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 | 2021 Feb
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
Correction to: Comparative clinical outcomes between direct oral anticoagulants and warfarin among elderly patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation in the CMS Medicare population.
Amin Alpesh A Keshishian Allison A Dina Oluwaseyi O Dhamane Amol A Nadkarni Anagha A Carda Eric E Russ Cristina C Rosenblatt Lisa L Mardekian Jack J Yuce Huseyin H Baker Christine L CL
Journal of thrombosis and thrombolysis 20210201 2
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:IntroductionAtrial fibrillation (AF), a common heart rhythm abnormality, is linked to a higher risk of stroke. Traditionally, warfarin has been the primary anticoagulation treatment for reducing the stroke risk. The new standard of treatment by direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) offers greater benefits including improved efficacy and fewer adverse effects with reduced monitoring. This study aims to evaluate the risk of stroke/systemic embolism (SE) and major bleeding (MB) among patients with AF who switched from warfarin to DOACs.MethodsThis study utilized Medicare data to conduct a retrospective analysis of patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF) who switched from warfarin to DOACs between January 1, 2012, and December 31, 2019. Patients with NVAF aged 65 and older who switched from warfarin and had continuous health plan enrollment were included. Descriptive statistics, propensity score matching (PSM), and Cox proportional hazard (PH) models were utilized to compare the outcomes and assess risks of SE and MB across the DOAC cohorts.ResultsAmong 1,843,495 patients with NVAF on warfarin, 171,700 switched to DOACs within 90 days of discontinuation (apixaban: 90,850; rivaroxaban: 67,698; dabigatran: 12,900). The mean follow-up period across DOAC cohorts ranged from 552 to 628 days. After PSM, apixaban showed significantly lower rates of stroke/SE compared to dabigatran (2.99% vs. 3.98%, p < 0.0001) and rivaroxaban (3.08% vs. 3.80%, p < 0.0001). MB rates were also lower with apixaban versus dabigatran (4.29% vs. 5.57%, p < 0.0001) and rivaroxaban (4.07% vs. 6.35%, p < 0.0001). Cox PH models confirmed these findings, with apixaban demonstrating lower risks of stroke/SE [hazard ratio (HR) 0.83, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.72-0.96 vs. dabigatran; HR 0.91, 95% CI 0.85-0.96 vs. rivaroxaban] and MB (HR 0.79, 95% CI 0.71-0.89 vs. dabigatran; HR 0.68, 95% CI 0.65-0.72 vs. rivaroxaban).ConclusionThe risk of stroke/SE and MB varies significantly among patients with NVAF switching from warfarin to different DOACs, with apixaban presenting the lowest risk compared to dabigatran and rivaroxaban.
| S-EPMC11868198 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe use of direct oral anticoagulants (DOAC) in patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF) and advanced chronic kidney disease (CKD) including dialysis is growing. Several studies have shown favorable results of DOAC compared with warfarin regarding bleeding risk but no difference in stroke protection. However, these studies had poor time in therapeutic range (TTR), in the warfarin comparison group.MethodsThis was a Swedish national cohort study investigating the risk of ischemic stroke and major bleeding on DOAC compared with warfarin in patients with NVAF, glomerular filtration rate category 3-5D (G3-G5D), kidney transplant recipients excluded, between 2009 and 2018. Data extracted from high-quality national healthcare registries including the Swedish Renal Registry, AuriculA (the Swedish national quality register for AF and anticoagulation) and The Stroke Register.ResultsAt enrolment, of 2453 patients 59% were treated with warfarin (mean TTR 67%) and 41% with DOAC. Overall, 693 (28.3%) had G3, 1113 (45.4%) G4, 222 (9.1%) G5 and 425 (17.3%) G5D. DOAC compared with warfarin showed lower hazard of major bleeding [hazard ratio 0.71 (95% confidence interval 0.53-0.96)] but no difference in ischemic stroke risk. Mortality was increased during DOAC treatment [1.24 (1.01-1.53)], presumably not a causal association since fewer fatal bleedings occurred on DOAC.ConclusionsDOAC treatment, compared with warfarin, is associated with almost 30% lower risk of bleeding in patients with NVAF and CKD G3-G5D. The stroke risk is comparable between the treatments. This is the first study comparing DOAC and well-managed warfarin (TTR 67%) in advanced CKD. Ongoing and planned randomized controlled trials need to confirm the possible benefit of DOAC.
| S-EPMC10157779 | biostudies-literature
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: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-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:Purpose of reviewDirect oral anticoagulants (DOACs) are increasingly used for the treatment and prevention of thromboembolic events in patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation (AF). Evidence regarding their role in patients with AF and concurrent valvular heart disease (VHD) continues to evolve.Recent findingsPost hoc analyses of randomized clinical trials suggest that DOACs are non-inferior to warfarin for the prevention of stroke or systemic embolism in patients with AF and VHD. Emerging evidence from observational data showed a favorable benefit-risk profile for DOACs compared to warfarin in patients with AF and VHD. DOACs are an attractive option for the treatment of patients with AF and VHD who cannot tolerate or have contraindications to warfarin therapy. Future studies are needed to evaluate their effectiveness, safety, and examine variability in the direction and magnitude of treatment effects in selected VHD subgroups.
| S-EPMC10877551 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC4802477 | 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