Dataset Information

Effectiveness and Safety of Non-Vitamin K Antagonist Oral Anticoagulant and Warfarin in Cirrhotic Patients With Nonvalvular Atrial Fibrillation.

ABSTRACT: Background Liver cirrhotic patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation have been excluded from randomized clinical studies regarding oral anticoagulants for stroke prevention. Whether non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants ( NOAC s) are superior to warfarin for these patients remains unclear. Methods and Results This nationwide retrospective cohort study, with data collected from the Taiwan National Health Insurance Research Database, enrolled 2428 liver cirrhotic patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation taking apixaban (n=171), dabigatran (n=535), rivaroxaban (n=732), or warfarin (n=990) from June 1, 2012, to December 31, 2016. We used propensity score-based stabilized weights to balance covariates across study groups. Patients were followed until the occurrence of an event or the end date of study. The NOAC group (n=1438) showed risk of ischemic stroke/systemic embolism and intracranial hemorrhage comparable to that of the warfarin group (n=990) after adjustment. The NOAC group showed significantly lower risk of gastrointestinal bleeding (hazard ratio: 0.51 [95% CI, 0.32-0.79]; P=0.0030) and all major bleeding (hazard ratio: 0.51 [95% CI, 0.32-0.74]; P=0.0003) compared with warfarin group. Overall, 90% (n=1290) of patients were taking a low-dose NOAC (apixaban 2.5 mg twice daily, rivaroxaban 10-15 mg daily, or dabigatran 110 mg twice daily). The subgroup analysis indicated that both dabigatran and rivaroxaban showed lower risk of all major bleeding than warfarin. The advantage of lower gastrointestinal and all major bleeding with NOACs over warfarin is contributed by those subgroups with either nonalcoholic or nonadvanced liver cirrhosis. Conclusions NOACs have a risk of thromboembolism comparable to that of warfarin and a lower risk of major bleeding among liver cirrhotic Asian patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation. Consequently, thromboprophylaxis with low-dose NOAC s may be considered for such patients.

SUBMITTER: Lee HF

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6474939 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:Background:Direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) are indicated for prevention of stroke and embolism in patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF). These agents have been shown to be non-inferior to warfarin in terms of efficacy and safety. However, their uptake in practice has been variable, and prescribed dosages may be inconsistent with manufacturer recommendations. Objectives:To evaluate patterns of oral anticoagulant use in patients with NVAF, including determination of patient characteristics associated with the prescribing of warfarin or DOACs and whether prescribed dosages of DOACs were concordant with manufacturer recommendations. Methods:This retrospective chart review was conducted from April to September 2017 at Abbotsford Regional Hospital, Abbotsford, British Columbia. Patients at least 18 years of age with NVAF and CHADS-65 score of 1 or higher were included. Patients with contraindications to oral anticoagulants, those with reversible atrial fibrillation, and those undergoing renal dialysis were excluded. The dosage of DOACs was categorized as too low, too high, or correct in relation to manufacturer recommendations for the Canadian product. Results:A total of 120 patients were included. At discharge, 83 (69%) of the patients had a prescription for DOAC, 25 (21%) had a prescription for warfarin, and 12 (10%) had no prescription for an oral anticoagulant. There were no statistically significant differences between the warfarin and DOAC groups with respect to patient characteristics. Among the 56 patients for whom a full DOAC dose was indicated, 7 (13%) received a dose that was too low. Among the 23 patients for whom a full DOAC dose was not indicated, 4 (17%) received a dose that was too high. Conclusions:At the study hospital, most patients with NVAF and CHADS-65 score of at least 1 had a discharge prescription for DOAC. Patient characteristics appeared to be similar between the warfarin and DOAC groups. For a notable proportion of patients who received a DOAC, the dosage was incorrect. Appropriate prescribing of oral anticoagulants could be further improved by education for prescribers and involvement of hospital pharmacists.

Project description:AimsUsing Scandinavian population-based registries, we assessed risk of stroke/systemic embolism (SE) and bleeding with non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants compared with warfarin in anticoagulation-naïve patients with atrial fibrillation (AF).Methods and resultsThis historical cohort study included 219 545 AF patients [median age 74 years; 43% women; mean CHA2DS2-VASc (congestive heart failure, hypertension, age ≥75 years, diabetes mellitus, stroke or transient ischaemic attack, vascular disease, age 65-74 years, sex category) score 3.3] initiating apixaban, dabigatran, rivaroxaban, or warfarin in Denmark, Norway, and Sweden (1 January 2013 to 31 December 2016). The primary endpoints were stroke/SE and major bleeding. The median follow-up times were 9.7 (3.9-21.5) months for stroke/SE and 9.6 (3.8-21.3) months for bleeding. Apixaban and warfarin initiators were older and had higher CHA2DS2-VASc scores compared with dabigatran and rivaroxaban initiators. After 1:1 propensity score matching, three cohorts were created: apixaban-warfarin (n = 111 162), dabigatran-warfarin (n = 56 856), and rivaroxaban-warfarin (n = 61 198). Adjusted hazard ratios (HRs) were estimated using a Cox regression. For stroke/SE, adjusted HRs against warfarin were 0.96 [95% confidence interval (CI): 0.87-1.06] for apixaban, 0.89 (95% CI: 0.80-1.00) for dabigatran, and 1.03 (95% CI: 0.92-1.14) for rivaroxaban. For major bleeding, the HRs against warfarin were 0.73 (95% CI: 0.67-0.78) for apixaban, 0.89 (95% CI: 0.82-0.97) for dabigatran, and 1.15 (95% CI: 1.07-1.25) for rivaroxaban. The results in the dabigatran cohort did not hold in all dose-defined subgroups.ConclusionIn this large Scandinavian study among AF patients initiating oral anticoagulation, those initiating dabigatran, apixaban, and rivaroxaban had similar rates of stroke/SE to patients initiating warfarin. Rates of major bleeding were lower with apixaban and dabigatran and higher with rivaroxaban, each compared with warfarin.

Project description:Background: Non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants (NOACs) depend on some degree of renal excretion, and no head-to-head comparisons based on renal function is available. This study mainly investigated the trade-off property of NOACs in nonvalvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF) with varying degrees of renal function. Methods: A comprehensive search of Medline, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Clinical Trials.gov Website was performed for eligible randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that reported the efficacy and safety outcomes according to renal function of NOACs. Primary efficacy outcome was any Stroke or systemic embolism (S/SE). Major bleeding was considered as a primary safety outcome. Risk ratios (RRs) with their confidence intervals (CIs), the surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA), and trade-off analysis were conducted by renal function. Results: Finally, 5 phase III Clinical Trials (72961 NVAF patients) comparing NOACs with warfarin in NVAF patients were included. In terms of normal renal function, dabigatran-150 mg was ranked first for efficacy (SUCRA: 90.3), and edoxaban-30 mg was ranked first for safety (SUCRA: 93.3). Dabigatran-110 mg/150 mg, and apixaban-5 mg were regarded as the most effective and reasonably safe interventions in the trade-off analysis. Regarding mild renal impairment, edoxaban-60 mg was ranked first for efficacy (SUCRA: 97.8), and edoxaban-30 mg was ranked first for safety (SUCRA: 99.5). Edoxaban-60 mg and dabigatran-150 mg were accounted as the most effective and reasonably safe interventions. With regards to moderate renal impairment, dabigatran-150 mg was ranked first for efficacy (SUCRA: 95.1), and edoxaban-15 mg was ranked first for safety (SUCRA: 98.2). Apixaban-2.5 mg and Edoxaban-30 mg was considered as the reasonably effective and the safest interventions. Conclusions: Dabigatran-150 mg seems the most effective therapy in patients with normal renal function and moderate renal impairment, and edoxaban-60 mg in patients with mild renal impairment. Low dose edoxaban (15 and 30 mg) seems the safest intervention. Apixaban-2.5 mg and edoxaban-30 mg might be the best trade-off property in moderate renal insufficiency. HIGHLIGHTS Dabigatran-150 mg seems the most effective therapy for normal renal function and moderate renal impairment patients, edoxaban-60 mg for mild renal impairment patients.Low-dose edoxaban can be considered as a good choice in NVAF patients at high risk of bleeding.Apixaban-2.5 mg and edoxaban-30 mg might be the balanced option in NVAF patients with moderate renal insufficiency.STUDY REGISTRATION: PROSPERO Identifier, CRD42017054235.

Project description:Background Reduced time in international normalized ratio therapeutic range (TTR) limits warfarin safety and effectiveness. In patients switched from warfarin to direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs), patient factors associated with low TTR could also increase risk of DOAC nonadherence. We investigated the relationship between warfarin TTR and DOAC adherence in warfarin-treated patients with atrial fibrillation switched to DOAC. Methods and Results Using data from the Veterans Health Administration, we identified patients with atrial fibrillation switched from warfarin to DOAC (switchers) or treated with warfarin alone (non-switchers). Logistic regression was used to evaluate association between warfarin TTR and DOAC adherence. We analyzed 128 605 patients (age, 71±9; 1.6% women; CHA2DS2-VASc 3.5±1.6); 32 377 switchers and 96 228 non-switchers. In 8016 switchers with international normalized ratio data to calculate 180-day TTR before switch, TTR was low (median 0.45; IQR, 0.26-0.64). Patients with TTR <0.5 were more likely to be switched to DOAC (odds ratio [OR],1.68 [95% CI,1.62-1.74], P<0.0001), as were those with TTR <0.6 or TTR <0.7. Proportion of days covered ≥0.8 was achieved by 76% of switchers at 365 days. In low-TTR individuals, proportion of days covered ≥0.8 was achieved by 70%, 72%, and 73% of switchers with TTR <0.5, 0.6, and 0.7, respectively. After multivariable adjustment, TTR <0.5 decreased odds of achieving 365-day proportion of days covered ≥0.8 (OR, 0.49; 0.43-0.57, P<0.0001), with similar relationships for TTR <0.6 and TTR <0.7. In non-switchers with TTR <0.5, long-term TTR remained low. Conclusions In patients with atrial fibrillation switched from warfarin to DOAC, most achieved adequate DOAC adherence despite low pre-switch TTRs. However, TTR trajectories remained low in non-switchers. Patients with low warfarin TTR more consistently achieved treatment targets after switching to DOACs, although adherence-oriented interventions may be beneficial.

Project description:Background and Purpose- This ARISTOPHANES study (Anticoagulants for Reduction in Stroke: Observational Pooled Analysis on Health Outcomes and Experience of Patients) used multiple data sources to compare stroke/systemic embolism (SE) and major bleeding (MB) among a large number of nonvalvular atrial fibrillation patients on non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants (NOACs) or warfarin. Methods- A retrospective observational study of nonvalvular atrial fibrillation patients initiating apixaban, dabigatran, rivaroxaban, or warfarin from January 1, 2013, to September 30, 2015, was conducted pooling Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services Medicare data and 4 US commercial claims databases. After 1:1 NOAC-warfarin and NOAC-NOAC propensity score matching in each database, the resulting patient records were pooled. Cox models were used to evaluate the risk of stroke/SE and MB across matched cohorts. Results- A total of 285?292 patients were included in the 6 matched cohorts: 57?929 apixaban-warfarin, 26?838 dabigatran-warfarin, 83?007 rivaroxaban-warfarin, 27?096 apixaban-dabigatran, 62?619 apixaban-rivaroxaban, and 27?538 dabigatran-rivaroxaban patient pairs. Apixaban (hazard ratio [HR], 0.61; 95% CI, 0.54-0.69), dabigatran (HR, 0.80; 95% CI, 0.68-0.94), and rivaroxaban (HR, 0.75; 95% CI, 0.69-0.82) were associated with lower rates of stroke/SE compared with warfarin. Apixaban (HR, 0.58; 95% CI, 0.54-0.62) and dabigatran (HR, 0.73; 95% CI, 0.66-0.81) had lower rates of MB, and rivaroxaban (HR, 1.07; 95% CI, 1.02-1.13) had a higher rate of MB compared with warfarin. Differences exist in rates of stroke/SE and MB across NOACs. Conclusions- In this largest observational study to date on NOACs and warfarin, the NOACs had lower rates of stroke/SE and variable comparative rates of MB versus warfarin. The findings from this study may help inform the discussion on benefit and risk in the shared decision-making process for stroke prevention between healthcare providers and nonvalvular atrial fibrillation patients. Clinical Trial Registration- URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov/ . Unique identifier: NCT03087487.

Project description:Objective To study the effectiveness and safety of the non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants (novel oral anticoagulants, NOACs) dabigatran, rivaroxaban, and apixaban compared with warfarin in anticoagulant naïve patients with atrial fibrillation.Design Observational nationwide cohort study.Setting Three Danish nationwide databases, August 2011 to October 2015.Participants 61 678 patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation who were naïve to oral anticoagulants and had no previous indication for valvular atrial fibrillation or venous thromboembolism. The study population was distributed according to treatment type: warfarin (n=35 436, 57%), dabigatran 150 mg (n=12 701, 21%), rivaroxaban 20 mg (n=7192, 12%), and apixaban 5 mg (n=6349, 10%).Main outcome measures Effectiveness outcomes defined a priori were ischaemic stroke; a composite of ischaemic stroke or systemic embolism; death; and a composite of ischaemic stroke, systemic embolism, or death. Safety outcomes were any bleeding, intracranial bleeding, and major bleeding.Results When the analysis was restricted to ischaemic stroke, NOACs were not significantly different from warfarin. During one year follow-up, rivaroxaban was associated with lower annual rates of ischaemic stroke or systemic embolism (3.0% v 3.3%, respectively) compared with warfarin: hazard ratio 0.83 (95% confidence interval 0.69 to 0.99). The hazard ratios for dabigatran and apixaban (2.8% and 4.9% annually, respectively) were non-significant compared with warfarin. The annual risk of death was significantly lower with apixaban (5.2%) and dabigatran (2.7%) (0.65, 0.56 to 0.75 and 0.63, 0.48 to 0.82, respectively) compared with warfarin (8.5%), but not with rivaroxaban (7.7%). For the combined endpoint of any bleeding, annual rates for apixaban (3.3%) and dabigatran (2.4%) were significantly lower than for warfarin (5.0%) (0.62, 0.51 to 0.74). Warfarin and rivaroxaban had comparable annual bleeding rates (5.3%).Conclusion All NOACs seem to be safe and effective alternatives to warfarin in a routine care setting. No significant difference was found between NOACs and warfarin for ischaemic stroke. The risks of death, any bleeding, or major bleeding were significantly lower for apixaban and dabigatran compared with warfarin.

Dataset Information

Effectiveness and Safety of Non-Vitamin K Antagonist Oral Anticoagulant and Warfarin in Cirrhotic Patients With Nonvalvular Atrial Fibrillation.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets