← Back
NeuroTrials.ai
Neurology Clinical Trial Database

BAFTA

Warfarin versus aspirin for stroke prevention in an elderly community population with atrial fibrillation (the Birmingham Atrial Fibrillation Treatment of the Aged Study, BAFTA): a randomised controlled trial

Year of Publication: 2007

Authors: Mant J, Hobbs FDR, Fletcher K, ..., Murray E; BAFTA investigators

Journal: Lancet

Citation: Lancet 2007;370(9586):493–503. DOI: 10.1016/S0140-6736(07)61233-1

Link: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(07)61233-1

Bottom Line

In primary-care patients ≥75 years with AF, warfarin (INR 2–3) halved the risk of fatal/disabling stroke, intracranial haemorrhage, or arterial embolism versus aspirin 75 mg (1.8% vs 3.8%/yr; RR 0.48) with no meaningful excess in major bleeding.

Major Points

  • Warfarin reduced the primary composite endpoint by 52% versus aspirin (RR 0.48, 95% CI 0.28–0.80, p=0.003); absolute risk reduction 2%/yr, NNT 50/yr.
  • The benefit was driven predominantly by ischaemic stroke prevention (0.8%/yr on warfarin vs 2.5%/yr on aspirin; RR 0.30, p=0.0004).
  • There was no significant increase in extracranial (1.4% vs 1.6%/yr) or total major haemorrhage (1.9% vs 2.0%/yr) with warfarin—including in patients ≥85 years old—when INR was managed to a target of 2.5.
  • Efficacy was consistent across prespecified subgroups: age, sex, previous stroke/TIA, method of AF identification, prior warfarin use, and CHADS2 score.
  • BAFTA established that age ≥75 alone should not be a contraindication to oral anticoagulation for AF; findings were incorporated into subsequent international guidelines.

Design

Study Type: Prospective randomised open-label trial with blinded endpoint assessment (PROBE)

Randomization: 1

Blinding: Open-label with blinded endpoint adjudication (independent neurologists and geriatrician)

Enrollment Period: April 2001 – November 2004

Follow-up Duration: Mean 2.7 years (SD 1.2); follow-up through September 2006

Centers: 260

Countries: United Kingdom

Sample Size: 973

Analysis: Intention-to-treat (prespecified on-treatment analysis for major haemorrhage)


Inclusion Criteria

  • Age ≥75 years
  • Atrial fibrillation or atrial flutter demonstrated on study ECG or on an ECG performed within the previous 2 years (verified by a consultant cardiologist)
  • Recruited from participating UK primary care practices (England and Wales)
  • Clinical equipoise—the primary care physician judged either warfarin or aspirin to be an acceptable treatment option
  • Written informed consent after two-stage information/consent process

Exclusion Criteria

  • Rheumatic heart disease
  • Major non-traumatic haemorrhage within the previous 5 years
  • Prior intracranial haemorrhage
  • Endoscopically proven peptic ulcer disease within the previous year
  • Oesophageal varices
  • Allergic hypersensitivity to warfarin or aspirin
  • Terminal illness (as judged by the primary care physician)
  • Surgery within the past 3 months
  • Blood pressure >180/110 mm Hg
  • Primary care physician judged that either warfarin or aspirin was clearly indicated/contraindicated

Baseline Characteristics

CharacteristicWarfarin (n=488)Aspirin (n=485)
Mean Age (years)81.5 (SD 4.3)81.5 (SD 4.2)
Age 75–79197 (40%)200 (41%)
Age 80–84196 (40%)190 (39%)
Age ≥8595 (19%)95 (20%)
Sex - Male267 (55%)264 (54%)
Identified via practice register342 (70%)341 (70%)
Identified via opportunistic screening146 (30%)144 (30%)
CHADS2 1–2349 (72%)349 (72%)
CHADS2 3–6139 (28%)136 (28%)
On warfarin at entry194 (40%)187 (39%)
On aspirin at entry203 (42%)204 (42%)
History of stroke or TIA64 (13%)60 (12%)
History of hypertension259 (53%)269 (55%)
Systolic BP (mm Hg)139.9 (SD 19.2)141.3 (SD 19.9)
Diastolic BP (mm Hg)78.1 (SD 11.1)78.9 (SD 12.5)
Diabetes mellitus68 (14%)61 (13%)
Heart failure96 (20%)94 (19%)
Myocardial infarction47 (10%)56 (12%)
Angina80 (16%)75 (15%)

Arms

FieldWarfarinControl
InterventionWarfarin dosed to target INR 2.5 (acceptable range 2–3); routine UK primary/hospital-based anticoagulation managementAspirin 75 mg once daily
DurationFor duration of follow-up (mean 2.7 years)For duration of follow-up (mean 2.7 years)

Outcomes

OutcomeTypeControlInterventionHR / OR / RRP-value
First fatal or non-fatal disabling stroke (ischaemic or haemorrhagic), other intracranial haemorrhage, or clinically significant arterial embolism (ITT)Primary48 events (3.8%/year) on aspirin24 events (1.8%/year) on warfarin0.480.003
All strokes (ischaemic + haemorrhagic, fatal + non-fatal)Secondary61 (4.9%/yr)33 (2.5%/yr)0.520.002
Ischaemic strokeSecondary32 (2.5%/yr)10 (0.8%/yr)0.30.0004
Haemorrhagic strokeSecondary5 (0.4%/yr)6 (0.5%/yr)1.150.83
All strokes + TIASecondary70 (5.7%/yr)40 (3.1%/yr)0.550.002
Myocardial infarctionSecondary15 (1.2%/yr)15 (1.1%/yr)0.960.91
Heart failure (hospitalisation/death)Secondary23 (1.8%/yr)38 (2.9%/yr)1.590.08
All non-stroke vascular eventsSecondary76 (6.3%/yr)78 (6.1%/yr)0.970.84
All-cause mortalitySecondary108 (8.4%/yr)107 (8.0%/yr)0.950.73
Major vascular events (composite: stroke, MI, PE, vascular death)Secondary100 (8.1%/yr)76 (5.9%/yr)0.730.03
Primary events plus major haemorrhage (net clinical benefit composite)Secondary64 (5.1%/yr)39 (3.0%/yr)0.590.008
Major extracranial haemorrhageAdverseWarfarin 1.4%/yr (18 events) vs Aspirin 1.6%/yr (20) — RR 0.87 (0.43–1.73), p=0.67
Other hospital admission for haemorrhageAdverseWarfarin 1.8%/yr (24) vs Aspirin 1.5%/yr (19) — RR 1.22 (0.64–2.36), p=0.52
All major haemorrhage (intracranial + fatal/transfusion/surgery extracranial)AdverseWarfarin 1.9%/yr (25) vs Aspirin 2.0%/yr (25) — RR 0.96 (0.53–1.75), p=0.90
Intracranial haemorrhage (including haemorrhagic stroke)AdverseWarfarin 8 events (~0.6%/yr) vs Aspirin 6 events (~0.5%/yr)
Fatal primary eventsAdverseWarfarin 15 (1.1%/yr) vs Aspirin 23 (1.8%/yr) — RR 0.63 (0.31–1.26)
Non-vascular deathAdverseWarfarin 51 (3.8%/yr) vs Aspirin 51 (4.0%/yr) — RR 0.96 (0.64–1.45)
INR controlAdverseTime in therapeutic range (2–3) 67%; below range 19%, above 14%; median INR 2.3 (IQR 2.0–2.8)
Treatment adherenceAdverse67% of warfarin-assigned remained on warfarin; 76% of aspirin-assigned remained on aspirin
On-treatment analysis for major haemorrhageAdverseRR 0.88 (95% CI 0.46–1.63) — no significant difference

Subgroup Analysis

Warfarin superiority for the primary outcome was consistent across prespecified subgroups: age (75–79, 80–84, ≥85), sex (male and female), method of identification (practice register vs opportunistic screening), prior warfarin use (yes/no), history of stroke or TIA (yes/no), and CHADS2 score (1–2 vs 3–6). No significant interaction was detected between treatment allocation and any subgroup for either the primary event or major haemorrhage. Notably, in patients ≥85 years the primary event rate was 2.8%/yr on warfarin vs 5.6%/yr on aspirin (RR 0.50).


Criticisms

  • Open-label design (blinded endpoint adjudication mitigates but does not eliminate ascertainment bias).
  • Only 21% of eligible identified patients with AF entered the trial (most exclusions reflected clinician preference for one therapy), limiting external generalisability at the high-risk extreme.
  • Under-powered for secondary outcomes and safety comparisons: 95% CIs around major haemorrhage remain wide, so a modest bleeding excess with warfarin cannot be excluded.
  • Substantial treatment crossover (33% off warfarin; 17% of aspirin group ultimately on warfarin) likely diluted true between-group differences in both efficacy and bleeding.
  • Primary endpoint restricted to fatal/disabling stroke—minor strokes and TIAs were not captured as primary events.
  • Predates direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs); results inform vitamin K antagonist strategy but should be interpreted alongside subsequent AF DOAC trials in the elderly.
  • Aspirin dose fixed at 75 mg (standard UK practice); higher aspirin doses could plausibly have produced more bleeding but not more efficacy.
  • INR management reflected routine UK practice (TTR 67%); benefit could differ in settings with poorer or better anticoagulation control.

Funding

UK Medical Research Council; additional support from the Midland Research Practices Network (MidReC) and the Primary Care Research Trust. Dr Lip disclosed research/lecturing support from AstraZeneca, Sanofi-Aventis, Bayer, Astellas, and Daiichi-Sankyo; other authors declared no conflicts.

Based on: BAFTA (Lancet, 2007)

Authors: Mant J, Hobbs FDR, Fletcher K, ..., Murray E; BAFTA investigators

Citation: Lancet 2007;370(9586):493–503. DOI: 10.1016/S0140-6736(07)61233-1

Content summarized and formatted by NeuroTrials.ai.