ArticleJACC. Advances2026
Outcomes With Warfarin in Atrial Fibrillation: Individual Patient Data Analysis From Four Randomized Trials.
Article in JACC. Advances, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundWarfarin remains widely used for stroke prevention in atrial fibrillation (AF), particularly where access to direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) is limited. Updated outcome data across clinical risk groups are needed.
objectivesThe objectives of the study were to identify predictors of adverse outcomes with warfarin, evaluate the TIMI-AF risk score, and assess the benefit of standard-dose (SD) DOACs vs warfarin across risk strata.
methodsIndividual patient-level data from 58,634 patients (29,272 warfarin and 29,362 DOAC) enrolled in 4 pivotal randomized trials were analyzed. The net clinical outcome (NCO), defined as all-cause death, disabling or fatal stroke, or intracranial/fatal bleeding, was assessed using trial-stratified Cox models across key clinical subgroups and TIMI-AF risk score categories. Outcomes with SD-DOACs vs warfarin were compared across risk strata.
resultsOlder age (adjusted HR [aHR]: 1.55; 95% CI: 1.31-1.83), male sex (aHR: 1.30; 95% CI: 1.20-1.40), impaired kidney function (aHR: 2.21; 95% CI: 1.90-2.56), lower body mass index (aHR: 1.25; 95% CI: 1.15-1.36), vitamin K antagonist-naïve status (aHR: 1.17; 95% CI: 1.08-1.27), and nonparoxysmal AF (aHR: 1.31; 95% CI: 1.19-1.44) were independently associated with increased NCO risk (P < 0.001 for each). Annualized NCO rates were 3.5%, 7.6%, and 12.9% in low-, intermediate-, and high-risk TIMI-AF groups (P trend<0.001). SD-DOACs reduced NCO across all risk strata; however, absolute benefit with DOACs was modest in low-risk patients (0.3%; 95% CI: 0.1% to 0.6%).
conclusionsSeveral predictors of poor warfarin outcomes were identified. Although SD-DOACs reduced NCO across the risk spectrum, patients with low TIMI-AF scores derived modest absolute benefit. In settings with limited DOAC access, warfarin may be a reasonable option for lower-risk patients.
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.