Methodological considerations for investigating oral anticoagulation persistence in atrial fibrillation.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT: Aims
Reports of long-term oral anticoagulant (OAC) therapy for atrial fibrillation (AF) reveal highly variable, and generally suboptimal estimates of medication persistence. The objective of this review is to summarize current literature and highlight important methodological considerations for interpreting persistence research and designing studies of persistence on OAC treatment.Methods and results
We summarize differences in study methodology, setting, timing, treatment, and other factors associated with reports of better or worse persistence. For example, prospective compared with retrospective study designs are associated with higher reported persistence. Similarly, patient factors such as permanent AF or high stroke risk, and treatment with non-vitamin K oral antagonists relative to vitamin K antagonists are associated with higher persistence. Persistence has also been reported to be higher in Europe compared with North America and higher when the treating physician is a general practitioner compared with a specialist. We propose a framework for assessing and designing persistence studies. This framework includes aspects of patient selection, reliability and validity of measures, persistence definitions, clinical utility of measurements, follow-up periods, and analytic approaches.Conclusions
Differences in study design, patient selection, treatments, and factors such as the countries/regions where studies are conducted or the type of treating physician may help explain the variability in OAC persistence estimates. A framework is proposed to assess persistence studies. This may have utility to compare and interpret published studies as well as for planning of future studies.
SUBMITTER: Paquette M
PROVIDER: S-EPMC8141301 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:Patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) experiencing ischemic stroke despite oral anticoagulation (OAC), i.e., breakthrough strokes, are not uncommon, and represent an important clinical subgroup in view of the consistently high risk of stroke recurrence and mortality. The understanding of the heterogenous potential mechanism underlying OAC failure is essential in order to implement specific therapeutic measures aimed at reducing the risk of recurrent ischemic stroke. However, due to the incomplete comprehension of this phenomenon and the limited available data, secondary stroke prevention in such high-risk patients represents a clinical dilemma. There are several available strategies to prevent ischemic stroke recurrence in AF patients with breakthrough stroke in the absence of competing causes unrelated to AF, and these include continuation or change in the type of OAC, addition of antiplatelet therapy, left atrial appendage closure, or any combination of the above options. However, due to the limited available data, the latest guidelines do not provide any specific recommendations about which of the above strategies may be preferred. This review describes the incidence, the clinical impact and the potential mechanisms underlying OAC failure in AF patients. Furthermore, the evidence supporting each of the above therapeutic options for secondary stroke prevention and the potential future directions will be discussed.
| S-EPMC10532406 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BACKGROUND:Cardiological societies recommend, in their guidelines, that patients with atrial fibrillation and an intermediate (or higher) risk of stroke and systemic embolization should be treated with oral anticoagulant drugs. For patients who do not have mitral valve stenosis or a mechanical valve prosthesis, non-vitamin-K dependent oral anticoagulants (NOAC) are preferred over vitamin K antagonists (VKA) for this purpose. It is unclear, however, whether patients with chronic kidney disease and atrial fibrillation benefit from oral anticoagulation to the same extent as those with normal kidney function. It is also unclear which of the two types of anti - coagulant drug is preferable for patients with chronic kidney disease; NOAC are, in part, renally eliminated. METHODS:This review is based on pertinent publications retrieved by a selective literature search, and on international guidelines. RESULTS:Current evidence suggests that patients with atrial fibrillation who have chronic kidney disease with a glomerular filtration rate (GFR) above 15 mL/ min/1.73 m² should be treated with an oral anticoagulant drug if they have an at least intermediate risk of embolization, as assessed with the CHA2DS2-VASc score. For patients with advanced chronic kidney disease (GFR from 15 to 29 mL/ min/1.73 m²), however, this recommendation is based only on registry studies. For dialysis patients with atrial fibrillation, decisions whether to give oral anticoagulant drugs should be taken on an individual basis, in view of the elevated risk of hemorrhage and the unclear efficacy of such drugs in these patients. The subgroup analyses of the NOAC approval studies show that, for patients with atrial fibrillation and chronic kidney disease with a creatinine clearance of >25-30 mL/min, NOAC should be given in preference to VKA, as long as the patient does not have mitral valve stenosis or a mechanical valve prosthesis. For those whose creatinine clearance is less than 25 mL/min, the relative merits of NOAC versus VKA are still debated. CONCLUSION:The cardiological societies' recommendation that patients with atrial fibrillation should be given oral anticoagulant drugs applies to the majority of such patients who also have chronic kidney disease.
| S-EPMC5974258 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) are at increased thromboembolic risk, and they suffer more severe strokes with worse outcomes. Most thromboembolic complications of AF are eminently preventable with oral anticoagulation, and the increasing numbers of AF patients mean antithrombotic therapy is the most crucial management aspect of this common arrhythmia. Despite the proven efficacy of warfarin, a string of limitations have meant that it is underused by physicians and patients alike. This has prompted a search for new anticoagulants that could overcome many of the inconveniences of dose variability and anticoagulant monitoring associated with warfarin, but without sacrificing efficacy in thromboprophylaxis. The arrival of new oral anticoagulants has been complemented by improved risk stratification schemes, which permit clinicians to easily and reliably identify patients requiring anticoagulation and their bleeding risk. These advances in AF treatment will hopefully translate into improved outcomes for patients, especially as our experience with the new agents grows.
| S-EPMC4711491 | biostudies-other
Project description:Worldwide, rivaroxaban is increasingly used for stroke prevention in atrial fibrillation (SPAF) but little is known about the rates of or reasons for rivaroxaban discontinuations in daily care. Using data from a prospective, non-interventional oral anticoagulation (NOAC) registry, we analysed rivaroxaban treatment persistence.Persistence with rivaroxaban in SPAF was assessed in an ongoing, prospective, non-interventional registry of >2600 NOAC patients from daily care using the Kaplan-Meier time-to-first-event analysis. Reasons for and management of rivaroxaban discontinuation were assessed. Potential baseline risk factors for treatment discontinuation were evaluated using Cox regression analysis. Between October 2011 and April 2014, 1204 rivaroxaban SPAF patients were enrolled [39.3% switched from vitamin K antagonists (VKAs) and 60.7% newly treated patients]. Of these, 223 patients (18.5%) stopped rivaroxaban during follow-up (median 544 days), which translates into a discontinuation rate of 13.6 (95% CI 11.8-15.4) per 100 patient-years. Most common reasons for treatment discontinuations were bleeding complications (30% of all discontinuations), followed by other side-effects (24.2%) and diagnosis of stable sinus rhythm (9.9%). A history of chronic heart failure (HR 1.43; 95% CI 1.09-1.87; P = 0.009) or diabetes (HR 1.39; 95% CI 1.06-1.82; P = 0.018) were the only statistically significant baseline risk factors for rivaroxaban discontinuation. After discontinuation of rivaroxaban, patients received antiplatelet therapy (31.8%), VKA (24.2%), another NOAC (18.4%), heparin (9.9%), or nothing (15.7%).Our data indicate that overall persistence with rivaroxaban therapy is high, with a discontinuation rate of ?15% in the first year of treatment and few additional discontinuations thereafter.
| S-EPMC4381834 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The nonvitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants have recently become available as an alternative to warfarin as stroke prophylaxis in atrial fibrillation, but data on real-life patient experience, including bleeding risk, are lacking. Our objective was to compare major bleeding events and nonpersistence between the nonvitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulant apixaban and other nonvitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants (dabigatran and rivaroxaban) and warfarin in a contemporary, nation-wide cohort of patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation.Of 54 321 patients (median age, 73 years; 56% male; mean CHA2DS2-VASc score, 2.9), 7963, 6715, 15 413, and 24 230 patients initiated apixaban, rivaroxaban, dabigatran, and warfarin, respectively. Apixaban and rivaroxaban initiators were older, less often male, with higher HAS-BLED and CHA2DS2-VASc scores compared with dabigatran and warfarin initiators. A total of 2418 patients (4.5%) experienced a major bleeding event over all available follow-up. In this period, rivaroxaban (hazard ratio [HR] [95% CI], 1.49 [1.27-1.77]), dabigatran (HR, 1.17 [1.00-1.38]), and warfarin (HR, 1.23 [1.05-1.43]) users were significantly more likely to bleed than apixaban users. Findings were similar when restricted to the first 30 days after OAC initiation. Risk of nonpersistence was higher for dabigatran (HR, 1.45 [1.33-1.59]) and warfarin initiators (HR, 1.22 [1.12-1.33]), but not for rivaroxaban initiators (HR, 1.07 [0.96-1.20]) compared with apixaban initiators.In a real-world cohort of nonvalvular atrial fibrillation patients, apixaban had a lower adjusted major bleeding risk compared with rivaroxaban, dabigatran, and warfarin. Apixaban had a lower risk of nonpersistence compared with dabigatran and warfarin and similar risk compared with rivaroxaban.
| S-EPMC5523754 | biostudies-other
Project description:Background and aimsFew recent large-scale studies have evaluated the risks and benefits of continuing oral anticoagulant (OAC) therapy after catheter ablation (CA) for atrial fibrillation (AF). This study evaluated the status of continuation of OAC therapy and the association between continuation of OAC therapy and thromboembolic and bleeding events according to the CHADS2 score.MethodsThis retrospective study included data from the Japanese nationwide administrative claims database of patients who underwent CA for AF between April 2014 and March 2021. Patients without AF recurrence assessed by administrative data of the treatment modalities were divided into two groups according to continuation of OAC therapy 6 months after the index CA. The primary outcomes were thromboembolism and major bleeding after a landmark period of 6 months. After inverse probability of treatment weighting analysis, the association between OAC continuation and outcomes was determined according to the CHADS2 score.ResultsAmong 231 374 patients included, 69.7%, 21.6%, and 8.7% had CHADS2 scores of ≤1, 2, and ≥3, respectively. Of these, 71% continued OAC therapy at 6 months. The OAC continuation rate was higher in the high CHADS2 score group than that in the low CHADS2 score group. Among all patients, 2451 patients (0.55 per 100 person-years) had thromboembolism and 2367 (0.53 per 100 person-years) had major bleeding. In the CHADS2 score ≤1 group, the hazard ratio of the continued OAC group was 0.86 [95% confidence interval (CI): 0.74-1.01, P = .06] for thromboembolism and was 1.51 (95% CI: 1.27-1.80, P < .001) for major bleeding. In the CHADS2 score ≥3 group, the hazard ratio of the continued OAC group was 0.61 (95% CI: 0.46-0.82, P = .001) for thromboembolism and was 1.05 (95% CI: 0.71-1.56, P = 0.81) for major bleeding.ConclusionsThis observational study suggests that the benefits and risks of continuing OAC therapy after CA for AF differ based on the patient's CHADS2 score. The risk of major bleeding due to OAC continuation seems to outweigh the risk reduction of thromboembolism in patients with lower thromboembolic risk.
| S-EPMC10873714 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The potential to save money within a short time frame provides a more compelling "business case" for quality improvement than merely demonstrating cost-effectiveness. Our objective was to demonstrate the potential for cost savings from improved control in patients anticoagulated for atrial fibrillation.Our population consisted of 67 077 Veterans Health Administration patients anticoagulated for atrial fibrillation between October 1, 2006, and September 30, 2008. We simulated the number of adverse events and their associated costs and utilities, both before and after various degrees of improvement in percent time in therapeutic range (TTR). The simulation had a 2-year time horizon, and costs were calculated from the perspective of the payer. In the base-case analysis, improving TTR by 5% prevented 1114 adverse events, including 662 deaths; it gained 863 quality-adjusted life-years and saved $15.9 million compared with the status quo, not accounting for the cost of the quality improvement program. Improving TTR by 10% prevented 2087 events, gained 1606 quality-adjusted life-years, and saved $29.7 million. In sensitivity analyses, costs were most sensitive to the estimated risk of stroke and the expected stroke reduction from improved TTR. Utilities were most sensitive to the estimated risk of death and the expected mortality benefit from improved TTR.A quality improvement program to improve anticoagulation control probably would be cost-saving for the payer, even if it were only modestly effective in improving control and even without considering the value of improved health. This study demonstrates how to make a business case for a quality improvement initiative.
| S-EPMC3967019 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundNon-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants (NOAC) have superior safety and comparable efficacy profile compared to vitamin-K antagonists (VKAs), with more convenient dosing schemes. However, issues with adherence to the NOACs remain unsolved.AimsWe sought to investigate the adherence to oral anticoagulation (OAC) and baseline factors associated with poor adherence after ischaemic stroke in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF).MethodsWe recruited hospitalised patients (2013-2019) from two prospective stroke registries in Larissa and Helsinki University Hospitals and invited survived patients to participate in a telephone interview. We assessed adherence with the Adherence to Refills and Medications Scale (ARMS) and defined poor adherence as a score of over 17. In addition to demographics, individual comorbidities, and stroke features, we assessed the association of CHA2DS2-VASc and SAMe-TT2R2 scores with poor adherence.ResultsAmong 396 patients (median age 75.0 years, interquartile range [IQR] 70-80; 57% men; median time from ischaemic stroke to interview 21 months [IQR 12-33]; median ARMS score 17 [IQR 17-19]), 56% of warfarin users and 44% of NOAC users reported poor adherence. In the multivariable regression model adjusted for site, sex, and age, poor adherence was independently associated with tertiary education, absence of heart failure, smoking history, use of VKA prior to index stroke, and prior ischaemic stroke. CHA2DS2-VASc and SAMe-TT2R2 scores were not associated with poor adherence.ConclusionsAdherence was poor in half of AF patients who survived an ischaemic stroke. Independent patient-related factors, rather than composite scores, were associated with poor adherence in these patients.KEY MESSAGESAdherence was poor in half of the atrial fibrillation patients who survived an ischaemic stroke.Independent patient-related factors rather than composite scores were associated with poor adherence.The findings support the importance of recognising adherence support as a crucial part of holistic patient care recommended by recent AF guideline.
| S-EPMC8439221 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundOral anticoagulation (OAC) reduces the risk of thromboembolic events in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF); however, thromboembolism (TE) still can occur despite OAC. Factors associated with residual risk for stroke, systemic embolism, or transient ischemic attack events despite OAC have not been well described.ObjectiveThe purpose of this study was to evaluate the residual risk of thromboembolic events in patients with AF despite OAC.MethodsA total of 18,955 patients were analyzed in the Outcomes Registry for Better Informed Treatment of Atrial Fibrillation (ORBIT-AF I and II) using multivariable Cox proportional hazard modeling. Mean age was 72 ± 10.7, and 42% were women. There were 451 outcome events.ResultsThe risk of TE despite OAC increased with CHA2DS2-VASc score: 0.76 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.63-0.92) events per 100 patient-years for CHA2DS2-VASc score <4 vs 2.01 (95% CI 1.81-2.24) events per 100-patient years for CHA2DS2-VASc score >4. Factors associated with increased risk were previous stroke or transient ischemic attack (hazard ratio [HR] 2.87; 95% CI 2.30-3.59; P <.001), female sex (HR 1.52; 95% CI 1.24-1.86; P <.001), hypertension (HR 1.50; 95% CI 1.09-2.06; P = .01), and permanent AF (HR 1.47; 95% CI 1.12-1.94; P = .001). When transient ischemic attack was excluded, the results were similar, but permanent AF was no longer significantly associated with thromboembolic events.ConclusionPatients with AF have a residual risk of TE with increasing CHA2DS2-VASc score despite OAC. Key risk markers include previous stroke/transient ischemic attack, female sex, hypertension, and permanent AF.
| S-EPMC9795305 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Aims Persistence with direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) has become a concern in non-valvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF) patients, but whether this affects prognosis is rarely studied. We investigated the persistence with oral anticoagulants (OACs) and its association with prognosis among a nationwide cohort of NVAF patients.Methods and results DOAC-naive NVAF patients who started to use DOACs for ischaemic stroke prevention between 2013 and 2018 were included using Dutch national statistics. Persistence with OACs was determined based on the presence of a 100-day gap between the last prescription and the end of study period. In 93 048 patients, 75.7% had a baseline CHA2DS2-VASc score of ≥2. The cumulative incidence of persistence with OACs was 88.1% [95% confidence interval (CI) 87.9-88.3%], 82.6% (95% CI 82.3-82.9%), 77.7% (95% CI 77.3-78.1%), and 72.0% (95% CI 71.5-72.5%) at 1, 2, 3, and 4 years after receiving DOACs, respectively. Baseline characteristics associated with better persistence with OACs included female sex, age range 65-74 years, permanent atrial fibrillation, previous exposure to vitamin K antagonists, stroke history (including transient ischaemic attack), and a CHA2DS2-VASc score ≥2. Non-persistence with OACs was associated with an increased risk of the composite outcome of ischaemic stroke and ischaemic stroke-related death [adjusted hazard ratio (aHR) 1.79, 95% CI 1.49-2.15] and ischaemic stroke (aHR 1.58, 95% CI 1.29-1.93) compared with being persistent with OACs.Conclusion At least a quarter of NVAF patients were non-persistent with OACs within 4 years, which was associated with poor efficacy of ischaemic stroke prevention. The identified baseline characteristics may help identify patients at risk of non-persistence.
| S-EPMC8530535 | biostudies-literature