Thrombopoietin Receptor Agonists and Other Second-Line Therapies for Immune Thrombocytopenia: A Narrative Review With a Focus on Drug Access in Canada.

INTRODUCTION: Immune thrombocytopenia (ITP) is an autoimmune disease characterized by low platelet counts and increased risk of bleeding. After corticosteroids with or without intravenous immune globulin (first-line treatment), second-line treatment options include rituximab, splenectomy, thrombopoietin receptor agonists (TPO-RAs), and fostamatinib. In Canada, the choice of second-line therapy is influenced by access to medications. The goals of this narrative review are to 1) summarize the evidence for the use of TPO-RAs and other second-line therapies in ITP and 2) highlight differences in public funding criteria for TPO-RAs across provinces and territories in Canada. METHODS: We conducted a literature review of second-line therapies for ITP. We solicited information on public funding programs for TPO-RAs in Canada from health care providers, pharmacists, and provincial ministries of health. RESULTS: Head-to-head trials involving TPO-RAs, rituximab, splenectomy, and fostamatinib are lacking. There is substantial evidence of effect for TPO-RAs in improving platelet count levels, health-related quality of life, bleeding, and fatigue from placebo-controlled trials and observational studies; however, access to TPO-RAs through provincial funding programs in Canada is variable. Splenectomy failure is a prerequisite for the funding of TPO-RAs in Ontario, Manitoba, and Saskatchewan, but not in Alberta or Quebec. Other provinces either do not have access to public funding or funding is provided on a case-by-case basis. DISCUSSION: TPO-RAs are effective second-line therapies for the treatment of ITP; however, access is variable across Canada, which results in health disparities and poor uptake of international treatment guidelines.

Genotype-guided drug prescribing vs. usual care reduced clinically relevant adverse drug reactions at 12 wk.

SOURCE CITATION: Swen JJ, van der Wouden CH, Manson LE, et al; Ubiquitous Pharmacogenetics Consortium. A 12-gene pharmacogenetic panel to prevent adverse drug reactions: an open-label, multicentre, controlled, cluster-randomised crossover implementation study. Lancet. 2023;401:347-356. 36739136.

Hydroxychloroquine-Chloroquine, QT-Prolongation, and Major Adverse Cardiac Events: A Meta-analysis and Scoping Review.

OBJECTIVES: We aimed to evaluate the high-quality literature on the frequency and nature of major adverse cardiac events (MACE) associated with either hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) or chloroquine (CQ). DATA SOURCES: We searched Medline, Embase, International Pharmaceutical Abstracts, and Cochrane Central from 1996 onward using search strategies created in collaboration with medical science librarians. STUDY SELECTION AND DATA EXTRACTION: Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) published in English language from January 1996 to September 2022, involving adult patients at least 18 years of age, were selected. Outcomes of interest were death, arrhythmias, syncope, and seizures. Random-effects meta-analyses were performed with a Treatment Arm Continuity Correction for single and double zero event studies. DATA SYNTHESIS: By study drug, there were 31 HCQ RCTs (n = 6677), 9 CQ RCTs (n = 622), and 1 combined HCQ-CQ trial (n = 105). Mortality was the most commonly reported MACE at 220 of 255 events (86.3%), with no reports of torsades de pointes or sudden cardiac death. There was no increased risk of MACE with exposure to HCQ-CQ compared with control (risk ratio [RR] = 0.90, 95% CI = 0.69-1.17, I2 = 0%). RELEVANCE TO PATIENT CARE AND CLINICAL PRACTICE: These findings have important implications with respect to patient reassurance and updated guidance for prescribing practices of these medications. CONCLUSIONS: Despite listing as QT-prolonging meds, HCQ-CQ did not increase the risk of MACE.

A comparison of confounder selection and adjustment methods for estimating causal effects using large healthcare databases.

PURPOSE: Confounding adjustment is required to estimate the effect of an exposure on an outcome in observational studies. However, variable selection and unmeasured confounding are particularly challenging when analyzing large healthcare data. Machine learning methods may help address these challenges. The objective was to evaluate the capacity of such methods to select confounders and reduce unmeasured confounding bias. METHODS: A simulation study with known true effects was conducted. Completely synthetic and partially synthetic data incorporating real large healthcare data were generated. We compared Bayesian adjustment for confounding (BAC), generalized Bayesian causal effect estimation (GBCEE), Group Lasso and Doubly robust estimation, high-dimensional propensity score (hdPS), and scalable collaborative targeted maximum likelihood algorithms. For the hdPS, two adjustment approaches targeting the effect in the whole population were considered: Full matching and inverse probability weighting. RESULTS: In scenarios without hidden confounders, most methods were essentially unbiased. The bias and variance of the hdPS varied considerably according to the number of variables selected by the algorithm. In scenarios with hidden confounders, substantial bias reduction was achieved by using machine-learning methods to identify proxies as compared to adjusting only by observed confounders. hdPS and Group Lasso performed poorly in the partially synthetic simulation. BAC, GBCEE, and scalable collaborative-targeted maximum likelihood algorithms performed particularly well. CONCLUSIONS: Machine learning can help to identify measured confounders in large healthcare databases. They can also capitalize on proxies of unmeasured confounders to substantially reduce residual confounding bias.

In healthy older adults, daily aspirin increased cancer mortality.

SOURCE CITATION: McNeil JJ, Gibbs P, Orchard SG, et al. Effect of aspirin on cancer incidence and mortality in older adults. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2021;113:258-65. 32778876.

Thromboembolic Events in Users of Warfarin Treated with Different Skeletal Muscle Relaxants.

Background and Objectives: Warfarin and a skeletal muscle relaxant are co-treatments in nearly a quarter-million annual United States (US) office visits. Despite international calls to minimize patient harm arising from anticoagulant drug interactions, scant data exist on clinical outcomes in real-world populations. We examined effects of concomitant use of warfarin and individual muscle relaxants on rates of hospitalization for thromboembolism among economically disadvantaged persons. Materials and Methods: Using 1999−2012 administrative data of four US state Medicaid programs, we conducted 16 retrospective self-controlled case series studies: half included concomitant users of warfarin + one of eight muscle relaxants; half included concomitant users of an inhaled corticosteroid (ICS) + one of eight muscle relaxants. The ICS analyses served as negative control comparisons. In each study, we calculated incidence rate ratios (IRRs) comparing thromboembolism rates in the co-exposed versus warfarin/ICS-only exposed person-time, adjusting for time-varying confounders. Results: Among ~70 million persons, we identified 8693 warfarin-treated subjects who concomitantly used a muscle relaxant, were hospitalized for thromboembolism, and met all other inclusion criteria. Time-varying confounder-adjusted IRRs ranged from 0.31 (95% confidence interval: 0.13−0.77) for metaxalone to 3.44 (95% confidence interval: 1.53−7.78) for tizanidine. The tizanidine finding was robust after quantitatively adjusting for negative control ICS findings, and in numerous prespecified secondary analyses. Conclusions: We identified a potential >3-fold increase in the rate of hospitalized thromboembolism in concomitant users of warfarin + tizanidine vs. warfarin alone. Alternative explanations for this finding include confounding by indication, a native effect of tizanidine, or chance.

Drug-drug interactions with warfarin: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

AIMS: The objective of this paper is to systematically review the literature on drug-drug interactions with warfarin, with a focus on patient-important clinical outcomes. METHODS: MEDLINE, EMBASE and the International Pharmaceutical Abstract (IPA) databases were searched from January 2004 to August 2019. We included studies describing drug-drug interactions between warfarin and other drugs. Screening and data extraction were conducted independently and in duplicate. We synthesized pooled odds ratios (OR) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs), comparing warfarin plus another medication to warfarin alone. We assessed the risk of bias at the study level and evaluated the overall certainty of evidence using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach. RESULTS: Of 42 013 citations identified, a total of 72 studies reporting on 3 735 775 patients were considered eligible, including 11 randomized clinical trials and 61 observational studies. Increased risk of clinically relevant bleeding when added to warfarin therapy was observed for antiplatelet (AP) regimens (OR = 1.74; 95% CI 1.56-1.94), many antimicrobials (OR = 1.63; 95% CI 1.45-1.83), NSAIDs including COX-2 NSAIDs (OR = 1.83; 95% CI 1.29-2.59), SSRIs (OR = 1.62; 95% CI 1.42-1.85), mirtazapine (OR = 1.75; 95% CI 1.30-2.36), loop diuretics (OR = 1.92; 95% CI 1.29-2.86) among others. We found a protective effect of proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) against warfarin-related gastrointestinal (GI) bleeding (OR = 0.69; 95% CI 0.64-0.73). No significant effect on thromboembolic events or mortality of any drug group used with warfarin was found, including single or dual AP regimens. CONCLUSIONS: This review found low to moderate certainty evidence supporting the interaction between warfarin and a small group of medications, which result in increased bleeding risk. PPIs are associated with reduced hospitalization for upper GI bleeding for patients taking warfarin. Further studies are required to better understand drug-drug interactions leading to thromboembolic outcomes or death.

Rates of rebleeding, thrombosis and mortality associated with resumption of anticoagulant therapy after anticoagulant-related bleeding.

BACKGROUND: Data on resuming oral anticoagulants (OACs) after bleeding are primarily from studies involving patients given warfarin, with few data on direct OACs (DOACs). We aimed to characterize prescribing patterns for OACs after OAC-related bleeding and compare the rates of bleeding, thrombosis and mortality in patients who resumed either type of OAC with those who did not. METHODS: We conducted a population-based cohort study of adults aged 66 years or older who were admitted to hospital for bleeding while receiving OACs from Apr. 1, 2012, to Mar. 31, 2017, using linked administrative health databases from Ontario. We used competing risk methods to calculate cause-specific adjusted hazard ratios (HRs) for thrombosis, bleeding and mortality with resumption of OACs adjusted as a time-varying covariate. We determined time to OAC resumption using the Kaplan-Meier method. RESULTS: We included 6793 patients with gastrointestinal (n = 4297, 63.3%), intracranial (n = 805, 11.9%) or other bleeding (n = 1691, 25.0%). At cohort entry, 3874 patients (57.0%) were prescribed warfarin and 2919 patients (43.0%) were prescribed a DOAC. The most common indication for OAC was atrial fibrillation (n = 5557, 81.8%), followed by venous thromboembolism (n = 1367, 20.1%). Oral anticoagulants were resumed in 4792 patients (70.5%) within 365 days of the index bleed. The median time to resumption was 46 (interquartile range 6-550) days. We found that resuming OAC was associated with reduced rates of thrombosis (adjusted HR 0.60, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.50-0.72) and mortality (adjusted HR 0.54, 95% CI 0.48-0.60), and an increased rate of rebleeding (adjusted HR 1.88, 95% CI 1.64-2.17). INTERPRETATION: We found that resuming OAC is associated with a reduction in thrombosis and mortality but an increase in bleeding. Randomized controlled trials that evaluate the net benefit of strategies for resumption of OAC after a bleeding event are warranted.

USPSTF recommends asking adults screening questions about unhealthy drug use.

SOURCE CITATION: Krist AH, Davidson KW, Mangione CM, et al. Screening for unhealthy drug use: US Preventive Services Task Force recommendation statement. JAMA. 2020;323:2301-09. 32515821.

Barriers and facilitators to optimal oral anticoagulant management: a scoping review.

Oral anticoagulants (OACs) are high alert medications and require high-quality management to optimize health outcomes. The objective of this scoping review was to identify barriers and facilitators (B&Fs) associated with the quality of OAC management. We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, and CINAHL databases until July 12, 2018, and cross-referenced the bibliographies of the retrieved studies. We included quantitative and qualitative studies that assessed B&Fs to OAC management. The study selection and data extraction processes were performed in duplicate. Analyses included measuring the prevalence of reported B&Fs from studies reporting quantitative data, identifying B&Fs in narrative analyses, and identifying their impact on important outcomes of OAC management. B&Fs were coded and aggregated to higher-level themes using a consensus approach. Factors were described as "key" if they were statistically associated with important outcomes in a randomized trial or observational study. We included 62 studies-three randomized clinical trials (RCTs), 46 observational studies (cross-sectional studies, cohort studies, and case-control studies), 11 qualitative studies, and two mixed-methods studies. Factors identified could be grouped into four themes-therapy-related, patient-related, healthcare provider-related, and health system-related. Key barriers to optimal OAC management were mostly patient-related, whereas interventions focused on education or implementing protocols were shown through RCTs to be effective at improving knowledge scores of OAC patients. While multiple barriers and some facilitators were identified in this review, none was proven to be associated with clinical outcomes. With this in mind, individual physicians may wish to address the key barriers in their practice as a quality improvement initiative but system-wide or policy changes should await high-quality evidence. Future trials should address these factors.Systematic review registration: PROSPERO CRD42017069043.

Evaluation of online clinical pharmacology curriculum resources for medical students.

AIMS: To identify and evaluate clinical pharmacology (CP) online curricular (e-Learning) resources that are internationally available for medical students. METHODS: Literature searches of Medline, EMBASE and ERIC databases and an online survey of faculty members of international English language medical schools, were used to identify CP e-Learning resources. Resources that were accessible online in English and aimed to improve the quality of prescribing specific medications were then evaluated using a summary percentage score for comprehensiveness, usability and quality, and for content suitability. RESULTS: Our literature searches and survey of 252 faculty (40.7% response rate) in 219 medical schools identified 22 and 59 resources respectively. After screening and removing duplicates, 8 eligible resources remained for evaluation. Mean total score was 53% (standard deviation = 13). The Australian National Prescribing Curriculum, ranked highest with a score of 77%, based primarily on very good ratings for usability, quality and suitable content. CONCLUSION: Using a novel method and evaluation metric to identify, classify, and rate English language CP e-Learning resources, the National Prescribing Curriculum was the highest ranked open access resource. Future work is required to implement and evaluate its effectiveness on prescribing competence.

Direct comparative effectiveness and safety between non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants for stroke prevention in nonvalvular atrial fibrillation: a systematic review and meta-analysis of observational studies.

The non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants (NOACs) have been increasingly prescribed in clinical practice for stroke prevention in patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation (AF). Direct comparisons between NOACs in trials are lacking, leaving an important clinical decision-making gap. We aimed to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis to summarize the evidence of observational studies for direct comparative effectiveness and safety amongst NOACs in patients with AF. Conference proceedings and electronic databases including MEDLINE, CINAHL, EMBASE and PUBMED were systematically searched. We included observational studies directly comparing individual NOACs in patients with nonvalvular AF who were aged ≥ 18 years for stroke prevention. Primary outcome included effectiveness outcome (stroke or systemic embolism) and safety outcome (major bleeding). Data were extracted in duplicated by two reviewers independently. A random-effects meta-analysis was conducted to synthesize the data from included observational studies. We used the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) to rate the overall quality of evidence for each outcome. Fifteen studies were included for qualitative synthesis, twelve studies for meta-analyses. It was found that rivaroxaban and dabigatran were similar with regard to risk of stroke or systemic embolism (Hazard ratio [HR] = 1.00, 95% CI 0.91-1.10; evidence quality: low), but rivaroxaban was associated with higher risk of major bleeding (HR = 1.39, 95% CI 1.28-1.50; evidence quality: moderate). Compared with apixaban, a significantly higher risk of major bleeding was observed with rivaroxaban (HR = 1.71, 95% CI 1.51-1.94; evidence quality: low). Apixaban was associated with lower risk of major bleeding, in comparison with dabigatran (HR = 0.80, 95% CI 0.68-0.95; evidence quality: low). No differences in risk of stroke or systemic embolism was observed between rivaroxaban versus apixaban, and apixaban versus dabigatran. In this study, apixaban was found to have the most favorable safety profile amongst the three NOACs. No significant difference was observed in risk of stroke or systemic embolism between the NOACs. Such findings may provide some decision-making support for physicians regarding their choices amongst NOACs in patients with AF.Registration PROSPERO (identifier: CRD42016052908).

Do telehealth interventions improve oral anticoagulation management? A systematic review and meta-analysis.

The benefits and harms of telehealth interventions compared to usual care for oral anticoagulation management are unclear. A systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted to assess their impact on clinically important outcomes. A search was conducted through MEDLINE, EMBASE and CENTRAL databases, and the retrieved citations were independently screened and extracted by two review authors. Cochrane Collaboration-recommended tools were used to assess for risk of bias. Co-primary outcomes were major bleeding and major thromboembolic events. Of 2145 retrieved citations, 7 were included for qualitative synthesis (1 randomized controlled trial, 1 prospective cohort and 5 retrospective cohorts). None addressed direct oral anticoagulants. Telehealth interventions were mainly consisted of telephone visits by clinicians, pharmacists and specialists. Meta-analysis of 3 studies (n = 6955) showed significant improvements in the telehealth group for major thromboembolic events (RR 0.43, 95% CI 0.25-0.74, p = 0.002), but no significant difference for major bleeding events (RR 0.83, 95% CI 0.52-1.33, p = 0.44). There was no significant difference in any of the secondary outcomes. The overall GRADE quality of evidence was rated very low due to high risk of bias and low precision. Based on very low quality evidence, telehealth interventions may lower the risk of major thromboembolic events, but not other clinically important outcomes. A high quality study is likely to strongly influence these results. High quality randomized trials are recommended to better assess the benefits and harms of telehealth interventions for anticoagulation management.

Regional variation in healthcare spending and mortality among senior high-cost healthcare users in Ontario, Canada: a retrospective matched cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Senior high cost health care users (HCU) are a priority for many governments. Little research has addressed regional variation of HCU incidence and outcomes, especially among incident HCU. This study describes the regional variation in healthcare costs and mortality across Ontario's health planning districts [Local Health Integration Networks (LHIN)] among senior incident HCU and non-HCU and explores the relationship between healthcare spending and mortality. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective population-based matched cohort study of incident senior HCU defined as Ontarians aged ≥66 years in the top 5% most costly healthcare users in fiscal year (FY) 2013. We matched HCU to non-HCU (1:3) based on age, sex and LHIN. Primary outcomes were LHIN-based variation in costs (total and 12 cost components) and mortality during FY2013 as measured by variance estimates derived from multi-level models. Outcomes were risk-adjusted for age, sex, ADGs, and low-income status. In a cost-mortality analysis by LHIN, risk-adjusted random effects for total costs and mortality were graphically presented together in a cost-mortality plane to identify low and high performers. RESULTS: We studied 175,847 incident HCU and 527,541 matched non-HCU. On average, 94 out of 1000 seniors per LHIN were HCU (CV = 4.6%). The mean total costs for HCU in FY2013 were 12 times higher that of non-HCU ($29,779 vs. $2472 respectively), whereas all-cause mortality was 13.6 times greater (103.9 vs. 7.5 per 1000 seniors). Regional variation in costs and mortality was lower in senior HCU compared with non-HCU. We identified greater variability in accessing the healthcare system, but, once the patient entered the system, variation in costs was low. The traditional drivers of costs and mortality that we adjusted for played little role in driving the observed variation in HCUs' outcomes. We identified LHINs that had high mortality rates despite elevated healthcare expenditures and those that achieved lower mortality at lower costs. Some LHINs achieved low mortality at excessively high costs. CONCLUSIONS: Risk-adjusted allocation of healthcare resources to seniors in Ontario is overall similar across health districts, more so for HCU than non-HCU. Identified important variation in the cost-mortality relationship across LHINs needs to be further explored.

Deprescribing benzodiazepine receptor agonists: Evidence-based clinical practice guideline.

OBJECTIVE: To develop an evidence-based guideline to help clinicians make decisions about when and how to safely taper and stop benzodiazepine receptor agonists (BZRAs); to focus on the highest level of evidence available and seek input from primary care professionals in the guideline development, review, and endorsement processes. METHODS: The overall team comprised 8 clinicians (1 family physician, 2 psychiatrists, 1 clinical psychologist, 1 clinical pharmacologist, 2 clinical pharmacists, and 1 geriatrician) and a methodologist; members disclosed conflicts of interest. For guideline development, a systematic process was used, including the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation) approach. Evidence was generated by conducting a systematic review of BZRA deprescribing trials for insomnia, as well as performing a review of reviews of the harms of continued BZRA use and narrative syntheses of patient preferences and resource implications. This evidence and GRADE quality of evidence ratings were used to generate recommendations. The team refined guideline content and recommendations through consensus and synthesized clinical considerations to address front-line clinician questions. The draft guideline was reviewed by clinicians and stakeholders. RECOMMENDATIONS: We recommend that deprescribing (tapering slowly) of BZRAs be offered to elderly adults (≥ 65 years) who take BZRAs, regardless of duration of use, and suggest that deprescribing (tapering slowly) be offered to adults aged 18 to 64 who have used BZRAs for more than 4 weeks. These recommendations apply to patients who use BZRAs to treat insomnia on its own (primary insomnia) or comorbid insomnia where potential underlying comorbidities are effectively managed. This guideline does not apply to those with other sleep disorders or untreated anxiety, depression, or other physical or mental health conditions that might be causing or aggravating insomnia. CONCLUSION: Benzodiazepine receptor agonists are associated with harms, and therapeutic effects might be short term. Tapering BZRAs improves cessation rates compared with usual care without serious harms. Patients might be more amenable to deprescribing conversations if they understand the rationale (potential for harm), are involved in developing the tapering plan, and are offered behavioural advice. This guideline provides recommendations for making decisions about when and how to reduce and stop BZRAs. Recommendations are meant to assist with, not dictate, decision making in conjunction with patients.

Unwarranted claims of drug efficacy in pharmaceutical sales visits: are drugs approved on the basis of surrogate outcomes promoted appropriately?

AIMS: This study compares physicians' recall of the claims of benefits on cardiovascular disease and diabetes made by pharmaceutical sales representatives for drugs approved on the basis of a surrogate outcome, i.e., an off-label claim, compared with those approved on the basis of a serious morbidity or mortality (clinical) outcome. METHODS: Physicians in primary care practices in Montreal, Vancouver, Sacramento and Toulouse, who saw sales representatives as part of their usual practice and served a non-referral population, were contacted in blocks of 25 from a randomized list of all physicians practising in the relevant metropolitan area. We compared how frequently physicians reported that sales reps made claims of serious morbidity or mortality (clinically meaningful) benefits for drugs approved on the basis of surrogate outcomes vs. drugs approved on the basis of clinical outcomes. RESULTS: There were 448 promotions for 58 unique brand name cardiovascular and diabetes drugs. Claims of clinically meaningful benefit were reported in 156 (45%) of the 347 promotions for surrogate outcome drugs, constituting unwarranted efficacy claims, i.e., off-label promotion. Claims of clinical benefit were reported in 72 of the 101 promotions (71%) for drugs approved on the basis of clinical outcomes, adjusted OR = 0.3 (95% CI 0.2, 0.6), P < 0.001. CONCLUSIONS: Claims of efficacy made in sales visit promotions for drugs approved only on the basis of surrogate outcomes extended beyond the regulator-approved efficacy information for the product in almost half of promotions. Unapproved claims of drug efficacy constitute a form of off-label promotion and merit greater attention from regulators.

Comparison of treatment effect estimates of non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants versus warfarin between observational studies using propensity score methods and randomized controlled trials.

Emerging observational studies using propensity score (PS) methods assessed real-world comparative effectiveness of non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants (NOACs) versus warfarin in patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation (AF). We aimed to compare treatment effect estimates of NOACs between PS studies and randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Electronic databases and conference proceedings were searched systematically. Primary outcomes included stroke or systemic embolism (SE) and major bleeding. A random-effects meta-analysis was performed to synthesize the data by pooling the PS- and RCT-derived hazard ratios (HRs) separately. The ratio of HRs (RHR) from the ratio of PS-derived HRs relative to RCT-derived HRs was used to determine whether there was a difference between estimates from PS studies and RCTs. There were 10 PS studies and 5 RCTs included for analysis. No significant difference of treatment effect estimates between the PS studies and RCTs was observed: RHR 1.11, 95 % CI 0.98-1.23 for stroke or SE; RHR 1.07, 95 % CI 0.87-1.34 for major bleeding. A significant association between NOACs and risk of stroke or SE was observed: HR 0.88, 95 % CI 0.83-0.94 for the PS studies; HR 0.79, 95 % CI 0.72-0.87 for the RCTs. However, no relationship between NOACs and risk of major bleeding was found: HR 0.91, 95 % CI 0.79-1.05 for the PS studies; HR 0.85, 95 % CI 0.73-1.00 for the RCTs. In this study, treatment effect estimates of NOACs versus warfarin in patients with non-valvular AF from PS studies are found to be in agreement with those from RCTs.