Dataset Information

Efficacy and safety of the target-specific oral anticoagulants for stroke prevention in atrial fibrillation: the real-life evidence.

ABSTRACT: The aim of our article is to provide a concise review for clinicians entailing the main studies that evaluated the efficacy and safety of target-specific oral anticoagulants (TSOAs) for thromboembolic stroke prevention in the real-world setting. Atrial fibrillation (AF) is one of the most common supraventricular arrhythmias that requires anticoagulation therapy to prevent stroke and systemic embolism. TSOAs, dabigatran, apixaban and rivaroxaban have become available as an alternative to warfarin anticoagulation in nonvalvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF). Randomized clinical trials showed non-inferior or superior results in efficacy and safety of the TSOAs compared with warfarin for stroke prevention in NVAF patients. For this reason, the 2012 update to the European Society of Cardiology guidelines for the management of AF recommends TSOAs as broadly preferable to vitamin K antagonists (VKAs) in the vast majority of patients with NVAF [Camm et al. 2012]. Although the clinical trial results and the guideline's indications, there is a need for safety and efficacy data from unselected patients in everyday clinical practice. Recently, a large number of studies testing the efficacy and the safety of TSOAs in clinical practice have been published. The aim of our article is to provide a concise review for clinicians, outlining the main studies that evaluated the efficacy and safety of TSOAs for thromboembolic stroke prevention in the real-world setting.

SUBMITTER: Russo V

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5315223 | biostudies-other | 2017 Feb

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-other

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Efficacy and safety of the target-specific oral anticoagulants for stroke prevention in atrial fibrillation: the real-life evidence.

Russo Vincenzo V Rago Anna A Proietti Riccardo R Di Meo Federica F Antonio Papa Andrea A Calabrò Paolo P D'Onofrio Antonio A Nigro Gerardo G Nigro Gerardo G AlTurki Ahmed A

Therapeutic advances in drug safety 20161024 2

The aim of our article is to provide a concise review for clinicians entailing the main studies that evaluated the efficacy and safety of target-specific oral anticoagulants (TSOAs) for thromboembolic stroke prevention in the real-world setting. Atrial fibrillation (AF) is one of the most common supraventricular arrhythmias that requires anticoagulation therapy to prevent stroke and systemic embolism. TSOAs, dabigatran, apixaban and rivaroxaban have become available as an alternative to warfarin ...[more]

PMID: 28255434

Similar Datasets

Project description:Dabigatran, an oral thrombin inhibitor, and rivaroxaban and apixaban, oral factor Xa inhibitors, have been found to be safe and effective in reducing stroke risk in patients with atrial fibrillation. We sought to compare the efficacy and safety of the 3 new agents based on data from their published warfarin-controlled randomized trials, using the method of adjusted indirect comparisons.We included findings from 44 535 patients enrolled in 3 trials of the efficacy of dabigatran (Randomized Evaluation of Long-Term Anticoagulation Therapy [RELY]), apixaban (Apixaban for Reduction in Stroke and Other Thromboembolic Events in Atrial Fibrillation [ARISTOTLE]), and rivaroxaban (Rivaroxaban Once Daily Oral Direct Factor Xa Inhibition Compared With Vitamin K Antagonism for Prevention of Stroke and Embolism Trial in Atrial Fibrillation [ROCKET-AF]), each compared with warfarin. The primary efficacy end point was stroke or systemic embolism; the safety end point we studied was major hemorrhage. To address a lack of comparability between trial populations caused by the restriction of ROCKET-AF to high-risk patients, we conducted a subgroup analysis in patients with a CHADS(2) score ?3. We found no statistically significant efficacy differences among the 3 drugs, although apixaban and dabigatran were numerically superior to rivaroxaban. Apixaban produced significantly fewer major hemorrhages than dabigatran and rivaroxaban.An indirect comparison of new anticoagulants based on existing trial data indicates that in patients with a CHADS(2) score ?3 dabigatran 150 mg, apixaban 5 mg, and rivaroxaban 20 mg resulted in statistically similar rates of stroke and systemic embolism, but apixaban had a lower risk of major hemorrhage compared with dabigatran and rivaroxaban. Until head-to-head trials or large-scale observational studies that reflect routine use of these agents are available, such adjusted indirect comparisons based on trial data are one tool to guide initial therapeutic choices.

Project description:BackgroundThere are limited data about the clinical benefits and harm of direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) in stroke prevention in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) complicated with anemia or thrombocytopenia.MethodsThis is a multi-center retrospective cohort study involving 5469 AF patients from 15 hospitals in China. Patients were divided into three groups according to hemoglobin and platelet levels: Group 1 (hemoglobin male ≥ 130 g/L; female ≥ 120 g/L and platelet ≥ 100 × 109/L), Group 2 (hemoglobin male < 130 g/L; female < 120 g/L or platelet < 100 × 109/L), and Group 3 (hemoglobin male < 130 g/L; female < 120 g/L and platelet < 100 × 109/L). Patients in each category are further divided into two groups according to their stroke prevention strategies: rivaroxaban or dabigatran. Clinical results include major, minor, total bleeding, thrombosis, and the composite outcome of major bleeding and thrombosis.ResultsHigher hemoglobin levels were associated with a reduced risk of total bleeding and major bleeding, while platelet counts were not associated with any event. Compared with Group 1, Group 2 had a higher risk of major bleeding (aOR 1.70, 95%CI 1.12-2.57, P = 0.012), and the composite endpoint of major bleeding and thrombosis (aOR 1.70, 95%CI 1.19-2.44, P = 0.004). Compared with Group 1, Group 3 had a higher total bleeding risk (aOR 2.15, 95%CI 1.14-4.05, P = 0.018). Compared with dabigatran, rivaroxaban was associated with higher composite risk in Group 1 (aOR 2.91, 95% CI 1.66-5.16, P < 0.001) and Group 2 (aOR 3.05, 95%CI 1.46-6.39, P = 0.003), but there was no significant difference in Group 3 (aOR 1.78, 95%CI 0.23-13.54, P = 0.577).ConclusionsHigher hemoglobin levels are associated with a reduced risk of total bleeding and major bleeding in patients with AF. Dabigatran was associated with better clinical outcomes than rivaroxaban in patients with anemia or thrombocytopenia but not in those with anemia and thrombocytopenia.

Project description:IntroductionNovel oral anticoagulants (NOACs) have been approved for prevention of stroke and systemic embolism in patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF). A large number of patients are on NOACs when they present for AF ablation. We intended to evaluate the safety and efficacy of NOACs for AF ablation during the periprocedural period by performing a meta-analysis of trials comparing NOACs with warfarin.MethodsStudies comparing NOACs (dabigatran and rivaroxaban) with warfarin as periprocedural anticoagulants for AF ablation were identified using an electronic search. Primary outcomes were: (1) a composite endpoint of stroke, transient ischemic attack (TIA), peripheral arterial embolism, or silent cerebral lesions on magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and (2) major bleeding complications. A random effects model was used to pool the safety and efficacy data across all included trials.ResultsWhen compared to warfarin, there was an increased risk of the composite endpoint of stroke, TIA, peripheral arterial embolism, or silent cerebral lesions on MRI with NOACs as periprocedural anticoagulants for AF ablation [odds ratio (OR): 1.69, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.06-2.68]. Sub-group analysis revealed a higher risk of composite endpoint with dabigatran as a periprocedural anticoagulant for AF ablation (OR: 2.01, 95% CI: 1.19-3.39) whereas the risk was similar with rivaroxaban (OR: 0.90, 95% CI: 0.34-2.41). Sensitivity analysis after excluding silent cerebral lesions on MRI showed there was no increased risk of thromboembolic events with either dabigatran (OR: 1.69, 95% CI: 0.81-3.51) or rivaroxaban (OR: 0.70, 95% CI: 0.12-4.04). Risk of bleeding with NOACs was similar to warfarin (OR: 0.91, 95% CI: 0.62-1.34).ConclusionNOACs are comparable to warfarin in terms of bleeding complications. However, dabigatran therapy is potentially associated with a higher risk of silent cerebral lesions on MRI. The results of this study should be considered as hypothesis-generating and assessed further in prospective randomized clinical studies.

Project description:Objective To compare the efficacy, safety, and cost effectiveness of direct acting oral anticoagulants (DOACs) for patients with atrial fibrillation.Design Systematic review, network meta-analysis, and cost effectiveness analysis. Data sources Medline, PreMedline, Embase, and The Cochrane Library.Eligibility criteria for selecting studies Published randomised trials evaluating the use of a DOAC, vitamin K antagonist, or antiplatelet drug for prevention of stroke in patients with atrial fibrillation.Results 23 randomised trials involving 94?656 patients were analysed: 13 compared a DOAC with warfarin dosed to achieve a target INR of 2.0-3.0. Apixaban 5 mg twice daily (odds ratio 0.79, 95% confidence interval 0.66 to 0.94), dabigatran 150 mg twice daily (0.65, 0.52 to 0.81), edoxaban 60 mg once daily (0.86, 0.74 to 1.01), and rivaroxaban 20 mg once daily (0.88, 0.74 to 1.03) reduced the risk of stroke or systemic embolism compared with warfarin. The risk of stroke or systemic embolism was higher with edoxaban 60 mg once daily (1.33, 1.02 to 1.75) and rivaroxaban 20 mg once daily (1.35, 1.03 to 1.78) than with dabigatran 150 mg twice daily. The risk of all-cause mortality was lower with all DOACs than with warfarin. Apixaban 5 mg twice daily (0.71, 0.61 to 0.81), dabigatran 110 mg twice daily (0.80, 0.69 to 0.93), edoxaban 30 mg once daily (0.46, 0.40 to 0.54), and edoxaban 60 mg once daily (0.78, 0.69 to 0.90) reduced the risk of major bleeding compared with warfarin. The risk of major bleeding was higher with dabigatran 150 mg twice daily than apixaban 5 mg twice daily (1.33, 1.09 to 1.62), rivaroxaban 20 mg twice daily than apixaban 5 mg twice daily (1.45, 1.19 to 1.78), and rivaroxaban 20 mg twice daily than edoxaban 60 mg once daily (1.31, 1.07 to 1.59). The risk of intracranial bleeding was substantially lower for most DOACs compared with warfarin, whereas the risk of gastrointestinal bleeding was higher with some DOACs than warfarin. Apixaban 5 mg twice daily was ranked the highest for most outcomes, and was cost effective compared with warfarin.Conclusions The network meta-analysis informs the choice of DOACs for prevention of stroke in patients with atrial fibrillation. Several DOACs are of net benefit compared with warfarin. A trial directly comparing DOACs would overcome the need for indirect comparisons to be made through network meta-analysis.Systematic review registration PROSPERO CRD 42013005324.

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.

Dataset Information

Efficacy and safety of the target-specific oral anticoagulants for stroke prevention in atrial fibrillation: the real-life evidence.

Publications

Efficacy and safety of the target-specific oral anticoagulants for stroke prevention in atrial fibrillation: the real-life evidence.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets