Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40289614›Full record

ArticleEuropean heart journal. Cardiovascular pharmacotherapy2025

Stroke risk stratifications according to CHA2DS2-VASc vs. CHA2DS2-VA in patients with atrial fibrillation: insights from the GLORIA-AF registry.

Steven Ho Man Lam, Giulio Francesco Romiti, Bernadette Corica, Tommaso Bucci, Brian Olshansky, Tze-Fan Chao, Menno V Huisman, Gregory Y H Lip

Abstract readMulticenter StudyComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in European heart journal. Cardiovascular pharmacotherapy, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. CHAFrontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2026
    Article
  5. Observational
  6. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

Steven Ho Man LamLiverpool Centre for Cardiovascular Sciences at University of Liverpool, Liverpool John Moors University and Liverpool Heart & Chest Hospital, Liverpool L7 8TX, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-2147-0995
Giulio Francesco RomitiLiverpool Centre for Cardiovascular Sciences at University of Liverpool, Liverpool John Moors University and Liverpool Heart & Chest Hospital, Liverpool L7 8TX, UK.
Bernadette CoricaLiverpool Centre for Cardiovascular Sciences at University of Liverpool, Liverpool John Moors University and Liverpool Heart & Chest Hospital, Liverpool L7 8TX, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-9460-4435
Tommaso BucciLiverpool Centre for Cardiovascular Sciences at University of Liverpool, Liverpool John Moors University and Liverpool Heart & Chest Hospital, Liverpool L7 8TX, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-2895-6234
Brian OlshanskyDivision of Cardiology, Department of Medicine, University of Iowa, 200 Hawkins Drive, Iowa City, IA 52242, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-6044-045X
Tze-Fan ChaoDivision of Cardiology, Department of Medicine, Taipei Veterans General Hospital, No. 201, Sec. 2, Shipai Rd., Beitou District, Taipei 11217, Taiwan.ORCID 0000-0002-6587-3094
Menno V HuismanDepartment of Thrombosis and Hemostasis, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands.
Gregory Y H LipLiverpool Centre for Cardiovascular Sciences at University of Liverpool, Liverpool John Moors University and Liverpool Heart & Chest Hospital, Liverpool L7 8TX, UK.

Funding

Boehringer Ingelheim GmbH
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

aimsWhether the adoption of CHA2DS2-VA score, the sex-independent version of the CHA2DS2-VASc score is beneficial for stratifying risk of stroke in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) remains controversial. METHODS AND

resultsUtilizing the data from the global, multicentre and prospective GLORIA-AF Registry Phase III, we compared the performances of CHA2DS2-VA and CHA2DS2-VASc scores in stratifying the risk of ischaemic stroke and thromboembolism (TE), and compared the risk of ischaemic stroke and TE, and the use of oral anticoagulants in male and female patients with AF. A total of 21 260 AF patients with available data were included in the analysis (mean age 70.2 ± 10.3 years, 44.9% female). Overall, female patients were less likely prescribed with oral anticoagulant (OAC) compared with males [odds ratio: 0.90, 95%confidence interval [CI]: (0.83-0.97)]. A significant interaction (P < 0.001) between sex and age was observed, with a lower likelihood of receiving OAC among younger female patients.The risk of ischaemic stroke [hazard ratio (HR):1.14, 95%CI: (0.85-1.53)] and TE [HR: 1.02, 95%CI: (0.82-1.26)] was similar between male and female patients, and the predictive ability of the two scores was similar for both outcomes: TE [area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC): 0.641, 95%CI: (0.585-0.697) vs. AUC: 0.636, 95%CI: (0.580-0.692); P = 0.593] and ischaemic stroke [AUC: 0.660, (95%CI: 0.582-0.739) vs. AUC: 0.646, (95%CI: 0.568-0.725); P = 0.847]. There was a possible interaction between sex and age observed, with a higher risk of TE in younger female patients (P = 0.051).

conclusionCHA2DS2-VA score had similar predictive performance for thromboembolic events compared with CHA2DS2-VASc score. The role of female sex in the management and outcomes of patients with AF may differ according to age. Whether the omission of the female criterion from CHA2DS2-VA would lead to less OAC use in female AF patients over the next years remains to be seen.

Indexed as

AnticoagulantsAtrial FibrillationDecision Support TechniquesIschemic StrokeStrokeThromboembolismAdministration, OralAgedAged, 80 and overAge FactorsFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedPredictive Value of TestsProspective StudiesAnticoagulantsAtrial fibrillationCHA2DS2-VACHA2DS2-VAScStroke

Identifiers

PMID40289614
PMCPMC12343043

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.