Trial reportThe New England journal of medicine2012
Warfarin and aspirin in patients with heart failure and sinus rhythm.
Trial report in The New England journal of medicine, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to 4 registered trials, which are not on this map. Cited by 195 papers, 15 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Warfarin Versus Aspirin in Reduced Cardiac Ejection Fraction (WARCEF) Trial
A Randomized Controlled Trial of Influenza Vaccine to Prevent Adverse Vascular Events: A Pilot Study
A Randomized Controlled Trial of Influenza Vaccine to Prevent Adverse Vascular Events
Effects of APIXaban on BRAIN Protection in Patients With Sinus Rhythm and Heart Failure: APIXBRAIN-HF Trial
Who cites it
195 citing papers in PubMed, 15 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 575 citations in OpenAlex.
- Sex differences in pharmacological treatment of heart failure: a meta-analysis of randomized trials.European heart journal · 2026Pooled it
- Antiplatelet versus anticoagulation treatment for people with heart failure in sinus rhythm.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2025Pooled it
- Heart Failure and All-Cause Hospitalizations in Patients With Heart Failure: A Meta-Analysis.JAMA network open · 2024Pooled it
- Latin-American guidelines of recommendations at discharge from an acute coronary syndrome.Archivos de cardiologia de Mexico · 2024Guideline
- Stroke in patients with heart failure and reduced or preserved ejection fraction.European heart journal · 2023Pooled it
- An updated systematic review on heart failure treatments for patients with renal impairment: the tide is not turning.Heart failure reviews · 2022Pooled it
- Pooled it
- Association of Oral Anticoagulation With Stroke in Atrial Fibrillation or Heart Failure: A Comparative Meta-Analysis.Stroke · 2021Pooled it
- Off-label Use for Direct Oral Anticoagulants: Valvular Atrial Fibrillation, Heart Failure, Left Ventricular Thrombus, Superficial Vein Thrombosis, Pulmonary Hypertension-a Systematic Review.The Annals of pharmacotherapy · 2021Pooled it
- Anticoagulation versus placebo for heart failure in sinus rhythm.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2021Pooled it
- Implantable Cardioverter-Defibrillators in Trials of Drug Therapy for Heart Failure: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Journal of the American Heart Association · 2020Pooled it
- A comparison of anticoagulation, antiplatelet, and placebo treatment for patients with heart failure reduced ejection fraction in sinus rhythm: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Heart failure reviews · 2020Pooled it
- Guideline
- Anticoagulation versus placebo for heart failure in sinus rhythm.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2014Pooled it
- Oral anticoagulation therapy in heart failure patients in sinus rhythm: a systematic review and meta-analysis.PloS one · 2013Pooled it
- Apixaban and Recurrent Stroke Risk With Left Ventricular Dysfunction: A Secondary Analysis of the ARCADIA Trial.Stroke · 2025Trial
- Machine learning for stroke in heart failure with reduced ejection fraction but without atrial fibrillation: A post-hoc analysis of the WARCEF trial.European journal of clinical investigation · 2025Trial
- Diabetes mellitus in patients with heart failure and reduced ejection fraction: a post hoc analysis from the WARCEF trial.Internal and emergency medicine · 2024Trial
- New-onset atrial fibrillation in patients with worsening heart failure and coronary artery disease: an analysis from the COMMANDER-HF trial.Clinical research in cardiology : official journal of the German Cardiac Society · 2022Trial
- Left ventricular dimensions and cardiovascular outcomes in systolic heart failure: the WARCEF trial.ESC heart failure · 2021Trial
135 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
- Commented on by[Journal club].2012
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
25 authors at 12 institutions in 6 countries.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundIt is unknown whether warfarin or aspirin therapy is superior for patients with heart failure who are in sinus rhythm.
methodsWe designed this trial to determine whether warfarin (with a target international normalized ratio of 2.0 to 3.5) or aspirin (at a dose of 325 mg per day) is a better treatment for patients in sinus rhythm who have a reduced left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF). We followed 2305 patients for up to 6 years (mean [±SD], 3.5±1.8). The primary outcome was the time to the first event in a composite end point of ischemic stroke, intracerebral hemorrhage, or death from any cause.
resultsThe rates of the primary outcome were 7.47 events per 100 patient-years in the warfarin group and 7.93 in the aspirin group (hazard ratio with warfarin, 0.93; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.79 to 1.10; P=0.40). Thus, there was no significant overall difference between the two treatments. In a time-varying analysis, the hazard ratio changed over time, slightly favoring warfarin over aspirin by the fourth year of follow-up, but this finding was only marginally significant (P=0.046). Warfarin, as compared with aspirin, was associated with a significant reduction in the rate of ischemic stroke throughout the follow-up period (0.72 events per 100 patient-years vs. 1.36 per 100 patient-years; hazard ratio, 0.52; 95% CI, 0.33 to 0.82; P=0.005). The rate of major hemorrhage was 1.78 events per 100 patient-years in the warfarin group as compared with 0.87 in the aspirin group (P<0.001). The rates of intracerebral and intracranial hemorrhage did not differ significantly between the two treatment groups (0.27 events per 100 patient-years with warfarin and 0.22 with aspirin, P=0.82).
conclusionsAmong patients with reduced LVEF who were in sinus rhythm, there was no significant overall difference in the primary outcome between treatment with warfarin and treatment with aspirin. A reduced risk of ischemic stroke with warfarin was offset by an increased risk of major hemorrhage. The choice between warfarin and aspirin should be individualized. (Funded by the National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke; WARCEF ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00041938.).
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.