Dataset Information

Effect of Non-vitamin K Antagonist Oral Anticoagulants in Atrial Fibrillation Patients with Newly Diagnosed Cancer.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES:There are limited data on the use of non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants (NOACs) in atrial fibrillation (AF) patients with cancer. We aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of NOACs in AF patients with cancer in this study. METHODS:In 2,568 consecutive non-valvular AF patients with newly diagnosed cancer, we analyzed ischemic stroke/systemic embolism (SE), major bleeding, and all-cause death. Based on propensity score matching, 388 matched pairs were included in the NOAC and warfarin groups. RESULTS:Patient baseline characteristics were comparable between the matched groups. During median follow-up of 1.8 years, the NOAC group had significantly lower incidences of ischemic stroke/SE (p<0.001), major bleeding (p<0.001), and all-cause death (p<0.001) than the warfarin group. Moreover, the incidence of major bleeding was significantly lower in the NOAC group than in the warfarin group with optimal international normalized ratio control (p=0.03). Especially, within 1 year after cancer diagnosis, the incidences of all clinical events were significantly lower in the NOAC group than in the warfarin group. CONCLUSIONS:In AF patients with newly diagnosed cancer, NOACs showed lower incidences of ischemic stroke/SE, major bleeding, and all-cause death than warfarin, especially within 1 year after cancer diagnosis.

SUBMITTER: Kim K

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5940645 | biostudies-literature | 2018 May

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Effect of Non-vitamin K Antagonist Oral Anticoagulants in Atrial Fibrillation Patients with Newly Diagnosed Cancer.

Kim Kyu K Lee Yong Joon YJ Kim Tae Hoon TH Uhm Jae Sun JS Pak Hui Nam HN Lee Moon Hyoung MH Joung Boyoung B

Korean circulation journal 20180226 5

<h4>Background and objectives</h4>There are limited data on the use of non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants (NOACs) in atrial fibrillation (AF) patients with cancer. We aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of NOACs in AF patients with cancer in this study.<h4>Methods</h4>In 2,568 consecutive non-valvular AF patients with newly diagnosed cancer, we analyzed ischemic stroke/systemic embolism (SE), major bleeding, and all-cause death. Based on propensity score matching, 388 matched pairs ...[more]

PMID: 29671285

Similar Datasets

Project description:Background Vitamin K antagonists (VKAs) are associated with coronary artery calcification in low-risk populations, but their effect on calcification of large arteries remains uncertain. The effect of non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants (NOACs) on vascular calcification is unknown. We investigated the influence of use of VKA and NOAC on calcification of the aorta and aortic valve. Methods In patients with atrial fibrillation without a history of major adverse cardiac or cerebrovascular events who underwent computed tomographic angiography, the presence of ascending aorta calcification (AsAC), descending aorta calcification (DAC), and aortic valve calcification (AVC) was determined. Confounders for VKA/NOAC treatment were identified and propensity score adjusted logistic regression explored the association between treatment and calcification (Agatston score > 0). AsAC, DAC, and AVC differences were assessed in propensity score-matched groups. Results Of 236 patients (33% female, age: 58 ± 9 years), 71 (30%) used VKA (median duration: 122 weeks) and 79 (34%) used NOAC (median duration: 16 weeks). Propensity score-adjusted logistic regression revealed that use of VKA was significantly associated with AsAC (odds ratio [OR]: 2.31; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.16-4.59; p = 0.017) and DAC (OR: 2.38; 95% CI: 1.22-4.67; p = 0.012) and a trend in AVC (OR: 1.92; 95% CI: 0.98-3.80; p = 0.059) compared with non-anticoagulation. This association was absent in NOAC versus non-anticoagulant (AsAC OR: 0.51; 95% CI: 0.21-1.21; p = 0.127; DAC OR: 0.80; 95% CI: 0.36-1.76; p = 0.577; AVC OR: 0.62; 95% CI: 0.27-1.40; p = 0.248). A total of 178 patients were propensity score matched in three pairwise comparisons. Again, use of VKA was associated with DAC ( p = 0.043) and a trend toward more AsAC ( p = 0.059), while use of NOAC was not (AsAC p = 0.264; DAC p = 0.154; AVC p = 0.280). Conclusion This cross-sectional study shows that use of VKA seems to contribute to vascular calcification. The calcification effect was not observed in NOAC users.

Project description:BackgroundUse of the non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants (NOACs) is endorsed by current guidelines for stroke prevention in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF). However efficacy and safety of NOACs in patients undergoing catheter ablation (RFCA) of AF has not been well established yet.ObjectivesTo perform a meta-analysis of all studies comparing NOACs and vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants (VKAs) in patients undergoing RFCA.Data sourcesStudies were searched for in PubMed and Google Scholar databases.Study eligibility criteriaStudies were considered eligible if: they evaluated the clinical impact of NOACs versus VKAs; they specifically analyzed the use of anticoagulants during periprocedural phase of RFCA; they reported clinical outcome data.Study appraisal and synthesis methods25 studies were selected, including 9881 cases. The summary measure used was the risk ratio (RR) with 95% confidence interval (CI). The random-effects or the fixed effect model were used to synthesize results from the selected studies.ResultsThere was no significant difference in thromboembolic complications (RR 1.39; p=0.13). Bleeding complications were significantly lower in the NOACs-treated arm as compared to VKAs (RR=0.67, p<0.001). Interestingly, a larger number of thromboembolic events was found in the VKAs-treated arm in those studies where VKAs had been interrupted during the periprocedural phase (RR=0.68; p=ns). In this same subgroup a significantly higher incidence of both minor (RR=0.54; p=0.002) and major bleeding (RR=0.41; p=0.01) events was recorded. Conversely, the incidence of thromboembolic events in the VKAs-treated arm was significantly lower in those studies with uninterrupted periprocedural anticoagulation treatment (RR=1.89; p=0.02).LimitationsAs with every meta-analysis, no patients-level data were available.Conclusions and implicationsThe use of NOACs in patients undergoing RFCA is safe, given the lower incidence of bleedings observed with NOACs. On the other side, periprocedural interruption of VKAs and bridging with heparin is associated with a higher bleeding rate with no significant benefit on onset of thromboembolic events.

Project description:Importance:Patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation at risk of stroke should receive oral anticoagulants (OAC). However, approximately 1 in 8 patients in the Global Anticoagulant Registry in the Field (GARFIELD-AF) registry are treated with antiplatelet (AP) drugs in addition to OAC, with or without documented vascular disease or other indications for AP therapy. Objective:To investigate baseline characteristics and outcomes of patients who were prescribed OAC plus AP therapy vs OAC alone. Design, Setting, and Participants:Prospective cohort study of the GARFIELD-AF registry, an international, multicenter, observational study of adults aged 18 years and older with recently diagnosed nonvalvular atrial fibrillation and at least 1 risk factor for stroke enrolled between March 2010 and August 2016. Data were extracted for analysis in October 2017 and analyzed from April 2018 to June 2019. Exposure:Participants received either OAC plus AP or OAC alone. Main Outcomes and Measures:Clinical outcomes were measured over 3 and 12 months. Outcomes were adjusted for 40 covariates, including baseline conditions and medications. Results:A total of 24 436 patients (13 438 [55.0%] male; median [interquartile range] age, 71 [64-78] years) were analyzed. Among eligible patients, those receiving OAC plus AP therapy had a greater prevalence of cardiovascular indications for AP, including acute coronary syndromes (22.0% vs 4.3%), coronary artery disease (39.1% vs 9.8%), and carotid occlusive disease (4.8% vs 2.0%). Over 1 year, patients treated with OAC plus AP had significantly higher incidence rates of stroke (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR], 1.49; 95% CI, 1.01-2.20) and any bleeding event (aHR, 1.41; 95% CI, 1.17-1.70) than those treated with OAC alone. These patients did not show evidence of reduced all-cause mortality (aHR, 1.22; 95% CI, 0.98-1.51). Risk of acute coronary syndrome was not reduced in patients taking OAC plus AP compared with OAC alone (aHR, 1.16; 95% CI, 0.70-1.94). Patients treated with OAC plus AP also had higher rates of all clinical outcomes than those treated with OAC alone over the short term (3 months). Conclusions and Relevance:This study challenges the practice of coprescribing OAC plus AP unless there is a clear indication for adding AP to OAC therapy in newly diagnosed atrial fibrillation.

Dataset Information

Effect of Non-vitamin K Antagonist Oral Anticoagulants in Atrial Fibrillation Patients with Newly Diagnosed Cancer.

Publications

Effect of Non-vitamin K Antagonist Oral Anticoagulants in Atrial Fibrillation Patients with Newly Diagnosed Cancer.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets