Effectiveness and safety of oral anticoagulation treatment beyond 1 year after venous thromboembolism in patients at intermediate recurrence risk.

Effectiveness and safety of long-term anticoagulation treatment are uncertain in venous thromboembolism (VTE) patients at intermediate risk of recurrence. We examined the association between treatment beyond 1 year and outcomes in a Danish nationwide register-based study. VTE patients at intermediate risk of recurrence, that is, non-cancer patients with a first-time unprovoked VTE, who started oral anticoagulation treatment within 30 days and were alive 365 days after the index VTE were included and followed between 2007 and 2015. Exposure was extended (>365 days) or intermediate (91-365 days) treatment. Analyses were done using Cox regression on a propensity score weighted population. We included 18 609 patients with 7232 (38.9%) receiving extended treatment. Mean duration of follow-up was 2.6 years. Compared with intermediate treatment, treatment beyond 365 days was associated with a lower weighted risk of recurrent VTE (hazard ratio [HR] 0.56, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.49-0.65) and all-cause mortality (HR 0.81, 95% CI 0.72-0.90) and an increased risk of major bleeding (HR 1.87, 95% CI 1.58-2.22). In conclusion, extended anticoagulation treatment (predominantly warfarin) beyond 1 year was in real-life settings associated with a lower risk of recurrent VTE and all-cause mortality among VTE patients with an intermediate risk of recurrence. However, an increased bleeding risk should be considered.

Patient characteristics and bleeding events in nonvalvular atrial fibrillation patients treated with apixaban or vitamin K antagonists: real-world evidence from Italian administrative databases.

AIM: This study aimed to evaluate the risk of major bleeding among two cohorts of nonvalvular atrial fibrillation patients newly initiating a vitamin K antagonist (VKA) or apixaban in a real-world setting in Italy. PATIENTS & METHODS: A retrospective study using a large administrative database of Italian local health units was performed, using data from ten local health units and patients were included from the date of new initiation of apixaban or VKAs from January 2012 to June 2015. RESULTS: Risk of major bleeding was calculated using an adjusted Cox regression model. Compared with VKA, apixaban had a significantly lower risk of major bleeding (hazard ratio = 0.44 [95% CI: 0.12-0.97]). CONCLUSION: In this analysis, apixaban was associated with a lower risk of major bleeding compared with VKA.

Initiation and continuation of oral anticoagulant prescriptions for stroke prevention in non-valvular atrial fibrillation: A cohort study in primary care in France.

BACKGROUND: Oral anticoagulants are prescribed in non-valvular atrial fibrillation for stroke prevention; however, little is known about the current management of anticoagulation in France, particularly given the availability of non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants in recent years. AIMS: To describe the characteristics of patients prescribed oral anticoagulants, and assess treatment persistence in French primary care. METHODS: We conducted a cohort study of patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation, who were newly prescribed oral anticoagulants between 1 January 2014 and 31 January 2016, using French primary care data (IMS Longitudinal Patient Database). Adjusting for baseline characteristics, risk of non-persistence (switch or discontinuation) was compared using Cox regression. RESULTS: Of 4111 patients, 1710 were newly prescribed vitamin K antagonists, 1257 rivaroxaban, 744 apixaban and 400 dabigatran. The median age was 76 years, and 57.5% were male. History of hypertension was the most common co-morbidity (68.1%). Compared with vitamin K antagonists, non-persistence was higher with rivaroxaban (hazard ratio: 1.28; 95% confidence interval: 1.13-1.45) and dabigatran (hazard ratio: 1.42; 95% confidence interval: 1.20-1.69) and similar with apixaban (hazard ratio: 1.12; 95% confidence interval: 0.96-1.32). CONCLUSIONS: Non-persistence (treatment discontinuation or switch) with vitamin K antagonists was lower than with rivaroxaban and dabigatran in French primary care; however, non-persistence with the newest drug, apixaban, was similar to vitamin K antagonists. Larger studies with longer follow-up are needed to support these findings. This study is registered on ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT02488421).

Modelling the effect of beliefs about asthma medication and treatment intrusiveness on adherence and preference for once-daily vs. twice-daily medication.

People with asthma who do not adhere to their maintenance medication may experience poorer asthma control and need more healthcare support than those who adhere. People (N = 1010) aged 18-55 years with self-reported asthma, taking one or more asthma maintenance medication(s), from five European countries, participated in a survey using validated scales (Medication Adherence Report Scale [MARS], Asthma Control Test™ [ACT], Beliefs about Medicine Questionnaire [BMQ] and the Asthma Treatment Intrusiveness Questionnaire [ATIQ]). We performed a post hoc evaluation of adherence to maintenance medication, asthma control, beliefs about medication, preferences for once-daily vs. twice-daily asthma maintenance medication and treatment intrusiveness, using structural equation modelling to investigate the relationships between these factors. Most participants reported potential problems with asthma control (ACT < 19: 76.8% [n = 776]), low adherence (median MARS = 3.40) and preferred once-daily medication (73.5% [n = 742/1010]). Non-adherence was associated with worse asthma control (r = 0.262 [P < 0.001]) and a expressed preference for once-daily medication over a "twice daily medication that works slightly better" (test statistic [T] = 2.970 [P = 0.003]). Participants reporting non-adherence/preferring once-daily medication had negative beliefs about their treatment (BMQ necessity-concerns differential: r = 0.437 [P < 0.001]/T = 6.886 [P < 0.001]) and found medication intrusive (ATIQ: r = -0.422 [P < 0.001]/T = 2.689[P = 0.007]). Structural equation modelling showed complex relationships between variables, including: (1) high concerns about treatment associated with increased perceived treatment intrusiveness and reduced adherence, which influenced asthma control; (2) high concerns about treatment and healthcare seeking behaviour, which were predictive of preferring twice-daily asthma medication. Concerns about medication and perceived treatment intrusiveness were predictive of poor adherence, and were associated with preference for once-daily asthma medication. Confirm the utility of the PAPA model and NCF in explaining nonadherence linked to poor asthma control.

Oral anticoagulant persistence in patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation: A cohort study using primary care data in Germany.

This study examined characteristics and treatment persistence among patients prescribed oral anticoagulants (OACs) for stroke prevention in non-valvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF). We identified 15,244 patients (51.8% male, 72.7% aged ≥70) with NVAF and no prior OAC therapy who were prescribed apixaban (n = 1,303), rivaroxaban (n = 5,742), dabigatran (n = 1,622) or vitamin-K antagonists (VKAs, n = 6,577) between 1-Dec-2012 and 31-Oct-2014 in German primary care (IMS® Disease Analyzer). We compared OAC persistence using Cox regression over patients' entire follow-up and using a data-driven time-partitioned approach (before/after 100 days) to handle non-proportional hazards. History of stroke risk factors (stroke/transient ischaemic attack [TIA] 15.2%; thromboembolism 14.1%; hypertension 84.3%) and high bleeding risk (HAS-BLED score≥3 68.4%) was common. Apixaban-prescribed patients had more frequent history of stroke/TIA (19.7%) and high bleeding risk (72.6%) than other OACs. 12-month persistence rates were: VKA 57.5% (95% confidence interval (CI) 56.0-59.0%), rivaroxaban 56.6% (54.9-58.2%), dabigatran 50.1% (47.2-53.1%), apixaban 62.9% (58.8-67.0%). Over entire follow-up, compared to VKA, non-persistence was similar with apixaban (adjusted hazard ratio 1.08, 95% CI 0.95-1.24) but higher with rivaroxaban (1.21, 1.14-1.29) and dabigatran (1.53, 1.40-1.68). Using post-hoc time-partitioned approach: in first 100 days, non-persistence was higher with apixaban (1.37, 1.17-1.59), rivaroxaban (1.41, 1.30-1.53) and dabigatran (1.91, 1.70-2.14) compared to VKA. Compared to apixaban, rivaroxaban non-persistence was similar (1.03, 0.89-1.20), dabigatran was higher (1.39, 1.17-1.66). After 100 days, apixaban non-persistence was lower than VKA (0.66, 0.52-0.85); rivaroxaban (0.97, 0.87-1.07) and dabigatran (1.10, 0.95-1.28) were similar to VKA. Furthermore, rivaroxaban (1.46, 1.13-1.88) and dabigatran (1.67, 1.26-2.19) non-persistence was higher than apixaban. This study describes real-world observations on OAC use, particularly early apixaban use following approval for NVAF, in Germany. We identified potential differential OAC prescribing and higher persistence with apixaban than other OACs after 100 days' treatment. Larger studies are needed with longer follow-up to establish long-term patterns.

Comparative effectiveness of mepolizumab and omalizumab in severe asthma: An indirect treatment comparison.

BACKGROUND: Severe asthma is a heterogeneous disease. Patients with both eosinophilic and allergic asthma phenotypes may be eligible for treatment with mepolizumab and omalizumab. Evidence on the relative effectiveness of these treatments in this 'overlap' population would be informative for clinical and payer decision making. METHODS: A systematic literature review and indirect treatment comparison (Bayesian framework) were performed to assess the comparative effectiveness and tolerability of mepolizumab and omalizumab, as add-ons to standard of care. Studies included in the primary analysis were double-blind, randomized controlled trials, ≥12 weeks' duration enrolling patients with severe asthma with a documented exacerbation history and receiving high-dose inhaled corticosteroids plus ≥1 additional controller. Two populations were examined: patients potentially eligible for 1) both treatments (Overlap population) and 2) either treatment (Trial population). RESULTS: In the Overlap population, no differences between treatments in clinically significant exacerbations and exacerbations requiring hospitalization were found, although trends favored mepolizumab (rate ratio [RR]:0.66 [95% credible intervals (Crl):0.37,1.19]; 0.19[0.02,2.32], respectively). In the Trial population, mepolizumab treatment produced greater reductions in clinically significant exacerbations (RR:0.63 [95% CrI:0.45,0.89]) but not exacerbations requiring hospitalization compared with omalizumab (RR:0.58 [95% Crl: 0.16,2.13]), although the trend favored mepolizumab. Both treatments had broadly comparable effects on lung function, and similar tolerability profiles. CONCLUSIONS: Whilst this analysis has limitations due to a restricted evidence base and residual heterogeneity, it showed that in patients with severe asthma, mepolizumab seems to be at least as effective as omalizumab and that the tolerability profiles of the two treatments did not meaningfully differentiate.

Once-daily fluticasone furoate/vilanterol versus twice daily combination therapies in asthma-mixed treatment comparisons of clinical efficacy.

BACKGROUND: Fluticasone furoate (FF)/vilanterol (VI) is a once-daily inhaled corticosteroid (ICS)/long-acting beta2 agonist (LABA) combination. FF/VI, 92/22mcg and 184/22mcg, are approved in Europe as maintenance therapy in persistent asthma. We report data from mixed treatment comparisons (MTC) of once-daily FF/VI against established twice-daily ICS/LABA combination therapies on clinical efficacy outcomes. METHODS: Data from 31 parallel-group randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of ICS/LABA, of ≥8 weeks' duration in patients aged ≥12 years with asthma, identified by systematic review, were analysed using covariate-adjusted Bayesian hierarchical models for four efficacy outcomes (primary analysis). Lung function, assessed by change from baseline morning peak expiratory flow (PEF) (n = 18 studies) and forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1) (n = 28), was the outcome of primary interest. Secondary objectives were assessment of relative efficacy in terms of exacerbation rates (n = 6) and health status (n = 7). Overall, 24 different treatment arms were included in the MTC; we report findings comparing FF/VI (92/22mcg and 184/22mcg) with fluticasone propionate/salmeterol (FP/SAL) (250/50mcg and 500/50mcg) and budesonide/formoterol (BUD/FORM) (320/9mcg and 640/18mcg). RESULTS: For PEF (margin = 12 l/min), FF/VI 92/22mcg demonstrated ≥94 % probability and FF/VI 184/22mcg >99 % probability of non-inferiority to corresponding doses of both FP/SAL and BUD/FORM. For FEV1 (margin = 100 ml), FF/VI demonstrated ≥98 % (92/22mcg) and >99 % (184/22mcg) probability of non-inferiority to both FP/SAL and BUD/FORM. Findings for exacerbations were inconclusive due to lack of data: FF/VI 92/22mcg demonstrated 74 % and 82 % probability of non-inferiority (margin = 10 %) to FP/SAL 250/50mcg and BUD/FORM 320/9mcg, respectively. For Asthma Quality of Life Questionnaire (AQLQ) score, FF/VI 92/22mcg demonstrated >99 % and 90 % probability of non-inferiority (margin = 0.25) to FP/SAL 250/50mcg and BUD/FORM 320/9mcg. Data were unavailable to assess non-inferiority of FF/VI 184/22mcg on exacerbations or AQLQ. CONCLUSIONS: Both strengths of once-daily FF/VI in asthma were comparable with corresponding doses of twice-daily FP/SAL and BUD/FORM in terms of lung function in this MTC analysis. FF/VI 92/22mcg was comparable with FP/SAL and BUD/FORM on AQLQ, but exacerbation results were inconclusive. Model limitations include disconnected treatment networks and variability across studies. Our data support previous RCT findings suggesting that the efficacy of once-daily FF/VI in improving lung function and health status in asthma is comparable with twice-daily ICS/LABAs.

Once-daily fluticasone furoate/vilanterol 100/25 mcg versus twice daily combination therapies in COPD - mixed treatment comparisons of clinical efficacy.

BACKGROUND: Fluticasone furoate (FF)/vilanterol (VI) 100/25 mcg is a once-daily inhaled corticosteroid (ICS)/long-acting beta2 agonist (LABA) treatment approved in the United States, Canada and Europe for the long-term maintenance therapy of COPD. We report data from mixed treatment comparisons (MTC) of once-daily FF/VI against established twice-daily ICS/LABA combination therapies on clinical efficacy outcomes. METHODS: Data from 33 parallel-group randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of ICS/LABAs, of ≥8 weeks' duration in patients ≥12 years of age with COPD, identified by systematic review, were analysed using covariate-adjusted Bayesian hierarchical models for three efficacy outcomes. Lung function, assessed by change from baseline in forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV1), was the outcome of primary interest (n = 28 studies). Secondary objectives were assessment of annual rate of moderate/severe exacerbations (n = 15) and patient-reported health status, measured by change from baseline in St George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ) Total score (n = 20). Overall, 25 different treatments were included in the MTC; we report findings, including probabilities of non-inferiority, for comparisons of once-daily FF/VI 100/25 mcg with twice-daily fluticasone propionate (FP)/salmeterol (SAL) 500/50 mcg and budesonide (BUD)/formoterol (FORM) 400/12 mcg. RESULTS: For FEV1, FF/VI 100/25 mcg demonstrated >99% probability of non-inferiority to FP/SAL 500/50 mcg and BUD/FORM 400/12 mcg using a 50 mL margin. For annual rate of moderate/severe exacerbations, FF/VI 100/25 mcg demonstrated 73% and 77% probability of non-inferiority to FP/SAL 500/50 mcg and BUD/FORM 400/12 mcg, respectively, using a 10% rate ratio margin. For SGRQ Total score, the corresponding probabilities of non-inferiority were 99% and 98%, respectively, on a 2-unit margin. Significant covariate effects were identified: increased age was associated with deterioration in FEV1 and reduced exacerbation frequency; shorter study duration was associated with reduced exacerbation frequency. CONCLUSIONS: FF/VI 100/25 mcg was comparable with corresponding doses of FP/SAL and BUD/FORM on lung function and health status outcomes. Non-inferiority on moderate/severe exacerbation rate was not demonstrated to the same degree of confidence, though observed rates were similar. Model limitations include a weak treatment network for the exacerbation analysis and variability across the included studies. Our data support previous RCT findings suggesting that the efficacy of FF/VI 100/25 mcg on lung function and health status in COPD is comparable with twice-daily ICS/LABAs.