Validation of risk scores for ischaemic stroke in atrial fibrillation across the spectrum of kidney function

AIMS : The increasing prevalence of ischaemic stroke (IS) can partly be explained by the likewise growing number of patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD). Risk scores have been developed to identify high-risk patients, allowing for personalized anticoagulation therapy. However, predictive performance in CKD is unclear. The aim of this study is to validate six commonly used risk scores for IS in atrial fibrillation (AF) patients across the spectrum of kidney function. METHODS AND RESULTS : Overall, 36 004 subjects with newly diagnosed AF from SCREAM (Stockholm CREAtinine Measurements), a healthcare utilization cohort of Stockholm residents, were included. Predictive performance of the AFI, CHADS(2), Modified CHADS(2), CHA(2)DS(2)-VASc, ATRIA, and GARFIELD-AF risk scores was evaluated across three strata of kidney function: normal kidney function [estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) >60 mL/min/1.73 m(2)], mild CKD (eGFR 30–60 mL/min/1.73 m(2)), and advanced CKD (eGFR <30 mL/min/1.73 m(2)). Predictive performance was assessed by discrimination and calibration. During 1.9 years, 3069 (8.5%) patients suffered an IS. Discrimination was dependent on eGFR: the median c-statistic in normal eGFR was 0.75 (range 0.68–0.78), but decreased to 0.68 (0.58–0.73) and 0.68 (0.55–0.74) for mild and advanced CKD, respectively. Calibration was reasonable and largely independent of eGFR. The Modified CHADS(2) score showed good performance across kidney function strata, both for discrimination [c-statistic: 0.78 (95% confidence interval 0.77–0.79), 0.73 (0.71–0.74) and 0.74 (0.69–0.79), respectively] and calibration. CONCLUSION : In the most clinically relevant stages of CKD, predictive performance of the majority of risk scores was poor, increasing the risk of misclassification and thus of over- or undertreatment. The Modified CHADS(2) score performed good and consistently across all kidney function strata, and should therefore be preferred for risk estimation in AF patients.