AUTHOR=Dong Liang , Lu Cao , Wensen Chen , Fuzhong Chen , Khalid Muhammad , Xiaoyu Dong , Guangjuan Li , Yanxia Qian , Yufeng Zhang , Xinjian Liu , Leilei Chen , Junhong Wang TITLE=Performance of PRECISE-DAPT and Age–Bleeding–Organ Dysfunction Score for Predicting Bleeding Complication During Dual Antiplatelet Therapy in Chinese Elderly Patients JOURNAL=Frontiers in Cardiovascular Medicine VOLUME=9 YEAR=2022 URL=https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/cardiovascular-medicine/articles/10.3389/fcvm.2022.910805 DOI=10.3389/fcvm.2022.910805 ISSN=2297-055X ABSTRACT=Background

Recently, the Age–Bleeding–Organ Dysfunction (ABO) algorithm was recommended by the Asian Pacific Society of Cardiology Consensus as a binary approach to evaluate bleeding risk. This analysis made comparison of the predictive performances between the PRECISE-DAPT and ABO bleeding score in identifying the risk of 12-months major bleeding in Chinese elderly patients over 65 years old patients who underwent percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) during dual-antiplatelet therapy period.

Methods

A total of 2,037 elderly coronary artery disease (CAD) patients (≥65 years) receiving dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) after PCI were enrolled in the study. The predictive accuracy of the two bleeding risk scores (PRECISE-DAPT and ABO) was compared for identifying the risk of bleeding during the dual-antiplatelet therapy in patients who underwent PCI. Major clinically relevant bleeding events were defined according to the Bleeding Academic Research Consortium (BARC) criteria.

Results

The PRECISE-DAPT score in the no bleeding, BARC = 1 bleeding, BARC ≥ 2 bleeding patients was 23.55 ± 10.46, 23.23 ± 10.03, and 33.54 ± 14.33 (p < 0.001), respectively. Meanwhile, the ABO score in the three groups was 0.72 ± 0.80, 0.69 ± 0.81, and 1.49 ± 0.99 (p < 0.001), respectively. The C-statistic of the PRECISE-DAPT model for prediction of BARC ≥ 2 bleeding in overall patients was 0.717 (95% CI, 0.656–0.777) and 0.720 (95% CI, 0.656–0.784) in acute coronary syndrome (ACS) patients. Similar discriminatory capacity was demonstrated in the ABO risk score [overall, patients, AUC: 0.712 (95% CI, 0.650–0.774); ACS patients, AUC: 0.703 (95% CI, 0.634–0.772)]. No differences were observed when the ABO model was in comparison with the PRECISE-DAPT model, regardless in overall patients (z = −0.199, p = 0.842) or ACS patients (z = −0.605, p = 0.545). The calibration for BARC ≥ 2 bleeding of the PRECISE-DAPT and ABO score were acceptable, regardless in overall patients [goodness-of-fit (GOF) Chi-square = 0.432 and 0.001, respectively; p-value = 0.806 and 0.999, respectively] or ACS patients (GOF Chi-square = 0.008 and 0.580, respectively; p-value = 0.996 and 0.748, respectively).

Conclusion

No matter of clinical presentation in Asian 65-years older patients with DAPT, the PRECISE-DAPT, and ABO scores had the similar discriminative ability for 12-months BARC ≥ 2 bleeding. Considering the simplicity and reliability, the PRECISE-DAPT score might be more clinically applicable in the overall population and ACS patients in bleeding prediction.