Dataset Information

Effectiveness and safety of direct oral anticoagulants compared to warfarin in treatment naive non-valvular atrial fibrillation patients in the US Department of defense population.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Clinical trials have demonstrated that direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) are at least non-inferior to warfarin in reducing the risk of stroke/systemic embolism (SE) among patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF), but the comparative risk of major bleeding varies between DOACs and warfarin. Using US Department of Defense (DOD) data, this study compared the risk of stroke/SE and major bleeding for DOACs relative to warfarin.

Methods

Adult patients with ?1 pharmacy claim for apixaban, dabigatran, rivaroxaban, or warfarin from 01 Jan 2013-30 Sep 2015 were selected. Patients were required to have ?1 medical claim for atrial fibrillation during the 12-month baseline period. Patients with a warfarin or DOAC claim during the 12-month baseline period were excluded. Each DOAC cohort was matched to the warfarin cohort using propensity score matching (PSM). Cox proportional hazards models were conducted to evaluate the risk of stroke/SE and major bleeding of each DOAC vs warfarin.

Results

Of 41,001 identified patients, there were 3691 dabigatran-warfarin, 8226 rivaroxaban-warfarin, and 7607 apixaban-warfarin matched patient pairs. Apixaban was the only DOAC found to be associated with a significantly lower risk of stroke/SE (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.55; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.39, 0.77; p?ConclusionAmong NVAF patients in the US DOD population, apixaban was associated with significantly lower risk of stroke/SE and major bleeding compared to warfarin. Dabigatran and rivaroxaban were associated with similar risk of stroke/SE and major bleeding compared to warfarin.

SUBMITTER: Gupta K

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6567643 | biostudies-literature | 2019 Jun

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Effectiveness and safety of direct oral anticoagulants compared to warfarin in treatment naïve non-valvular atrial fibrillation patients in the US Department of defense population.

Gupta Kiran K Trocio Jeffrey J Keshishian Allison A Zhang Qisu Q Dina Oluwaseyi O Mardekian Jack J Nadkarni Anagha A Shank Thomas C TC

BMC cardiovascular disorders 20190613 1

<h4>Background</h4>Clinical trials have demonstrated that direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) are at least non-inferior to warfarin in reducing the risk of stroke/systemic embolism (SE) among patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF), but the comparative risk of major bleeding varies between DOACs and warfarin. Using US Department of Defense (DOD) data, this study compared the risk of stroke/SE and major bleeding for DOACs relative to warfarin.<h4>Methods</h4>Adult patients with ≥1 ph ...[more]

PMID: 31195999

Similar Datasets

Project description:We examined a large community-based sample of patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) and valvular heart disease (VHD) (excluding prosthetic valves) with a goal to compare outcomes among patients with AF, with and without VHD, taking warfarin, dabigatran, and rivaroxaban.We identified Medicare beneficiaries enrolled in Medicare Part D benefit plan from 2011 to 2013 with newly diagnosed AF (18 137 patients with VHD [dabigatran, 1979; rivaroxaban, 2027; warfarin, 14 131] and 85 596 patients without VHD [dabigatran, 13 522; rivaroxaban, 14 257; warfarin, 57 817]). Primary outcomes of all-cause mortality, ischemic strokes, major bleeding, and myocardial infarction were compared across the 3 anticoagulants using 3-way propensity-matched samples. After propensity matching, a total of 5871 patients with VHD and 40 221 patients without VHD and AF were studied. Both dabigatran and rivaroxaban were associated with significantly lower risk of death in patients with VHD with AF (dabigatran versus warfarin: hazard ratio, 0.71; 95% confidence interval, 0.52-0.98; P=0.038; rivaroxaban versus warfarin: hazard ratio, 0.68; 95% confidence interval, 0.49-0.95; P=0.022). Nongastrointestinal bleeding was significantly reduced with dabigatran and rivaroxaban versus warfarin in those with VHD (dabigatran versus warfarin: hazard ratio, 0.17; 95% confidence interval, 0.06-0.49; P=0.001; rivaroxaban versus warfarin: hazard ratio, 0.37; 95% confidence interval, 0.17-0.84; P=0.017). Ischemic stroke and gastrointestinal bleeding rates did not differ between rivaroxaban, dabigatran, and warfarin in patients with VHD. The effects of the 3 anticoagulants on outcomes were comparable in patients with and without VHD and with AF.In this cohort of Medicare beneficiaries with VHD (excluding patients with prosthetic valves) and new-onset AF between 2011 and 2013, novel oral non-vitamin K anticoagulants were safe and effective options for prevention of systemic thromboembolism.

Project description:BackgroundThe incidence of osteoporotic fracture increases with age, particularly in elderly populations with atrial fibrillation (AF). However, direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) have less effect on osteoporotic fracture than vitamin K antagonists, it is unclear whether the risk of osteoporotic fracture is affected by different types and doses of DOACs in AF patients.MethodsThis nationwide population-based cohort study included AF patients prescribed DOACs between 2011 and 2016 taken from the Taiwan National Health Insurance database. Adjusted hazard ratios (aHRs) for the risk of osteoporotic, hip, and spine fractures between DOAC users were compared using the Fine and Gray subdistribution hazard model to adjust for possible confounders.ResultsA total of 56,795 patients who were prescribed DOACs were included in the present study. Among them, 24,597 patients received dabigatran, 26,968 received rivaroxaban, and 5230 received apixaban. After 2 years' follow up, there was no significant difference in the incidence of osteoporotic, spine, or hip fracture among those receiving dabigatran, rivaroxaban, or apixaban. Subgroup analysis showed that patients taking dabigatran had a higher incidence of osteoporotic and hip fracture than those taking rivaroxaban and apixaban in cases with concomitant peripheral artery disease (PAD) or a history of hip fracture (p for interaction: 0.004 and 0.030, respectively). However, dabigatran users had a lower incidence of osteoporotic fracture and spine fracture in those receiving standard-dose DOACs compared with rivaroxaban and apixaban; whereas, they had a higher incidence of hip fractures when administered at low dose.ConclusionAF patients with different DOACs did not have different risks of osteoporotic fracture overall. However, additional concomitant morbidities, such as PAD or a history of hip fracture, and standard/low doses might be associated with different risks for different DOACs. These findings should be taken into consideration in the clinic when the DOAC is being chosen.Plain language summaryDifferent direct oral anticoagulants had different impact on osteoporotic fracture Anticoagulation therapy is an essential therapy in atrial fibrillation (AF) patients, but osteoporotic fracture is another important issue in these patients prescribed with anticoagulants. However, no study has been conducted to evaluate the impact of different DOACs on different types of osteoporotic fractures. In our findings, although different DOACs had no significantly different impact on osteoporotic fractures, dabigatran users had a slightly higher incidence of osteoporotic and hip fractures among different DOACs, particularly in those have simultaneously had peripheral artery disease, a history of hip fracture. In addition, when AF patients taking low-dose DOACs, dabigatran users also have higher incidence of hip fracture than those taking other DOACs.