Correction to: Comparative clinical outcomes between direct oral anticoagulants and warfarin among elderly patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation in the CMS Medicare population.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Amin A
PROVIDER: S-EPMC8025292 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:Atrial fibrillation (AF) prevalence increases with age; > 80% of US adults with AF are aged ≥ 65 years. Compare the risk of stroke/systemic embolism (SE), major bleeding (MB), net clinical outcome (NCO), and major adverse cardiac events (MACE) among elderly non-valvular AF (NVAF) Medicare patients prescribed direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) VS warfarin. NVAF patients aged ≥ 65 years who initiated DOACs (apixaban, dabigatran, and rivaroxaban) or warfarin were selected from 01JAN2013-31DEC2015 in CMS Medicare data. Propensity score matching was used to balance DOAC and warfarin cohorts. Cox proportional hazards models estimated the risk of stroke/SE, MB, NCO, and MACE. 37,525 apixaban-warfarin, 18,131 dabigatran-warfarin, and 55,359 rivaroxaban-warfarin pairs were included. Compared to warfarin, apixaban (HR: 0.69; 95% CI 0.59-0.81) and rivaroxaban (HR: 0.82; 95% CI 0.73-0.91) had lower risk of stroke/SE, and dabigatran (HR: 0.88; 95% CI 0.72-1.07) had similar risk of stroke/SE. Apixaban (MB: HR: 0.61; 95% CI 0.57-0.67; NCO: HR: 0.64; 95% CI 0.60-0.69) and dabigatran (MB: HR: 0.79; 95% CI 0.71-0.89; NCO: HR: 0.84; 95% CI 0.76-0.93) had lower risk of MB and NCO, and rivaroxaban had higher risk of MB (HR: 1.08; 95% CI 1.02-1.14) and similar risk of NCO (HR: 1.04; 95% CI 0.99-1.09). Compared to warfarin, apixaban had a lower risk for stroke/SE, MB, and NCO; dabigatran had a lower risk of MB and NCO; and rivaroxaban had a lower risk of stroke/SE but higher risk of MB. All DOACs had lower risk of MACE compared to warfarin.
| S-EPMC6599494 | biostudies-literature
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.
| S-EPMC6015407 | biostudies-other
Project description:BackgroundData are needed on the use of oral anticoagulation in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) in rural versus urban areas, including the initiation of direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs).ObjectiveWe used Medicare data to examine rural/urban differences in anticoagulation use in patients with AF.MethodsWe identified incident AF in a 20% sample of fee-for-service Medicare beneficiaries (aged ≥ 65 years) from 2011 to 2016 and collected ZIP code and covariates at the time of AF. We identified the first anticoagulant prescription filled, if any, following AF diagnosis. We categorized beneficiaries into four rural/urban areas using rural-urban commuting area codes and used Poisson regression models to compare anticoagulant use.ResultsWe included 447,252 patients with AF (mean age 79 ± 8 years), of which 82% were urban, 9% large rural, 5% small rural, and 4% isolated. The percentage who initiated an anticoagulant rose from 34% in 2011 to 53% in 2016, paralleling the uptake of DOACs. In a multivariable-adjusted analysis, those in rural areas (vs. urban) were more likely to initiate an anticoagulant. However, rural beneficiaries (vs. urban) were less likely to initiate a DOAC; those in isolated areas were 17% less likely (95% confidence interval [CI] 13-20), those in small rural areas were 12% less likely (95% CI 9-15), and those in large rural areas were 10% less likely (95% CI 8-12).ConclusionAmong Medicare beneficiaries with AF, anticoagulation use was low but increased over time with the introduction of DOACs. Rural beneficiaries were less likely to receive a DOAC.
| S-EPMC9833644 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionThere is a paucity of real-world studies examining the risks of stroke/systemic embolism (SE) and major bleeding (MB) among non-valvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF) patients switching from warfarin to a direct oral anticoagulant (DOAC). This retrospective study was conducted to compare the stroke/SE and MB risks between patients switched from warfarin to apixaban, dabigatran, or rivaroxaban in real-world clinical practice.Materials and methodsThis study used data from four United States commercial claims databases from January 1, 2012 to June 30, 2019. The study population included NVAF patients initially treated with warfarin and switched to apixaban, dabigatran, or rivaroxaban within 90 days of their warfarin prescription ending. Patients were matched 1:1 between the DOACs in each database using propensity scores and then pooled for the final analysis. Cox proportional hazards models were used to calculate the risk of stroke/SE and MB.Results and conclusionsThe final population consisted of 2,611 apixaban-dabigatran, 12,165 apixaban-rivaroxaban, and 2,672 dabigatran-rivaroxaban pairs. Apixaban vs. dabigatran was associated with a lower risk of stroke/SE (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.61; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.39-0.96) and MB (HR: 0.67; 95% CI: 0.50-0.91). Apixaban vs. rivaroxaban was associated with a similar risk of stroke/SE (HR: 0.88; 95% CI: 0.73-1.07) and a lower risk of MB (HR: 0.60; 95% CI: 0.52-0.68). There was no significant difference in either risk between dabigatran and rivaroxaban. These results provide important insights into how the risks of stroke/SE and MB for NVAF patients vary when switching from warfarin to different DOACs.
| S-EPMC11315758 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Vitamin K antagonists have been used for many years as the treatment of choice for long-term oral anticoagulation in patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation. Unfortunately, the use of those drugs in the real-world setting, particularly among elderly patients, is suboptimal because of their limitations in management. Therefore, many patients were not adequately anticoagulated. Direct oral anticoagulants have been demonstrated to overcome almost all the limitations derived from the use of vitamin K antagonists. Direct oral anticoagulants are at least as effective as vitamin K antagonists in preventing thromboembolic events in patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation and safer in reducing the risk of intracranial haemorrhage and all-cause mortality. However, as a result of the strict inclusion and exclusion criteria applied to patients, data coming from randomized controlled trials might not apply to the general population. Furthermore, elderly patients were scarcely represented in randomized controlled trials with direct oral anticoagulants. Therefore in elderly patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation, unmet clinical needs still exist. This review article highlights some of them and provides potential answers based on the results coming from randomized clinical trials, real-world data, and the authors' clinical experience.
| S-EPMC8189975 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC4802477 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Randomized clinical trials comparing direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) to warfarin in cancer patients have not been performed. We evaluated the effectiveness and associated risk of DOACs vs warfarin, as well as comparisons of DOACs, in a large population of cancer patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation (AF). Using the MarketScan databases, we identified 16?096 AF patients (mean age, 74 years) initiating oral anticoagulant and being actively treated for cancer between 2010 and 2014. Anticoagulant users were matched by age, sex, enrollment date, and drug initiation date. Study end points were identified with diagnostic codes and included ischemic stroke, severe bleeding, other bleeding, and venous thromboembolism (VTE). Cox regression was used to estimate associations of anticoagulants with study end points. Compared with warfarin, rates of bleeding (hazard ratio [95% confidence interval]) were similar in rivaroxaban (1.09 [0.79, 1.39]) and dabigatran (0.96 [0.72, 1.27]) users, whereas apixaban users experienced lower rates (0.37 [0.17, 0.79]). Rates of ischemic stroke did not differ among anticoagulant users. Compared with warfarin, rate of VTE (hazard ratio [95% confidence interval]) was lower among rivaroxaban (0.51 [0.41, 0.63]), dabigatran (0.28 [0.21, 0.38]), and apixaban (0.14 [0.07, 0.32]) users. In head-to-head comparisons among DOACs, dabigatran users had lower rates of VTE than rivaroxaban users; apixaban users had lower rates of VTE and severe bleeding than rivaroxaban users. In this population of patients with AF and cancer, DOAC users experienced lower or similar rates of bleeding and stroke compared with warfarin users, and a lower rate of incident VTE.
| S-EPMC5812321 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundPrevious studies examining the use of direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) in atrial fibrillation (AF) have largely focused on patients newly initiating therapy. Little is known about the prevalence/patterns of switching to DOACs among AF patients initially treated with warfarin.HypothesisTo examine patterns of anticoagulation among patients chronically managed with warfarin upon the availability of DOACs and identify patient/practice-level factors associated with switching from chronic warfarin therapy to a DOAC.MethodsProspective cohort study of AF patients in the NCDR PINNACLE registry prescribed warfarin between May 1, 2008 and May 1, 2015. Patients were followed at least 1 year (median length of follow-up 375 days, IQR 154-375) through May 1, 2016 and stratified as follows: continued warfarin, switched to DOAC, or discontinued anticoagulation. To identify significant predictors of switching, a three-level multivariable hierarchical regression was developed.ResultsAmong 383 008 AF patients initially prescribed warfarin, 16.3% (n = 62 620) switched to DOACs, 68.8% (n = 263 609) continued warfarin, and 14.8% (n = 56 779) discontinued anticoagulation. Among those switched, 37.6% received dabigatran, 37.0% rivaroxaban, 24.4% apixaban, and 1.0% edoxaban. Switched patients were more likely to be younger, women, white, and have private insurance (all P < .001). Switching was less likely with increased stroke risk (OR, 0.92; 95%CI, 0.91-0.93 per 1-point increase CHA2 DS2 -VASc), but more likely with increased bleeding risk (OR, 1.12; 95%CI, 1.10-1.13 per 1-point increase HAS-BLED). There was substantial variation at the practice-level (MOR, 2.33; 95%CI, 2.12-2.58) and among providers within the same practice (MOR, 1.46; 95%CI, 1.43-1.49).ConclusionsAmong AF patients treated with warfarin between October 1, 2010 and May 1, 2016, one in six were switched to DOACs, with differences across sociodemographic/clinical characteristics and substantial practice-level variation. In the context of current guidelines which favor DOACs over warfarin, these findings help benchmark performance and identify areas of improvement.
| S-EPMC7368350 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundClinical 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.MethodsAdult 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.ResultsOf 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 < 0.001) and major bleeding (HR: 0.65; 95% CI: 0.53, 0.80; p < 0.001) compared to warfarin. Dabigatran and rivaroxaban initiation were associated with similar risk of stroke/SE (dabigatran: HR: 0.68; 95% CI: 0.43, 1.07; p = 0.096; rivaroxaban: HR: 0.83; 95% CI: 0.64, 1.09; p = 0.187) and major bleeding (dabigatran: HR: 1.05; 95% CI: 0.79, 1.40; p = 0.730; rivaroxaban: HR: 1.07; 95% CI: 0.91, 1.27; p = 0.423) compared to warfarin.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.
| S-EPMC6567643 | biostudies-literature
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.
| S-EPMC8083002 | biostudies-literature