Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jun 12, 2026

Echocardiographic Approaches and Protocols for Comprehensive Phenotypic Characterization of Valvular Heart Disease in Mice
Published on: February 14, 2017
From 'Negative' Trial to Positive Clinical Impact: Emulating WARCEF While Accounting for Selection Bias in Trial
Xiaodi Li1, Sivaraman Rajaganapathy1, Xinyue Hu1
1Department of Artificial Intelligence and Informatics, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA.
None:
While randomized controlled trials (RCTs) guide clinical practice, their completion may also influence real-world treatment patterns. We investigated whether the outcomes of trial emulation differ before and after the publication of the WARCEF (Warfarin versus Aspirin in Reduced Cardiac Ejection Fraction) randomized controlled trial. We emulated the WARCEF trial using EHR data from the Mayo Clinic Platform, comparing Warfarin and Aspirin in patients with heart failure and reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). Analyses were stratified by the WARCEF completion date (July 2014), using both intention-totreat (ITT) and per-protocol (PP) frameworks. For the ITT analysis, the cohort size before 2014 consisted of 4,579 patients on Aspirin and 93 on Warfarin, while after 2014, the cohort included 13,599 patients on Aspirin and 493 on Warfarin. For the PP analysis, the cohort size before 2014 consisted of 4,314 patients on Aspirin and 86 on Warfarin, while after 2014, the cohort included 3,373 patients on Aspirin and 99 on Warfarin. No significant treatment difference was observed before July 2014, 1.3961 (95% CI: 0.696 - 2.802, p = 0.3477) and 1.1572 (95% CI: 0.559 - 2.397, p = 0.6945) for ITT and PP analytic approaches respectively, consistent with the findings of the WARCEF trial. However, after trial completion, Warfarin was associated with increased risk, 2.039 (95% CI: 1.412 - 2.945, p < 0.001) and 3.940 (95% CI: 1.376 - 11.286, p = 0.0107) for ITT and PP analysis respectively. These changes suggest that the WARCEF results and subsequent guideline updates influenced prescribing patterns and patient selection, thereby altering the observed treatment effects. Trial completion and guideline shifts can materially affect real-world emulation outcomes. Ignoring temporal changes in clinical practice may obscure causal inference and overstate or understate treatment effects in emulation studies. The publication of the WARCEF trial results may have influenced clinical decision-making, leading physicians to prescribe Warfarin or Aspirin differently based on trial findings. This shift in treatment patterns can introduce selection bias in real-world data, as patient characteristics associated with each treatment may no longer be randomly distributed after the trial. For accurate trial emulation, it is essential to ensure that the patient cohort aligns precisely with the trial environment, particularly with respect to the trial's completion date.
More Related Videos
07:26Conducting Maximal and Submaximal Endurance Exercise Testing to Measure Physiological and Biological Responses to Acute Exercise in Humans
Published on: October 17, 2018
07:37Performing an In Vitro Genome-Wide CRISPR Knockout Screen in Chimeric Antigen Receptor T Cells
Published on: January 31, 2025
Related Concept Videos
Clinical Trials
There are four phases in a clinical trial. A phase one...
Crossover Experiments
Crossover designs are performed even with smaller sample sizes since the samples can act as their controls. These are better than simple randomized trials since patients are exposed to all the treatments.
Blinding
Clinical Trials: Overview
Types of Biopharmaceutical Studies: Controlled and Non-Controlled Approaches
Non-controlled studies, commonly employed for initial exploration, lack a control group, rendering them susceptible to biases and external influences. In contrast, controlled...
Hazard Ratio
For example, in a clinical trial evaluating a...