of second breast cancer occurrence is affected by family history of breast cancer and anti-estrogen treatment. We included all 4,152 women diagnosed with breast cancer between 1995 and 2007, using data from the population-based Geneva Cancer Registry. We compared the incidence of second breast cancer among patients according to estrogen receptor (ER) status with that expected in the general population by age-period Standardized Incidence Ratios (SIRs). Among the cohort, 63 women developed second breast cancer. Patients with ER-positive first tumors had a decreased risk of second breast cancer occurrence (SIR: 0.67, 95% CI: 0.48-0.90), whereas patients with ER-negative primary tumors had an increased risk (SIR: 1.98, 95% CI: 1.19-3.09) limited to ER-negative second tumors (SIR: 7.94, 95% CI: 3.81-14.60). Patients with positive family history had a tenfold (SIR: 9.74, 95% CI: 3.57-21.12) higher risk of ER-negative second tumor which increased to nearly 50-fold (SIR: 46.18, 95% CI: 12.58-118.22) when the first tumor was ER-negative. Treatment with anti-estrogen decreased the risk of second ER-positive tumors but not ER-negative tumors. The risk of second ER-negative breast cancer is very high after a first ER-negative tumor, in particular among women with strong family history. Surveillance and prevention of second cancer occurrence should consider both ER status of the first tumor and family history.

Risk factors for breast cancer

Hormonal contraceptives may produce a slight increase in the risk of breast cancer diagnosis among current and recent users, but this appears to be a short-term effect. In 1996 the largest collaborative reanalysis of individual data on over 150,000 women in 54 studies of breast cancer found a relative risk (RR) of 1.24 of breast cancer diagnosis among current combined oral contraceptive pill users; 10 or more years after stopping, no difference was seen. Further, the cancers diagnosed in women who had ever used hormonal contraceptives were less advanced than those in nonusers, raising the possibility that the small excess among users was due to increased detection. The relative risk of breast cancer diagnosis associated with current and recent use of hormonal contraceptives did not appear to vary with family history of breast cancer. Some studies have suggested that women who began using hormonal contraceptives before the age of 20 or before their first full-term pregnancy are at

Population-based estimates of the relation between breast cancer risk, tumor subtype, and family history.

Many studies that have estimated the breast cancer risk attributable to family history have been based on data collected within family units. Use of this study design has likely overestimated risks for the general population. We provide population-based estimates of breast cancer risk and different tumor subtypes in relation to the degree, number, and age at diagnosis of affected relatives. Cox Proportional Hazards to calculate risks (hazard ratios; 95% confidence interval) of breast cancer and tumor subtypes for women with a family history of breast cancer relative to women without a family history among a cohort of 75,189 women age >or=40 years of whom 1,087 were diagnosed with breast cancer from June 1, 2001-December 31, 2005 (median follow-up 3.16 years). Breast cancer risk was highest for women with a first-degree family history (1.54; 1.34-1.77); and did not differ substantially by the affected relative's age at diagnosis or by number of affected first-degree relatives. A second-degree family history only was not associated with a significantly increased breast cancer risk (1.15; 0.98-1.35). There was a suggestion that a positive family history was associated with risk of triple positive (Estrogen+/Progesterone+/HER2+) and HER2-overexpressing tumors. While a family history of breast cancer in first-degree relatives is an important risk factor for breast cancer, gathering information such as the age at diagnosis of affected relatives or information on second-degree relative history may be unnecessary in assessing personal breast cancer risk among women age >or=40 years.

Tesevatinib

Tesevatinib (KD019, XL647) is an experimental drug proposed for use in kidney cancer and polycystic kidney disease. The drug was first developed by Exelixis, Inc. and was later acquired by Kadmon Corporation. Tesevatinib binds to and inhibits several tyrosine receptor kinases that play major roles in tumor cell proliferation and tumor vascularization, including epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR; ERBB1), epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2; ERBB2), vascular endothelial growth factor receptor (VEGFR), and ephrin B4 (EphB4). The drug activity was initially studied in non-small cell lung cancer. In a 2007 pre-clinical study with xenograft tumors of an erlotinib-resistant cell line tesevatinib substantially inhibited the growth of these tumors. In polycystic kidney disease, a histological study of the drug effects and toxicity in rats and mice was published in July 2017.

Family history of cancer other than breast or ovarian cancer in first-degree relatives is associated with poor breast cancer prognosis.

Whether a first-degree family history of others cancers (FHOC) than breast or ovarian cancer (BOC) is associated with breast cancer prognosis remains unknown. Thus, the aim of the present study was to clarify this issue. Women who were diagnosed with invasive breast cancer at the Renmin Hospital of Wuhan University from 2010 to 2013 were included in the study. The demographic and clinicopathological characteristics of these patients were extracted. FHOC was considered positive for any patient who had a relative who had been diagnosed with cancer other than BOC. Disease-free survival (DFS) was calculated based on the date of diagnosis. DFS was analyzed using the Cox proportional hazards model. A total of 434 breast cancer patients were included in this study. Among these patients, 61 (14.06%) had a positive FHOC in first-degree relatives. Patients with a positive FHOC tended to have HER2-positive breast cancer (p = 0.03). In the survival analysis, FHOC was associated with poor DFS in both univariate (HR = 2.21 (1.28-3.83), 95% CI: 1.28-3.83, p < 0.01) and multivariate (HR = 2.50, 95% CI: 1.24-5.04, p = 0.01) analyses, especially in patients with luminal A subtypes. The results demonstrated an increased risk of recurrence in breast cancer patients with FHOC, especially in patients with luminal A subtype.

Atypical ductal hyperplasia

Cancer risk based on follow-up The relative risk of breast cancer based on a median follow-up of 8 years, in a case control study of US registered nurses, is 3.7. See also Ductal carcinoma in situ Breast cancer Collagenous spherulosis References External links What is atypical ductal hyperplasia? (hopkinsmedicine.org) Benign neoplasms Breast neoplasia

Familial breast cancer. Part II: Relationships with histology, staging, steroid receptors and serum tumor markers.

To identify differences in clinical characteristics, histological features, hormone receptor status, and tumor marker expression between patients with sporadic and familial breast cancer. As in the previous Part I of this study, two groups of women with breast cancer were compared. The first group (group I) included 504 patients with a family history of breast cancer. The second (control) group (group II) consisted of 300 patients not reporting such a history in their relatives. The examined parameters in this report were stage and axillary lymph node involvement at the time of the initial diagnosis, treatment methods, hormone receptor status, and serum levels of the tumor markers CEA and CA 15.3. The data were processed and analysed using the SPSS statistical package. The statistical significance of differences between groups and subgroups was evaluated by x(2) Pearson's test and Student's paired t-test. Compared to sporadic cases, patients with familial breast cancer were more often diagnosed at an advanced III or IV stage; metastatic involvement of the regional lymph nodes was more frequent in group I patients. In the same group more radical surgical procedures combined with chemotherapy and local irradiation were performed. In group I the percentage of negative hormone receptors was higher (35.3% versus 22.6%; p <0.0001) for estrogen receptors (ER), and 47.6% versus 32.6% (p <0.0001) for progesterone receptors (PR). Also, in group I raised serum levels of CA 15.3 were significantly more frequent compared with group II (48% versus 35.5%, p <0.0789), and this applied also for CEA values above 50 ng/ml (10.6% versus 1.5%, p <0.0002). Familial breast cancer displays particular clinical characteristics, distinguishing it from the sporadic type of the disease. Patients with familial breast cancer are usually diagnosed at an advanced stage. Commonly, the hormone receptors are negative and the serum concentrations of tumor markers elevated. The steroid receptor status represents the most reliable predictor of response to hormonotherapy and an important prognostic factor of the patient's outcome. As a result of their particular characteristics, these patients require more radical surgical techniques combined with pre- or postoperative local radiotherapy and systemic chemotherapy.

HER-2/neu status and tumor morphology of invasive breast carcinomas in Ashkenazi women with known BRCA1 mutation status in the Ontario Familial Breast Cancer Registry.

The prevalence of BRCA1 germline mutations is greater in the Ashkenazi Jewish population than in the general North American population. The Ontario Familial Breast Cancer Registry collects clinical and family history data in familial breast carcinoma cases, and unselected Ashkenazi breast carcinomas, and acts as a tumor tissue repository. Using this resource, we examined the tumor morphology, hormone receptor status, and HER-2/neu protein overexpression in Canadian Ashkenazi breast carcinoma patients whose germline BRCA1 mutation status is known. Thirty-eight tumors from 32 BRCA1 carriers and 354 tumors from 334 noncarriers were analyzed. The tumors in BRCA1 mutation carriers were more likely to be high grade (P < 0.0001) and estrogen receptor negative (P < 0.004). There was an increased frequency of typical medullary carcinomas in mutation carriers when all tumors were analyzed. However, this difference did not remain statistically significant when only the first tumor diagnosed in each patient was included in the analysis. There was no difference in HER-2/neu protein overexpression between the two groups overall (P = 0.07). However, when the analysis was restricted to Grade III tumors, there were significantly fewer HER-2/neu-positive tumors in the mutation carriers versus noncarriers (3.1% vs. 21.5%, P = 0.012). No significant differences were found in the incidence of lymph node status, progesterone receptor status, lymphatic vessel invasion, degree of lymphocytic infiltration, or in the presence of ductal carcinoma in situ associated with the invasive tumors. Increasing awareness of the morphologic and immunophenotypic features more commonly found in BRCA1-associated breast carcinomas may lead to a wider use of these characteristics in genetic screening programs and provide further clues to their pathogenesis.


The NNT (number needed to treat), means how many patients we would need to treat with an intervention to obtain a benefit; in this question how many patients do we need to treat with warfarin to prevent a stroke. To calculate this we use the following formula: NNT= 1/RRA (RRA: absolute risk reduction). RRA= Io - Ie (Io: incidence in those not exposed to warfarin; Ie: incidence in those exposed to warfarin). RRA: 5,2%- 2,2%= 3= 0,03. NNT: 1/0.03= 33.3.

The NNT (number needed to treat), means how many patients we would need to treat with an intervention to obtain a benefit; in this question how many patients do we need to treat with warfarin to prevent a stroke. To calculate this we use the following formula: NNT= 1/RRA (RRA: absolute risk reduction). RRA= Io - Ie (Io: incidence in those not exposed to warfarin; Ie: incidence in those exposed to warfarin). RRA: 5,2%- 2,2%= [HIDDEN]. NNT: 1/0.03= [HIDDEN].

An 86-year-old woman in whom nonvalvular atrial fibrillation has been detected. She has a CHADS2 score of 3 points. In the literature, similar patients on warfarin therapy have a stroke risk of 2.2% versus 5.2% in patients without warfarin. What would be the number needed to treat (NNT) to prevent embolic stroke with anticoagulation therapy?

Medical Costs of Oral Anticoagulants vs Warfarin for Atrial Fibrillation Patients with Different Stroke Risks.

The Apixaban for the Reduction in Stroke and Other Thromboembolic Events in Atrial Fibrillation (ARISTOTLE), Randomized Evaluation of Long-term Anticoagulation Therapy (RE-LY), and Rivaroxaban Once Daily Oral Direct Factor Xa Inhibition Compared with Vitamin K Antagonism for Prevention of Stroke and Embolism Trial in Atrial Fibrillation (ROCKET-AF) trials demonstrated that the oral anticoagulants (OACs), apixaban, dabigatran, and rivaroxaban, respectively, are efficacious for stroke prevention among nonvalvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF) patients. Based on clinical trial results this study evaluated medical costs of clinical events associated with use of individual OACs relative to those of warfarin in NVAF patients with moderate and high stroke risk. Rates for primary and secondary efficacy and safety outcomes (i.e., clinical events) among NVAF patients with CHADS2 = 2 and ≥3 were determined from the three OAC trials. One-year incremental costs among patients with clinical events from a US payer perspective were obtained from the literature and inflation adjusted to 2010 costs. Medical costs for clinical events associated with each OAC vs. warfarin were estimated and compared. For NVAF patients with moderate stroke risk (CHADS2 = 2) differences in clinical event medical costs vs. warfarin were -$298, -$143, and +$117 per patient year for apixaban, dabigatran (150 mg), and rivaroxaban, respectively (negative numbers indicate cost reduction). For NVAF patients with high stroke risk (CHADS2 ≥ 3) differences in clinical event medical costs vs. warfarin were -$697, +$2, and -$100 for apixaban, dabigatran (150 mg), and rivaroxaban, respectively. Medical cost differences associated with OACs vs. warfarin vary according to stroke risk. Of the three OACs, apixaban demonstrated consistent medical cost reductions vs. warfarin for NVAF patients with moderate and high stroke risks.

Oral anticoagulation in atrial fibrillation.

Atrial fibrillation affects approximately 5 million patients in the United States. The rate of stroke in adults with atrial fibrillation depending on their risk factors varies between 1-20% annually. Anticoagulation with vitamin K antagonists such as warfarin has been the mainstay therapy but it is cumbersome and requires close follow-up. Since 2010, three new oral anticoagulants have received Food and Drug Administration approval for stroke prevention in atrial fibrillation. This review summarizes data from three landmark trials: RE-LY, ROCKET-AF, and ARISTOTLE. In addition, issues relating to cost, reversal, drug interactions, and perioperative discontinuation are discussed. Compared to Warfarin, Dabigatran 150 mg twice daily lowered the primary outcome of stroke/systemic embolism by 34% (number needed to treat/yr 169) and had similar incidence of major bleeding. Rivaroxaban demonstrated non inferiority compared to the warfarin group for the primary outcome of stroke and systemic embolism and major bleeding. Apixaban showed a relative risk reduction for the primary outcome of 21% (number needed to treat 300), and lowered major bleeding down by 31% (number needed to treat /yr 104). Apixaban also showed a mortality benefit compared to warfarin (3.52 vs. 3.94%/year, p 0.047). All 3 oral anticoagulants lowered rates of intracranial hemorrhage. The use of Rivaroxaban and Apixaban has been projected to reduce medical costs when compared to warfarin, and Dabigatran is projected to have similar costs. All the 3 oral anticoagulants have robust randomized controlled trials supporting their comparability to warfarin therapy for stroke prevention in non valvular atrial fibrillation, with Apixaban showing superiority in incidence of strokes, major bleeding and mortality.

Secondary prevention of stroke in patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation: optimal intensity of anticoagulation.

Nonvalvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF) is frequently seen in elderly people and has become a main cause of cardioembolic stroke. The efficacy of anticoagulation for primary prevention of stroke or transient ischaemic attacks (TIAs) in patients with NVAF has been established by prospective, randomised and controlled trials. Warfarin decreased the frequency of all strokes by 68% and the rate of the combined outcome of stroke, systemic embolism or death by 48%. Anticoagulation with warfarin using international normalised ratios (INRs) ranging from 2.0 to 3.0 is recommended for patients with NVAF, who have any of the risk factors identified by the Atrial Fibrillation Investigators (AFI) [previous stroke or TIA, history of hypertension, diabetes mellitus, advanced age (> or = 65 years old), congestive heart failure and coronary artery disease], the American College of Chest Physicians (ACCP) [increased age (> 75 years old), prior stroke, hypertension and heart failure], or the Stroke Prevention in Atrial Fibrillation (SPAF) investigators [women > 75 years old, prior stroke, systolic blood pressure > 160mm Hg, recent heart failure, and fractional shortening < 25% on echocardiography]. For the secondary prevention of stroke, the efficacy of adjusted-dose warfarin therapy has been demonstrated by 2 major randomised trials. SPAF III (INR 2.0 to 3.0) demonstrated a lower incidence of ischaemic stroke or systemic embolism (3.4 %/year) compared with low fixed-dose warfarin plus aspirin (acetylsalicylic acid) [11.9%]. The European Atrial Fibrillation Trial [EAFT] (INR 2.5 to 4.0) showed a lower incidence of all stroke (4.0 %/year) with adjusted-dose warfarin compared with placebo (12.0 %/year). The incidence of major bleeding in the adjusted-dose warfarin group in SPAF III and EAFT was 2.4 and 2.8 %/year, respectively. EAFT incidence rates for the occurrence of a first ischaemic or haemorrhagic complication analysed by INR range indicated that the rate was lowest at INRs of 2.0 to 2.9, and higher with INRs of 3.0 to 3.9. Therefore, the optimal intensity of anticoagulation for prevention of recurrent stroke seems to be an INR of between 2.0 and 3.0, as for primary prevention. Retrospective and prospective studies from Japan reported that in the elderly, haemorrhagic complications occur frequently with INRs above 2.6 and major ischaemic events cannot be prevented at INRs below 1.6. Therefore, an INR target between 1.6 and 2.6 may be an alternative for secondary prevention of stroke in elderly patients with NVAF who have a potential risk of bleeding, to avoid both major ischaemic and haemorrhagic events. Antiplatelets may be administered in patients who are unable to manage taking warfarin properly or who have a high risk of falling and subsequently sustaining a head injury, although the efficacy of antiplatelets for secondary prevention of stroke in NVAF has not yet been established.

Management of atrial fibrillation

Chronic anticoagulation Among patients with nonvalvular AF, anticoagulation with warfarin can reduce stroke by 60% while antiplatelet agents can reduce stroke by 20%. The combination of aspirin and clopidogrel reduced the risk of stroke by 25%, but increased the risk of major bleeding by 57%, which means that this combination is inferior to warfarin, and is not an alternative for patients who are judged to be at high risk of bleeding on warfarin therapy.

Stroke

Previous stroke or TIA Keeping blood pressure below 140/90 mmHg is recommended. Anticoagulation can prevent recurrent ischemic strokes. Among people with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation, anticoagulation can reduce stroke by 60% while antiplatelet agents can reduce stroke by 20%. However, a recent meta-analysis suggests harm from anticoagulation started early after an embolic stroke. Stroke prevention treatment for atrial fibrillation is determined according to the CHA2DS2–VASc score. The most widely used anticoagulant to prevent thromboembolic stroke in people with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation is the oral agent warfarin while a number of newer agents including dabigatran are alternatives which do not require prothrombin time monitoring. Anticoagulants, when used following stroke, should not be stopped for dental procedures.

Management of atrial fibrillation

Latest ESC guidelines on atrial fibrillation recommend assessment of bleeding risk in AF using the HAS-BLED (Hypertension, Abnormal renal/liver function, Stroke, Bleeding history or predisposition, Labile International Normalized Ratio, Elderly, Drugs/alcohol concomitantly) bleeding risk schema as a simple, easy calculation, whereby a score of ≥3 indicates "high risk" and some caution and regular review of the patient is needed. The HAS-BLED score has also been validated in an anticoagulated trial cohort of 7329 patients with AF – in this study, the HAS-BLED score offered some improvement in predictive capability for bleeding risk over previously published bleeding risk assessment schemas and was simpler to apply. With the likely availability of new oral anticoagulants that avoid the limitations of warfarin (and may even be safer), more widespread use of oral anticoagulation therapy for stroke prevention in AF is likely.

[A study on the evaluation of anticoagulation status comparing of CHADS2 versus CHA2DS2-VASc scores in patients with non valvular atrial fibrillation in Xinjiang area].

To evaluate the current status of anticoagulation therapy in patients with atrial fibrillation(AF)in Xinjiang, and compare the two scoring systems(CHADS2 and CHA2DS2-VASc scores) in determining the risk of strokes in AF patients in Xinjiang. Subjects with AF were collected by searching the electronic and paper medical records from 35 hospitals in Xinjiang area during October 2013 to October 2014, and followed up for the incident strokes after 10 to 12 months. Totally, 5 953 AF patients were enrolled in the study with the age of (67.9±12.0) years old, and men to women ratio of 1.44. Most patients were in age groups of 60-69 (23.92%) and 70-79 years (37.81%). Among patients with a CHADS2 score of 1 or less, the CHA2DS2-VASc scores of these subjects ranged from 0 to 3. After 10 to 12 months of follow-up, 22 patients developed new strokes. Only 30.79% patients ( n=1 460) received the anticoagulation treatment among those (n=4 742) who need to be treated with anticoagulation drugs. In patients receiving anticoagulant therapy, 1 162 patients were treated with warfarin, and 298 patients with new oral anticoagulant drugs.Totally 1 110 patients treated with warfarin were monitored with international normalized ratio (INR). The median INR was 1.14 with only 97 cases meeting the recommended INR ranging of 2.0-3.0 in the guidelines. The compliance rate was 8.74%. The current status of anticoagulation for AF in Xinjiang area is characterized by "low anticoagulation rate" and "low compliance rate". The CHA2DS2-VASc score is more suitable for predicting the risk of strokes in patients with non valvular atrial fibrillation in Xinjiang area.

Nine-year trend of oral anticoagulant use in patients with embolic stroke due to nonvalvular atrial fibrillation.

Direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) are increasingly used as an alternative to warfarin in patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF). However, whether there is sufficient prescription of oral anticoagulants (OACs) to decrease the incidence of embolic stroke remains unclear. We conducted a retrospective observational study of patients hospitalized with ischemic stroke between January 1, 2010 and December 31, 2018. During the 8 years, the annual incidence ratio of embolic stroke to all ischemic strokes did not decrease over time (21-33%) except for that in 2018. The proportion of OAC users did not also change over time (from 23% to 45% [overall 31%], <iP</i = .78). Among the OAC users, 19% patients were warfarin users, and 12% patients were DOAC users. In 73% of warfarin users, prothrombin time was subtherapeutic, whereas in 60% of DOAC users, the dose was adequately prescribed. OACs were prescribed more often in patients with high CHADS2 score than in those with low score (<iP</i = .01). The number of patients who had no medical history of a doctor visit before admission increased significantly in the recent period of 2015-2018 (22% vs 8% in the previous period of 2010-2014) (<iP</i = .01). The incidence of embolic stroke patients without OACs did not decrease over time, and OACs in patients with NVAF have not been sufficient, even in DOAC era. In recent years, the incidence of undiagnosed AF has increased. To prevent embolic stroke, a correct AF diagnosis beforehand is important.

Periprocedural Outcomes of Direct Oral Anticoagulants Versus Warfarin in Nonvalvular Atrial Fibrillation.

Direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) are surpassing warfarin as the anticoagulant of choice for stroke prevention in nonvalvular atrial fibrillation. DOAC outcomes in elective periprocedural settings have not been well elucidated and remain a source of concern for clinicians. The aim of this meta-analysis was to evaluate the periprocedural safety and efficacy of DOACs versus warfarin in patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation. We reviewed the literature for data from phase III randomized controlled trials comparing DOACs with warfarin in the periprocedural period among patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation. Substudies from 4 trials (RE-LY [Randomized Evaluation of Long-Term Anticoagulation Therapy], ROCKET AF [Rivaroxaban Once Daily Oral Direct Factor Xa Inhibitor Compared with Vitamin K Antagonism for Prevention of Stroke and Embolism Trial in Atrial Fibrillation], ARISTOTLE [Apixaban for the Prevention of Stroke in Subjects With Atrial Fibrillation], and ENGAGE-AF [Effective Anticoagulation With Factor xA Next Generation in Atrial Fibrillation]) were included in the meta-analysis. DOACs as a group and warfarin were compared in terms of the 30-day pooled risk for stroke/systemic embolism, major bleeding, and death, according to whether the study drug was interrupted or not periprocedurally. The overall relative risk (RR) was estimated with a random-effects model. The I<sup2</sup test was used to assess heterogeneity in RR among the studies. In the uninterrupted anticoagulant strategy, there were no differences in the rates of stroke/systemic embolism (pooled risk, 0.6% [29 events/4519 procedures] versus 1.1% [31/2971]; RR, 0.70; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.41-1.18) and death (1.4% versus 1.8%; RR, 0.77; 95% CI, 0.53-1.12) between DOACs and warfarin and significantly fewer major bleeding events (2.0% versus 3.3%; RR, 0.62; 95% CI, 0.47-0.82) with DOACs compared to warfarin. Under an interrupted strategy, there was no significant difference between DOACs versus warfarin for stroke/systemic embolism (0.4% [41/9260] versus 0.5% [31/7168]; RR, 0.95; 95% CI, 0.59-1.55), major bleeding (2.1% versus 2.0%; RR, 1.05; 95% CI, 0.85-1.30), and death (0.7% versus 0.6%; RR, 1.24; 95% CI, 0.76-2.04). The studies were homogeneous ( I<sup2</sup=0.0%) for all calculated pooled associations except for the RR of death in the interrupted strategy ( I<sup2</sup=26.3%). The short-term safety and efficacy of DOACs and warfarin are not different in patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation periprocedurally. Under an uninterrupted anticoagulation strategy, DOACs are associated with a 38% lower risk of major bleeding compared with warfarin.

Atrial fibrillation

For those with non-valvular atrial fibrillation, DOACs are at least as effective as warfarin for preventing strokes and blood clots embolizing to the systemic circulation (if not more so) and are generally preferred over warfarin. DOACs carry a lower risk of bleeding in the brain compared to warfarin, although dabigatran is associated with a higher risk of intestinal bleeding. Dual antiplatelet therapy with aspirin and clopidogrel is inferior to warfarin for preventing strokes and has comparable bleeding risk in people with atrial fibrillation. In those who are also on aspirin, however, DOACs appear to be better than warfarin.

Comparing mortality in patients with atrial fibrillation who are receiving a direct-acting oral anticoagulant or warfarin: a meta-analysis of randomized trials.

In patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation (AF), direct-acting oral anticoagulants (DOACs) are at least non-inferior to warfarin for the prevention of stroke and systemic embolism. The main objective of this study was to obtain reliable and precise estimates for all-cause mortality, vascular mortality and bleeding mortality in patients with AF receiving a DOAC or warfarin for stroke prevention. A meta-analysis was performed on phase 3 randomized trials that compared a DOAC with warfarin for stroke prevention in AF. Published data were pooled by use of the DerSimonian random-effect model, with revman 5.2 and comprehensive meta analysis software version 2. The results were presented as risk ratios (RRs), absolute risk reduction (ARR), and number-needed-to-treat (NNT). A total of 71 683 patients were included in this meta-analysis from four randomized controlled trials (median patient follow-up: 1.8-2.8 years) that compared a DOAC with warfarin for stroke prevention in AF. As compared with warfarin, DOACs significantly reduced all-cause mortality (RR 0.89, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.85-0.94; ARR 0.76%, 95% CI 0.39-1.13%; NNT = 132), vascular mortality (RR 0.88, 95% CI 0.82-0.94; ARR 0.53%, 95% CI 0.23-0.83%; NNT = 189), and bleeding mortality (RR 0.54, 95% CI 0.44-0.67; ARR 0.32%, 95% CI 0.21-0.43%; NNT = 313). As compared with warfarin therapy for stroke prevention in patients with AF, DOACs significantly reduce all-cause mortality, vascular mortality, and bleeding mortality. This mortality benefit appears to be driven by the reduction in vascular-related and bleeding-related mortality, which, in turn, may be related to the reduction in intracranial bleeding.

Current trial-associated outcomes with warfarin in prevention of stroke in patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation: a meta-analysis.

Although several new antithrombotic agents have been developed for stroke prevention in patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation (AF), many patients will continue to be treated with warfarin worldwide. We performed a meta-analysis of safety and efficacy outcomes in patients with AF treated with warfarin for stroke prevention in large contemporary randomized controlled trials (RCTs). We searched the MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane databases for relevant studies; RCTs comparing warfarin with an alternative thromboprophylaxis strategy with at least 400 patients in the warfarin arm and reporting stroke as an efficacy outcome were included. Eight RCTs with 55,789 patient-years of warfarin therapy follow-up were included. Overall time spent in the therapeutic range was 55% to 68%. The annual incidence of stroke or systemic embolism in patients with AF taking warfarin was estimated to be 1.66% (95% CI, 1.41%-1.91%). Major bleeding rates varied from 1.40% to 3.40% per year across the studies. The risk of stroke per year was significantly higher in elderly patients (2.27%), female patients (2.12%), patients with a history of stroke (2.64%), and patients reporting no previous exposure to vitamin K antagonists (1.96%). There was a significant increase in the annual incidence of stroke with progressively increasing CHADS(2) (congestive heart failure, hypertension, age, diabetes, and prior stroke) scores. Current use of warfarin as a stroke prevention agent in patients with AF is associated with a low rate of residual stroke or systemic embolism estimated to be 1.66% per year. Compared with a previous meta-analysis, there has been significant improvement in the proportion of time spent in therapeutic anticoagulation, with a resultant decline in observed stroke rates.

HAS-BLED

2020 ESC guidelines on atrial fibrillation recommend assessment of bleeding risk in AF using the HAS-BLED bleeding risk schema as a simple, easy calculation, whereby a score of ≥3 indicates "high risk" and some caution and regular review of the patient is needed. The HAS-BLED score has also been validated in an anticoagulated trial cohort of 7329 people with AF - in this study, the HAS-BLED score offered some improvement in predictive capability for bleeding risk over previously published bleeding risk assessment schemas and was simpler to apply. With the likely availability of new oral anticoagulants that avoid the limitations of warfarin (and may even be safer), more widespread use of oral anticoagulation therapy for stroke prevention in AF is likely.

SAMe-TT2R2 score

The SAMe-TT2R2 score is a clinical prediction rule to predict the quality of vitamin K antagonist anticoagulation therapy as measured by time in therapeutic INR range (TTR) (VKA e.g. warfarin). It has been suggested that it can aid in the medical decision making between VKAs and new oral anticoagulant/non-VKA oral anticoagulant (NOAC e.g. dabigatran, rivaroxaban, apixaban or edoxaban) in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF). This score can be used with patients with ≥1 additional stroke risk factors using the CHA2DS2-VASc score, where oral anticoagulation is recommended or should be considered. This score reflects the need to offer an improved patient care pathway when using oral anticoagulants. While NOACs avoid the need for drug monitoring (e.g. INR monitoring), they have an unstable bioavailability and are not indicated for patients with chronic kidney failure or in patients with valvular replacement surgery.

Transient ischemic attack

Anticoagulants may be started if the TIA is thought to be attributable to atrial fibrillation. Atrial fibrillation is an abnormal heart rhythm that may cause the formation of blood clots that can travel to the brain, resulting in TIAs or ischemic strokes. Atrial fibrillation increases stroke risk by five times, and is thought to cause 10-12% of all ischemic strokes in the US. Anticoagulant therapy can decrease the relative risk of ischemic stroke in those with atrial fibrillation by 67% Warfarin is a common anticoagulant used, but direct acting oral anticoagulants (DOACs), such as apixaban, have been shown to be equally effective while also conferring a lower risk of bleeding. Generally, anticoagulants and antiplatelets are not used in combination, as they result in increased bleeding risk without a decrease in stroke risk. However, combined antiplatelet and anticoagulant therapy may be warranted if the patient has symptomatic coronary artery disease in addition to atrial

VKORC1

Warfarin is a commonly prescribed oral anticoagulant, or blood thinner used to treat blood clots such as deep vein thrombosis and pulmonary embolism and to prevent stroke in people who have atrial fibrillation, valvular heart disease or artificial heart valves. Warfarin causes inhibition on VKORC1 activities and leads to a reduced amount of vitamin K available to serve as a cofactor for clotting proteins. Inappropriate dosing of warfarin has been associated with a substantial risk of both major and minor hemorrhage. As the pharmacological target of warfarin, VKORC1 is considered a candidate gene for the variability in warfarin response. Previous researches have shown that the CYP2C9 genotype of patients also played a role in warfarin metabolism and response. Gene The human gene is located on chromosome 16. Two pseudogenes have been identified on chromosome 1 and the X chromosome. Clinical relevance

Anticoagulation therapy for stroke prevention in atrial fibrillation: how well do randomized trials translate into clinical practice?

Warfarin has been shown to be highly efficacious for preventing thromboembolism in atrial fibrillation in randomized trials, but its effectiveness and safety in clinical practice is less clear. To evaluate the effect of warfarin on risk of thromboembolism, hemorrhage, and death in atrial fibrillation within a usual care setting. Cohort study assembled between July 1, 1996, and December 31, 1997, and followed up through August 31, 1999. Large integrated health care system in Northern California. Of 13,559 adults with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation, 11,526 were studied, 43% of whom were women, mean age 71 years, with no known contraindications to anticoagulation at baseline. Ischemic stroke, peripheral embolism, hemorrhage, and death according to warfarin use and comorbidity status, as determined by automated databases, review of medical records, and state mortality files. Among 11,526 patients, 397 incident thromboembolic events (372 ischemic strokes, 25 peripheral embolism) occurred during 25,341 person-years of follow-up, and warfarin therapy was associated with a 51% (95% confidence interval [CI], 39%-60%) lower risk of thromboembolism compared with no warfarin therapy (either no antithrombotic therapy or aspirin) after adjusting for potential confounders and likelihood of receiving warfarin. Warfarin was effective in reducing thromboembolic risk in the presence or absence of risk factors for stroke. A nested case-control analysis estimated a 64% reduction in odds of thromboembolism with warfarin compared with no antithrombotic therapy. Warfarin was also associated with a reduced risk of all-cause mortality (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.69; 95% CI, 0.61-0.77). Intracranial hemorrhage was uncommon, but the rate was moderately higher among those taking vs those not taking warfarin (0.46 vs 0.23 per 100 person-years, respectively; P =.003, adjusted hazard ratio, 1.97; 95% CI, 1.24-3.13). However, warfarin therapy was not associated with an increased adjusted risk of nonintracranial major hemorrhage. The effects of warfarin were similar when patients with contraindications at baseline were analyzed separately or combined with those without contraindications (total cohort of 13,559). Warfarin is very effective for preventing ischemic stroke in patients with atrial fibrillation in clinical practice while the absolute increase in the risk of intracranial hemorrhage is small. Results of randomized trials of anticoagulation translate well into clinical care for patients with atrial fibrillation.

Edoxaban

Compared with warfarin it has fewer drug interactions. It was developed by Daiichi Sankyo and approved in July 2011, in Japan for prevention of venous thromboembolisms following lower-limb orthopedic surgery. It was also approved in the United States by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) in January 2015, for the prevention of stroke and non–central-nervous-system systemic embolism. It was approved for use in the European Union in June 2015. It is on the World Health Organization's List of Essential Medicines. Medical uses In the United States, edoxaban is approved for treating deep vein thrombosis and pulmonary embolism following five to ten days of initial therapy with a parenteral anticoagulant. It is also approved for reducing the risk of blood clots in people with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation.

Non-vitamin K Oral Anticoagulants Versus Warfarin for Patients with Atrial Fibrillation: Absolute Benefit and Harm Assessments Yield Novel Insights.

Benefits and/or harms (including costs) of non-vitamin K oral anticoagulants (NOACs) versus warfarin therapy need appreciation in relative and absolute terms. Accordingly, we derived clinically relevant relative and absolute benefit/harm parameters for NOACs (apixaban, dabigatran, rivaroxaban, edoxaban) compared to warfarin from four clinical trials involving atrial fibrillation (AF) patients. For each trial, we tabulated patient numbers enduring four important outcomes and calculated unadjusted relative risk reduction (RRR) and number needed to treat (NNT)/year values (and 95% confidence intervals) for the NAOC compared to warfarin. These outcomes were as follows: stroke/systemic embolism (primary endpoint), hemorrhagic stroke, major bleeds, and death. We also addressed drug acquisition costs. Each NOAC was noninferior to warfarin for primary-outcome prevention; RRRs were 12-33% and NNT/year values were 182-481, and all but one indicated statistically significant superiority. All the NOACs yielded statistically significant reductions in hemorrhagic stroke risk; RRRs were 42-74% and NNT/year values were 364-528. Major bleeding risk was comparable in both groups. Apixaban yielded a lower NNT/year for preventing death than for primary-outcome prevention. Compared to warfarin, NOAC acquisition costs were 70- to 140-fold greater. For the primary outcome, the absolute benefits of NOACs were modest (NNT/year values being large). Reduced hemorrhagic stroke rates with NOACs could be due to superior embolic infarct prevention and fewer consequential hemorrhagic transformations. Among apixaban recipients, the absolute mortality benefit exceeded that for the primary outcome, indicating prevention of additional unrelated deaths. The substantially greater NOAC acquisition costs need viewing against probable greater safety and the avoidance of monitoring bleeding risks.

Cost-Effectiveness of High-Dose Edoxaban Compared with Adjusted-Dose Warfarin for Stroke Prevention in Non-Valvular Atrial Fibrillation Patients.

To estimate the quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), costs, and cost-effectiveness of high-dose edoxaban compared with adjusted-dose warfarin in patients at risk for stroke who have nonvalvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF) and a creatinine clearance (Clcr ) of 15-95 ml/minute. A Markov model was created to compare the cost-effectiveness of high-dose edoxaban and adjusted-dose warfarin in patients with a Clcr of 15-95 ml/minute. The model was performed from a U.S. societal perspective and assumed patients initiated therapy at 70 years of age, had a mean CHADS2 (congestive heart failure, hypertension, age 75 or older, diabetes, stroke) score of 3, and no contraindications to anticoagulation. The model assumed a cycle length of 1 month and a lifetime horizon (maximum of 30 years/360 cycles). Data sources included renal subgroup analysis of the Effective Anticoagulation with Factor Xa Next Generation in Atrial Fibrillation (ENGAGE-AF) trial and other published studies. Outcomes included lifetime costs (2014 US$), QALYs, and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios. The robustness of the model's conclusions was tested using one-way and 10,000-iteration probabilistic sensitivity analysis (PSA). Patients treated with high-dose edoxaban lived an average of 10.50 QALYs at a lifetime treatment cost of $99,833 compared with 10.11 QALYs and $123,516 for those treated with adjusted-dose warfarin. The model's conclusions were found to be robust upon one-way sensitivity analyses. PSA suggested high-dose edoxaban was economically dominant compared with adjusted-dose warfarin in more than 99% of the 10,000 iterations run. High-dose edoxaban appears to be an economically dominant strategy when compared with adjusted-dose warfarin for the prevention of stroke in NVAF patients with a Clcr of 15-95 ml/minute and an appreciable risk of stroke.

Atrial fibrillation

Prognosis Atrial fibrillation increases the risk of heart failure by 11 per 1000, kidney problems by 6 per 1000, death by 4 per 1000, stroke by 3 per 1000, and coronary heart disease by 1 per 1000. Women have a worse outcome overall than men. Evidence increasingly suggests that atrial fibrillation is independently associated with a higher risk of developing dementia. Blood clots Prediction of embolism Among Danish men aged 50, with no risk factors, the 5-year risk of stroke was 1.1% and with AF alone 2.5%. For women the risks were slightly less, 0.7% and 2.1%. For men aged 70, the 5-year risk of stroke was 4.8% and with AF alone 6.8%. For women aged 70 the risk was again lower than for men, 3.4% with no added risk factor and 8.2% with AF. Determining the risk of an embolism causing a stroke is important for guiding the use of anticoagulants. The most accurate clinical prediction rules are: CHADS2 CHA2DS2-VASc score

Management of atrial fibrillation

diabetes. For patients with LAF, the risk of stroke is very low and is independent of whether the LAF was an isolated episode, paroxysmal, persistent, or permanent. The risk of systemic embolization (atrial clots migrating to other organs) depends strongly on whether there is an underlying structural problem with the heart (e.g. mitral stenosis) and on the presence of other risk factors, such as diabetes and high blood pressure. Finally, patients under 65 are much less likely to develop embolization compared with patients over 75. In young patients with few risk factors and no structural heart defect, the benefits of anticoagulation may be outweighed by the risks of hemorrhage (bleeding). Those at a low risk may benefit from mild (and low-risk) anticoagulation with aspirin (or clopidogrel in those who are allergic to aspirin). In contrast, those with a high risk of stroke derive most benefit from anticoagulant treatment with warfarin or similar drugs. A new class of anticoagulant

[Anticoagulation in permanent atrial fibrillation after 75 years of age].

More than 10% of the population over 75 years old is concerned by non valvular permanent atrial fibrillation which is responsible for at least 30% of ischemic strokes. The indication of an anticoagulant therapy is discussed in two different situations: primary or secondary prevention of stroke and acute phase of stroke. Patients over 75 years old have a high risk of stroke (> 8% year). All the studies have demonstrated the benefit of a primary or secondary prevention by antivitamin K with an INR between 2 and 3 (reduction of the relative risk of about 68%). Conversely, the efficacy of aspirin has not been proven in this population of elderly patients. Once stroke has occurred, it is not recommended to initiate an anticoagulation (unfractioned or low molecular weight heparin) within the first hours. Prevention of venous thrombosis remains necessary. Currently, less than 30% of the patients older than 75 years are given anticoagulation, the risk of the treatment being probably overestimated. The risk benefit ratio should be evaluated more properly for a given patient.

Stroke

Those with atrial fibrillation have a 5% a year risk of stroke, and this risk is higher in those with valvular atrial fibrillation. Depending on the stroke risk, anticoagulation with medications such as warfarin or aspirin is useful for prevention. Except in people with atrial fibrillation, oral anticoagulants are not advised for stroke prevention—any benefit is offset by bleeding risk. In primary prevention, however, antiplatelet drugs did not reduce the risk of ischemic stroke but increased the risk of major bleeding. Further studies are needed to investigate a possible protective effect of aspirin against ischemic stroke in women.

Management of atrial fibrillation

Most patients with AF are at increased risk of stroke. The possible exceptions are those with lone AF (LAF), characterized by absence of clinical or echocardiographic findings of other cardiovascular disease (including hypertension), related pulmonary disease, or cardiac abnormalities such as enlargement of the left atrium, and age under 60 years . The incidence of stroke associated with AF is 3 to 5 percent per year in the absence of anticoagulation, which is significantly higher compared to the general population without AF (relative risk 2.4 in men and 3.0 in women). A systematic review of risk factors for stroke in patients with nonvalvular AF concluded that a prior history of stroke or TIA is the most powerful risk factor for future stroke, followed by advancing age, hypertension, and diabetes. For patients with LAF, the risk of stroke is very low and is independent of whether the LAF was an isolated episode, paroxysmal, persistent, or permanent. The risk of systemic embolization

Relationship between CHADS2 score and ischemic stroke during rhythm control therapy for paroxysmal atrial fibrillation.

The CHADS2 score has been proposed for stratifying patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF) according to the risk of thromboembolism in the AHA/ACC/ESC guidelines. However, there is little information about its usefulness for predicting the long-term risk of ischemic stroke in Japanese patients with paroxysmal AF. We retrospectively evaluated the incidence of ischemic stroke and the efficacy of anticoagulant therapy in paroxysmal AF patients on rhythm control therapy who were stratified by their CHADS2 score. The subjects were 334 NVAF atients (229 men and 105 women, mean age, 68 +/- 12 years, mean follow-up period, 60 +/- 35 months) who were categorized into low risk (score 0), moderate risk (1 or 2), and high risk (3 or more) groups for thromboembolism. The low, moderate, and high risk groups accounted for 34%, 50%, and 16% of the patients, respectively. Among 257 patients without warfarin therapy, the annual rate of symptomatic ischemic stroke was 0.6% in the score 0 group, 0.5% in the score 1 group, 3.1% in the score 2 group, and 9.6% in the score 3 or more group. Among 77 patients treated with warfarin (target PT-INR: 1.6-3.0), the stroke rate was 0% in the score 0 group, 0% in the score 1 group, 1.4% in the score 2 group, and 6.6% in the score 3 or more group. The annual rate of ischemic stroke was 0.88% in patients treated with warfarin versus 2.67% in those without warfarin, or a decrease in risk of 68% with warfarin (P < 0.01). In Japanese patients with paroxysmal AF, the CHADS2 score is useful for predicting the risk of ischemic stroke. Anticoagulant therapy is needed to prevent ischemic stroke in patients with paroxysmal AF, especially those who have a CHADS2 score of 2 or more.

Cost-effectiveness of warfarin and aspirin for prophylaxis of stroke in patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation.

To examine the cost-effectiveness of prescribing warfarin sodium in patients who have nonvalvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF) with or without additional stroke risk factors (a prior stroke or transient ischemic attack, diabetes, hypertension, or heart disease). Decision and cost-effectiveness analyses. The probabilities for stroke, hemorrhage, and death were obtained from published randomized controlled trials. The quality-of-life estimates were obtained by interviewing 74 patients with atrial fibrillation. Costs were estimated from literature review, phone survey, and Medicare reimbursement. In the base case, the patients were 65 years of age and good candidates for warfarin therapy. Treatment with warfarin, aspirin, or no therapy in the decision analytic model. Quality-adjusted survival and marginal cost-effectiveness of warfarin as compared with aspirin or no therapy. For patients with NVAF and additional risk factors for stroke, warfarin therapy led to a greater quality-adjusted survival and to cost savings. For patients with NVAF and one additional risk factor, warfarin therapy cost $8000 per quality-adjusted life-year saved. For 65-year-old patients with NVAF alone, warfarin cost about $370,000 per quality-adjusted life-year saved, as compared with aspirin therapy. However, for 75-year-old patients with NVAF alone, prescribing warfarin cost $110,000 per quality-adjusted life-year saved. For patients who were not prescribed warfarin, aspirin was preferred to no therapy on the basis of both quality-adjusted survival and cost in all patients, regardless of the number of risk factors present. Treatment with warfarin is cost-effective in patients with NVAF and one or more additional risk factors for stroke. In 65-year-old patients with NVAF but no other risk factors for stroke, prescribing warfarin instead of aspirin would affect quality-adjusted survival minimally but increase costs significantly.

Cost-effectiveness of dabigatran compared with warfarin for stroke prevention in atrial fibrillation.

Warfarin reduces the risk for ischemic stroke in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) but increases the risk for hemorrhage. Dabigatran is a fixed-dose, oral direct thrombin inhibitor with similar or reduced rates of ischemic stroke and intracranial hemorrhage in patients with AF compared with those of warfarin. To estimate the quality-adjusted survival, costs, and cost-effectiveness of dabigatran compared with adjusted-dose warfarin for preventing ischemic stroke in patients 65 years or older with nonvalvular AF. Markov decision model. The RE-LY (Randomized Evaluation of Long-Term Anticoagulation Therapy) trial and other published studies of anticoagulation. The cost of dabigatran was estimated on the basis of pricing in the United Kingdom. Patients aged 65 years or older with nonvalvular AF and risk factors for stroke (CHADS₂ score ≥1 or equivalent) and no contraindications to anticoagulation. Lifetime. Societal. Warfarin anticoagulation (target international normalized ratio, 2.0 to 3.0); dabigatran, 110 mg twice daily (low dose); and dabigatran, 150 mg twice daily (high dose). Quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), costs (in 2008 U.S. dollars), and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios. The quality-adjusted life expectancy was 10.28 QALYs with warfarin, 10.70 QALYs with low-dose dabigatran, and 10.84 QALYs with high-dose dabigatran. Total costs were $143 193 for warfarin, $164 576 for low-dose dabigatran, and $168 398 for high-dose dabigatran. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratios compared with warfarin were $51 229 per QALY for low-dose dabigatran and $45 372 per QALY for high-dose dabigatran. The model was sensitive to the cost of dabigatran but was relatively insensitive to other model inputs. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio increased to $50 000 per QALY at a cost of $13.70 per day for high-dose dabigatran but remained less than $85 000 per QALY over the full range of model inputs evaluated. The cost-effectiveness of high-dose dabigatran improved with increasing risk for stroke and intracranial hemorrhage. Event rates were largely derived from a single randomized clinical trial and extrapolated to a 35-year time frame from clinical trials with approximately 2-year follow-up. In patients aged 65 years or older with nonvalvular AF at increased risk for stroke (CHADS₂ score ≥1 or equivalent), dabigatran may be a cost-effective alternative to warfarin depending on pricing in the United States. American Heart Association and Veterans Affairs Health Services Research & Development Service.

Warfarin

Warfarin is best suited for anticoagulation (clot formation inhibition) in areas of slowly running blood (such as in veins and the pooled blood behind artificial and natural valves), and in blood pooled in dysfunctional cardiac atria. Thus, common clinical indications for warfarin use are atrial fibrillation, the presence of artificial heart valves, deep venous thrombosis, and pulmonary embolism (where the embolized clots first form in veins). Warfarin is also used in antiphospholipid syndrome. It has been used occasionally after heart attacks (myocardial infarctions), but is far less effective at preventing new thromboses in coronary arteries. Prevention of clotting in arteries is usually undertaken with antiplatelet drugs, which act by a different mechanism from warfarin (which normally has no effect on platelet function). It can be used to treat people following ischemic strokes due to atrial fibrillation, though direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) may offer greater benefits.

Cost-effectiveness of apixaban vs warfarin for secondary stroke prevention in atrial fibrillation.

To compare the cost-effectiveness of apixaban vs warfarin for secondary stroke prevention in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF). Using standard methods, we created a Markov decision model based on the estimated cost of apixaban and data from the Apixaban for Reduction in Stroke and Other Thromboembolic Events in Atrial Fibrillation (ARISTOTLE) trial and other trials of warfarin therapy for AF. We quantified the cost and quality-adjusted life expectancy resulting from apixaban 5 mg twice daily compared with those from warfarin therapy targeted to an international normalized ratio of 2-3. Our base case population was a cohort of 70-year-old patients with no contraindication to anticoagulation and a history of stroke or TIA from nonvalvular AF. Warfarin therapy resulted in a quality-adjusted life expectancy of 3.91 years at a cost of $378,500. In comparison, treatment with apixaban led to a quality-adjusted life expectancy of 4.19 years at a cost of $381,700. Therefore, apixaban provided a gain of 0.28 quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) at an additional cost of $3,200, resulting in an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $11,400 per QALY. Our findings were robust in univariate sensitivity analyses varying model inputs across plausible ranges. In Monte Carlo analysis, apixaban was cost-effective in 62% of simulations using a threshold of $50,000 per QALY and 81% of simulations using a threshold of $100,000 per QALY. Apixaban appears to be cost-effective relative to warfarin for secondary stroke prevention in patients with AF, assuming that it is introduced at a price similar to that of dabigatran.

Comparison of Aspirin and Naoxintong Capsule () with Adjusted-Dose Warfarin in Elderly Patients with High-Risk of Non-Valvular Atrial Fibrillation and Genetic Variants of Vitamin K Epoxide Reductase.

To compared the therapeutic effect of a Chinese patent medicine Naoxintong Capsule (, NXT) and aspirin with adjusted-dose warfarin in Chinese elderly patients (over 65 years) with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF) and genetic variants of vitamin K epoxide reductase (VKORC1), who are at high-risk of thromboembolism. A total of 151 patients, with NVAF and AA genotype of VKORC1-1639 (a sensitive genotype to warfarin) and a CHA<sub2</subDS<sub2</sub-VASc clinical risk score of 2 or above, were chosen for this study. Patients were randomized into two groups and orally treated with a combination of aspirin (100 mg/day) and NXT (1.6 g thrice a day) or adjusted-dose warfarin [international normalized ratio 2.0-3.0). The primary end points including ischemic stroke and death as well as the secondary end points including hemorrhage events were followed up for at least 1 year. Baseline clinical data and the rates of primary end points were similar between groups. However, the rate of serious bleeding (secondary event) in the combination therapy group was lower than that in the adjusted-dose warfarin group (0% vs. 7.9%, odds ratio: 0.921, 95% confidence interval: 0.862-0.984, P=0.028). Aspirin combined with NXT and warfarin displayed comparable rates of primary end point including ischemic stroke and all-cause death during the 1-year follow-up. However, as compared with warfarin, the combination therapy reduced the rate of serious bleeding. Therefore, aspirin combined with NXT might provide an alternative pharmacotherapy in preventing ischemic stroke for elderly patients with NAVF who cannot tolerate warfarin. (No. ChiCTR-TRC-13003596).

Management of atrial fibrillation

To compensate for the increased risk of stroke, anticoagulants may be required. However, in the case of warfarin, if someone with AF has a yearly risk of stroke that is less than 2%, then the risks associated with taking warfarin outweigh the risk of getting a stroke from AF. However, since these older data, there is now greater recognition of the importance of good anticoagulation control (as reflected by time in therapeutic range) as well as greater awareness of bleeding risk factors as well as data from recent trials that aspirin carries a similar rate of major bleeding to warfarin, especially in the elderly.