Cost-effectiveness of antithrombotic agents for atrial fibrillation in older adults at risk for falls: a mathematical modelling study.

BACKGROUND: Antithrombotic drugs decrease stroke risk in patients with atrial fibrillation, but they increase bleeding risk, particularly in older adults at high risk for falls. We aimed to determine the most cost-effective antithrombotic therapy in older adults with atrial fibrillation who are at high risk for falls. METHODS: We conducted a mathematical modelling study from July 2019 to March 2020 based on the Ontario, Canada, health care system. We derived the base-case age, sex and fall risk distribution from a published cohort of older adults at risk for falls, and the bleeding and stroke risk parameters from an atrial fibrillation trial population. Using a probabilistic microsimulation Markov decision model, we calculated quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), total cost and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) for each of acetylsalicylic acid (ASA), warfarin, apixaban, dabigatran, rivaroxaban and edoxaban. Cost data were adjusted for inflation to 2018 values. The analysis used the Ontario public payer perspective with a lifetime horizon. RESULTS: In our model, the most cost-effective antithrombotic therapy for atrial fibrillation in older patients at risk for falls was apixaban, with an ICER of $8517 per QALY gained (5.86 QALYs at $92 056) over ASA. It was a dominant strategy over warfarin and the other antithrombotic agents. There was moderate uncertainty in cost-effectiveness ranking, with apixaban as the preferred choice in 66% of model iterations (given willingness to pay of $50 000 per QALY gained); edoxaban, 30 mg, was preferred in 31% of iterations. Sensitivity analysis across ranges of age, bleeding risk and fall risk still favoured apixaban over the other medications. INTERPRETATION: From a public payer perspective, apixaban is the most cost-effective antithrombotic agent in older adults at high risk for falls. Health care funders should implement strategies to encourage use of the most cost-effective medication in this population.

New warfarin anticoagulation management model after heart valve surgery: rationale and design of a prospective, multicentre, randomised trial to compare an internet-based warfarin anticoagulation management model with the traditional warfarin management model.

INTRODUCTION: Warfarin is an effective anticoagulant and the only oral anticoagulant available for patients with mechanical heart valves. The prothrombin time and the associated international normalised ratio (INR) are routinely tested to monitor the response to anticoagulation therapy in patients. Patients who undergo mechanical heart valve replacement need lifelong anticoagulation therapy, and their INR is regularly measured to adjust the anticoagulation strength and the dose of anticoagulation drugs. Appropriate warfarin anticoagulation management can reduce patient complications, such as bleeding and thrombosis, and improve the long-term survival rate. We propose modern internet technology as a platform to build a warfarin anticoagulation follow-up system after valve replacement surgery. This system will provide doctors and patients with more standardised and safer follow-up methods as well as a method to further reduce the risk of warfarin anticoagulation-related complications and improve its therapeutic effects. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: A prospective, multicentre, randomised, controlled trial will be conducted. A total of 700 patients who require long-term warfarin anticoagulation monitoring after heart valve replacement will be enrolled and randomly divided at a 1:1 ratio into a traditional outpatient anticoagulation management group and a group undergoing a new method of management based on the internet technology with follow-up for 1 year. Differences in the percentage of time in the therapeutic range (TTR), drug dose adjustments, bleeding/thrombosis and other related complications will be observed. The primary endpoint is the difference in the TTR between the two groups. The purpose of this study is to explore a safer and more effective mode of doctor-patient interaction and communication in the internet era. As of 13 July 2019, 534 patients had been enrolled. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This study protocol was approved by the Ethics Committee of Beijing Anzhen Hospital, Capital Medical University. The results will be published in a peer-reviewed medical journal. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ChiCTR1800016204.

Oral anticoagulation cost in primary antiphospholipid syndrome: comparison between warfarin and hypothetical rivaroxaban.

: The objective of the study is to perform a cost comparison of 1 year of oral anticoagulation management with warfarin vs. hypothetical rivaroxaban (RRX) in thrombotic primary antiphospholipid syndrome. Longitudinal study on 20 primary antiphospholipid syndrome patients followed-up for 1 year after anticoagulation stabilisation with warfarin: a dedicated software calculated number of clinic visits, time in therapeutic range and warfarin consumption for each patient; for RRX, we considered a visit every 3 months (baseline done in hospital before attending anticoagulant clinic); knowing the cost of both anticoagulants, the laboratory cost and the human cost we calculated and compared the yearly expenditure. Average time in therapeutic international normalized ratio range was 69 ±â€Š11%: warfarin management required a total of 375 of visits compared with the 60 for RRX; the yearly cost of RRX was superior to that of warfarin (12 012 vs. 446.4 euros, P < 0.0001), and in spite of lower laboratory (738 vs. 1853 euros, P < 0.0001) and human costs (774.6 vs. 4841 euros), RRX thromboprophylaxis still yielded a hefty bill (13 525 vs. 7140 euros, P < 0.0001). Switching from warfarin to RRX will be 48% more expensive to our Healthcare Authority; unless ongoing clinical trials demonstrate improved long-term outcomes for RRX over warfarin, we feel that a 69% time in therapeutic range does not warrant a change to RRX at a 48% increased cost.

Global deregulation of ginseng products may be a safety hazard to warfarin takers: solid evidence of ginseng-warfarin interaction.

Recent global deregulation of ginseng as the table food raises our concern about the possible ginseng-warfarin interaction that could be life-threatening to patients who take warfarin for preventing fatal strokes and thromboembolism while using ginseng products for bioenergy recovery. Here we show that quality-control ginsenosides, extracted from ginseng and containing its major active ingredients, produce dose- and time-dependent antagonism in rats against warfarin's anti-coagulation assessed by INR and rat thrombosis model. The interactions between ginsenosides and warfarin on thrombosis, pharmacokinetics, activities of coagulation factors and liver cytochrome P450 isomers are determined by using thrombosis analyzer, UPLC/MS/MS, ELISA and real-time PCR, respectively. The antagonism correlates well with the related pharmacokinetic interaction showing that the blood plateaus of warfarin reached by one-week warfarin administration are significantly reduced after three-week co-administration of warfarin with ginsenosides while 7-hydroxywarfarin is increased. The one-week warfarin and three-week warfarin-ginsenosides regimen result in restoring the suppressed levels by warfarin of the coagulating factors II, VII and protein Z, and significantly enhance activities of P450 3A4 and 2C9 that metabolize warfarin. The present study, for the first time, provides the solid evidence to demonstrate the warfarin-ginsenoside interaction, and warns the warfarin users and regulation authorities of the dangerous interaction.

Working toward precision medicine: Predicting phenotypes from exomes in the Critical Assessment of Genome Interpretation (CAGI) challenges.

Precision medicine aims to predict a patient's disease risk and best therapeutic options by using that individual's genetic sequencing data. The Critical Assessment of Genome Interpretation (CAGI) is a community experiment consisting of genotype-phenotype prediction challenges; participants build models, undergo assessment, and share key findings. For CAGI 4, three challenges involved using exome-sequencing data: Crohn's disease, bipolar disorder, and warfarin dosing. Previous CAGI challenges included prior versions of the Crohn's disease challenge. Here, we discuss the range of techniques used for phenotype prediction as well as the methods used for assessing predictive models. Additionally, we outline some of the difficulties associated with making predictions and evaluating them. The lessons learned from the exome challenges can be applied to both research and clinical efforts to improve phenotype prediction from genotype. In addition, these challenges serve as a vehicle for sharing clinical and research exome data in a secure manner with scientists who have a broad range of expertise, contributing to a collaborative effort to advance our understanding of genotype-phenotype relationships.

Ischemic Stroke in Nonvalvular Atrial Fibrillation at Warfarin Initiation: Assessment via a Large Insurance Database.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Stroke risk may increase shortly after warfarin initiation in nonvalvular atrial fibrillation patients. Because of the brief period and limited number of events, large samples are needed to study this effect. We compared 30-day rates of ischemic stroke between nonvalvular atrial fibrillation patients initiating warfarin to nonwarfarin comparators using an insurance claims database. METHODS: We identified nonvalvular atrial fibrillation patients via 1 inpatient/2 outpatient diagnosis claims from the MarketScan database, January 1, 2009, to December 31, 2010. We studied patients initiating warfarin using prescription claims and 1:1 matched 22 669 initiators to comparators based on age, sex, diagnosis date, and warfarin propensity score. Follow-up began on initiation date; patients were censored at discontinuation/switch of therapy, disenrollment, or end of the study. The median follow-up was 415 days. Cox regression was used to study differences in ischemic stroke risks between warfarin initiators and comparators while controlling for important prognostic factors. RESULTS: Warfarin initiators were generally similar to comparators in clinical features but had higher CHADS2 scores (1.26 versus 1.19). The first 30-day ischemic stroke rate was higher among warfarin initiators than comparators (1.47%/y (27/1836) versus 0.98%/y (18/1837); P=0.18) but lower subsequently (0.81%/y [134/16 543] versus 1.09%/y [406/37 248]; P=0.002). Multivariable regression confirmed a significant interaction between follow-up and warfarin use with the adjusted hazard ratios (95% confidence intervals) for warfarin/comparator as 1.46 (0.80-2.65) in the first 30 days and 0.70 (0.57-0.85) afterward. CONCLUSIONS: Warfarin effect was qualitatively different in the first 30 days after initiation than subsequently. This is consistent with a modest increase in stroke risk occurring briefly after starting warfarin.

Edoxaban in Atrial Fibrillation and Venous Thromboembolism-Ten Key Questions and Answers: A Practical Guide.

Edoxaban is the fourth non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulant now available for clinical use in the prevention of stroke/systemic embolism in atrial fibrillation (AF) and in the treatment of venous thromboembolism (VTE), after the completion of large-scale randomized comparative clinical trials with the vitamin K antagonist warfarin. Edoxaban has some peculiar pharmacological properties and outcome data. Here a group of experts in AF and VTE answers a set of questions on its practical use, trying to define the profile of patients that would be most appropriate for its use.

Hospital length-of-stay and costs among pulmonary embolism patients treated with rivaroxaban versus parenteral bridging to warfarin.

We sought to compare length-of-stay (LOS), total hospital costs, and readmissions among pulmonary embolism (PE) patients treated with rivaroxaban versus parenterally bridged warfarin. We identified adult PE (primary diagnostic code = 415.1x) patients in the Premier Database (11/2012-9/2015), and included those with ≥1 PE diagnostic test on days 0-2. Rivaroxaban users (allowing ≤2 days of prior parenteral therapy) were 1:1 propensity score matched to patients parenterally bridged to warfarin. LOS, total costs, and readmission for venous thromboembolism (VTE) or major bleeding within the same or subsequent 2 months were compared between cohorts. Separate analyses were performed in low-risk PE patients. Rivaroxaban use was associated with a 1.4-day [95 % confidence interval (CI) -1.47 to -1.28] shorter LOS, and $2322 (95 % CI -$2499 to -$2146) reduction in costs compared to parenterally bridged warfarin (p < 0.001 for both). There was no difference in readmission for VTE (1.5 versus 1.7 %) or major bleeding (0.3 versus 0.2 %) between the rivaroxaban and parenterally bridged warfarin cohorts (p ≥ 0.27 for both). Results were similar in low-risk patients (0.2-1.0 day and $251-$1751 reductions in LOS and costs, respectively, p ≤ 0.01 for all). In patients with PE, rivaroxaban was associated with reduced LOS and costs, without increased risk of readmission versus parenterally bridged warfarin. Similar results were observed in low-risk PE patients.

Quantitative assessment of the regenerative and mineralogenic performances of the zebrafish caudal fin.

The ability of zebrafish to fully regenerate its caudal fin has been explored to better understand the mechanisms underlying de novo bone formation and to develop screening methods towards the discovery of compounds with therapeutic potential. Quantifying caudal fin regeneration largely depends on successfully measuring new tissue formation through methods that require optimization and standardization. Here, we present an improved methodology to characterize and analyse overall caudal fin and bone regeneration in adult zebrafish. First, regenerated and mineralized areas are evaluated through broad, rapid and specific chronological and morphometric analysis in alizarin red stained fins. Then, following a more refined strategy, the intensity of the staining within a 2D longitudinal plane is determined through pixel intensity analysis, as an indicator of density or thickness/volume. The applicability of this methodology on live specimens, to reduce animal experimentation and provide a tool for in vivo tracking of the regenerative process, was successfully demonstrated. Finally, the methodology was validated on retinoic acid- and warfarin-treated specimens, and further confirmed by micro-computed tomography. Because it is easily implementable, accurate and does not require sophisticated equipment, the present methodology will certainly provide valuable technical standardization for research in tissue engineering, regenerative medicine and skeletal biology.

Influence of Successful Chronic Hepatitis C Virus Treatment with Ledipasvir/Sofosbuvir on Warfarin Dosing Requirements in Four Veterans.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: To describe international normalized ratio (INR) trends and warfarin dosage adjustments required for four veterans who were receiving warfarin therapy and started treatment for hepatitis C virus (HCV) with ledipasvir/sofosbuvir with or without ribavirin. DESIGN: Case series. SETTING: Pharmacist-led anticoagulation clinic in a Veterans Affairs Health Care System. PATIENTS: Four patients aged 59-66 years who were receiving warfarin and had stable, therapeutic INRs and started ledipasvir/sofosbuvir therapy with or without ribavirin for HCV infection. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: All four patients developed subtherapeutic INRs after the addition of ledipasvir/sofosbuvir with or without ribavirin. An increase in weekly warfarin dose ranging from 14-67% was required, with changes in warfarin doses starting 2-3 weeks after ledipasvir/sofosbuvir initiation. Two patients required dose reductions after HCV treatment completion, whereas the other two did not. Use of the Drug Interaction Probability Scale indicated that the interaction between warfarin and ledipasvir/sofosbuvir was doubtful (score of 1 [two patients]) or possible (score of 4 [two patients]). The mechanism of this interaction is unknown but may be related to improvements in hepatic function during HCV treatment. CONCLUSION: To our knowledge, this is the first case series describing a possible drug interaction between warfarin and ledipasvir/sofosbuvir (with or without ribavirin). Close monitoring is warranted when ledipasvir/sofosbuvir is initiated in patients receiving anticoagulation therapy with warfarin, especially those with evidence of cirrhosis prior to treatment. This is particularly important in the first month after starting treatment and the first month after completion. Failure to monitor and achieve therapeutic INR after HCV therapy completion may have the potential to result in adverse outcomes.

Pharmacogenetic versus clinical dosing of warfarin in individuals of Chinese and African-American ancestry: assessment using data simulation.

BACKGROUND: Clinical trials of genotype-guided dosing of warfarin have yielded mixed results, which may in part reflect ethnic differences among study participants. However, no previous study has compared genotype-guided versus clinically guided or standard-of-care dosing in a Chinese population, whereas those involving African-Americans were underpowered to detect significant differences. We present a preclinical strategy that integrates pharmacogenetics (PG) and pharmacometrics to predict the outcome or guide the design of dosing strategies for drugs that show large interindividual variability. We use the example of warfarin and focus on two underrepresented groups in warfarin research. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We identified the parameters required to simulate a patient population and the outcome of dosing strategies. PG and pharmacogenetic plus loading (PG+L) algorithms that take into account a patient's VKORC1 and CYP2C9 genotype status were considered and compared against a clinical (CA) algorithm for a simulated Chinese population using a predictive Monte Carlo and pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic framework. We also examined a simulated population of African-American ancestry to assess the robustness of the model in relation to real-world clinical trial data. RESULTS AND CONCLUSION: The simulations replicated similar trends observed with clinical data in African-Americans. They further predict that the PG+L regimen is superior to both the CA and the PG regimen in maximizing percentage time in therapeutic range in a Chinese cohort, whereas the CA regimen poses the highest risk of overanticoagulation during warfarin initiation. The findings supplement the literature with an unbiased comparison of warfarin dosing algorithms and highlights interethnic differences in anticoagulation control.

Comparison of two approaches of INR-follow-up and determinants of INR-stability.

INTRODUCTION: Patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) and treated with coumarins need a close follow-up of the international normalized ratio (INR)-values. This can be done by the general practitioner (GP) or by a haematologist in an outpatient hospital clinic. OBJECTIVE: To compare both ways of follow-up and to investigate determinants of stable INR-patterns. METHODS: Cross-sectional single-centre study in patients with AF treated at the UZ Brussel, a university hospital in Brussels. Of the 113 patients included in the study, 71 had their INR followed-up by their GP and 42 similar patients were followed-up by a haematologist. Data of these 113 patients were further analysed to identify possible determinants for stable INR-values. RESULTS: The time in therapeutic range (TTR) did not significantly differ between both groups. However, patients in the GP-group had significantly more INR-values under 2.0 compared to patients from the haematologist-group (P = 0.044), whereas patients in the haematologist-group had significantly more INR-values above 3.0 compared to patients from the GP-group (P = 0.038). Reimbursement costs of both ways of follow-up were comparable, but the out-of-pocket costs for the patient were lower in the GP-group. The time since AF diagnosis was the only significant determinant predicting a higher TTR. CONCLUSION: Both approaches of follow-up seem to lead to the same TTR, yielding no reason to advocate one approach above the other. However, the patient costs were lower when followed-up by the GP.

Laboratory assessment of warfarin reversal with global coagulation tests versus international normalized ratio in patients with intracranial bleeding.

We assess the in-vivo relationship between international normalized ratio (INR) and global coagulation tests in patients with life-threatening bleeding who received prothrombin complex concentrate (PCC) for warfarin reversal. This was a prospective pilot study in adult patients with intracranial bleeding related to anticoagulation with warfarin. Thromboelastography (TEG), thrombin generation parameters and INR were assessed at baseline, 30  min, 2 and 24  h after PCC. Changes in laboratory parameters and relationship between INR and global coagulation tests were assessed over time. Eight patients mean [standard deviation (SD)] age 72 (16) were included and received mean (SD) dose of PCC 24 (5) units/kg. Four patients died during the study, all with INR values more than 1.5 thirty minutes after PCC. Mean (SD) INR was 3.0 (1.3) and decreased significantly to 1.8 (0.48) thirty minutes after PCC (P < 0.01). Baseline endogenous thrombin potential and thrombin peak were 890  nmol/min and 123  nmol and increased significantly to 1943  nmol/min (P < 0.01) and 301  nmol (P < 0.01) 30  min after PCC administration. Reaction (R)-time decreased significantly (P = 0.02), and maximum amplitude and overall coagulation index (CI) significantly increased during treatment (P < 0.01, respectively). Thrombin generation and TEG values corrected after PCC administration; however, INR did not fully correct. Patients that died tended to be older with prolonged INR values across the study period. INR and TEG values correlated well with thrombin generation before administration of PCC, but this relationship was lost afterward.

Warfarin versus dabigatran etexilate: an assessment of efficacy and safety in patients with atrial fibrillation.

INTRODUCTION: Oral anticoagulation is the mainstay for stroke and thromboembolic event prevention in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF). Given limitations of warfarin therapy, non-vitamin K oral anticoagulants have been developed including direct thrombin inhibitors (i.e., dabigatran etexilate). Dabigatran etexilate has been tested thoroughly in terms of efficacy and safety in clinical trials and studies, involving 'real-world' cohorts. In this review, currently available evidence in patients with non-valvular AF is discussed. AREAS COVERED: The pharmacology, efficacy and safety, and current aspects of use of dabigatran etexilate in patients with non-valvular AF are reviewed in a comparative manner to warfarin both for chronic anticoagulation and in different clinical settings. EXPERT OPINION: Dabigatran etexilate appeared to have several pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic advantages over warfarin, as well as a favorable efficacy and safety profile being at least noninferior and often superior to warfarin in patients with non-valvular AF. The latter was shown in the clinical trials, meta-analyses and studies with 'real-world' data. Currently ongoing trials will expand the body of evidence on warfarin and will aid decision making in currently controversial areas. Important limitations of dabigatran etexilate include contraindications for its use in patients with prosthetic heart valves and end-stage chronic kidney disease.

Pharmacoepidemiological assessment of drug interactions with vitamin K antagonists.

PURPOSE: We present a database of prescription drugs and international normalized ratio (INR) data and the applied methodology for its use to assess drug-drug interactions with vitamin K antagonists (VKAs). We use the putative interaction between VKAs and tramadol as a case study. METHODS: We used a self-controlled case series to estimate the incidence rate ratio (IRR) comparing the rate of INR measurements of ≥4.0 in concomitant tramadol and VKA-exposed periods to VKA-only-exposed periods. Secondary analyses considered specific subgroups, alternative exposure criteria, alternative outcome definitions, and other drugs. RESULTS: We identified 513 VKA users with at least 1 INR measurement ≥4.0 and concomitant tramadol and VKA exposure during the observation period. The overall IRR was 1.80 (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.53-2.10), with a stronger association among users of phenprocoumon compared to warfarin (IRR, 3.37; 95%CI, 2.50-4.53 and IRR, 1.46; 95%CI, 1.20-1.76, respectively). We observed larger IRRs with stricter outcome definitions. Concomitant tramadol and VKA exposure was also associated with an increased rate of low INR measurements (i.e., <1.5; IRR, 1.70; 95%CI, 1.37-2.13). Morphine and, to some extent, oxycodone, penicillin, beta-blockers, and inhaled beta-agonists were associated with high INR. CONCLUSIONS: The approach successfully identified an interaction between tramadol and VKA. However, associations observed for other drugs with no known VKA interaction suggest that the current approach may have too low specificity to be useful as a screening tool, at least for drugs for which time-varying confounding may be present.

[Cost-effectiveness of apixaban compared to other new oral anticoagulants in patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation].

BACKGROUND: Atrial fibrillation is associated with development of thromboembolic events. New oral anticoagulants (apixaban, rivaroxaban and dabigatran) are recommended for antithrombotic therapy in patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF) with moderate and high risk of stroke. OBJECTIVES: The objective of this study was to evaluate the cost-effectiveness ratio of apixaban compared to dabigatran and rivaroxaban in patients with NVAF from the Russian Federation national health care system perspective. METHODS: This analysis used a Markov model that allowed estimation of the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) for apixaban compared to rivaroxaban and dabigatran 110 mg and 150 mg over lifetime horizon for patients with NVAF. The model enclosed cardiovascular event rates based on the results of the indirect treatment comparison that combined data from the randomized clinical trials comparing clinical effectiveness and safety of apixaban, rivaroxaban and dabigatran with warfarin (ARISTOTLE, ROCKET-AF, RE-LY). The following cardiovascular events were considered: ischemic and hemorrhagic stroke, systemic embolism, intracranial hemorrhage, other major bleeds, clinically relevant non-major bleeds and myocardial infarction. Direct medical costs were determined based on the rates of the compulsory national medical insurance system. The price of the new oral anticoagulants was taken as a weighted average tender price for the year 2013. In the model both costs and benefits (quality-adjusted life years and life-years) were discounted at 3.5%. Cost-effectiveness threshold was set at 1.4 million rubles per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained and corresponded to the three times GDP per capita in 2013 in the Russian Federation. RESULTS: In the base case analysis it was demonstrated that apixaban compared to dabigatran 110 mg and 150 mg and rivaroxaban provided additional 0.101, 0.060 and 0.072 life years as well as additional 0.063; 0.038 and 0.041 QALYs respectively. Over lifetime horizon apixaban compared to dabigatran 110 mg and 150 mg and rivaroxaban required additional treatment costs equal to 22.78; 31.18 and 6.70 thousands rubles, respectively. With that estimated incremental cost-effectiveness ratio for apixaban compared to dabigatran 110 mg and 150 mg and rivaroxaban was 362.60, 805.54 and 162.45 thousands rubles per QALY correspondingly. CONCLUSION: Apixaban provided increased life expectancy compared to other new anticoagulants and may be considered as a cost-effective alternative to dabigatran 110 mg and 150 mg and rivaroxaban from the Russian Federation national health care system perspective.

Avaliação da estabilidade de anticoagulação entre a Varfarina e a Femprocumona / Oral anticoagulation stability assessment with Warfarin and Phenprocoumon

Fundamentos: A varfarina e a femprocumona são os anticoagulantes orais mais utilizados; no entanto, até então, não existem estudos randomizados comparando a estabilidade da anticoagulação entre estes dois fármacos. Objetivos: Comparar a varfarina e femprocumona quanto à estabilidade na manutenção de anticoagulação em nível terapêutico (razão normatizada internacional [RNI] entre 2,0 e 3,0) e avaliar a incidência de complicações hemorrágicas e tromboembólicas decorrentes de anticoagulação inadequada.Métodos: Ensaio clínico, randomizado, duplo-cego, incluindo pacientes em tratamento vigente com anticoagulante oral, porém com RNI abaixo do alvo terapêutico nas últimas três semanas, randomizados para uso de varfarina ou femprocumona. O ajuste da dose da medicação foi realizado conforme algoritmo pré-estabelecido. Resultados: Foram randomizados 62 pacientes, sendo 31 em cada grupo, durante as cinco primeiras semanas de estudo. Verificou-se que a femprocumona se mostrou mais instável comparada à varfarina. A partir da sexta aferição de RNI, o grupo femprocumona apresentou melhora na estabilidade do valor do RNI, porém não houve significância estatística. Também não houve diferença significativa em relação aos efeitos colaterais dos fármacos. Conclusão: A varfarina demonstrou maior eficácia na estabilidade do RNI em relação à femprocumona.

Background: Although warfarin and phenprocoumon are the most widely used oral anticoagulants, there a r e n o r a n d o m i z e d s t u d i e s c o m p a r i n g t h e anticoagulation stability of these two drugs.Objectives: To compare warfarin and phenprocoumon in terms of therapeutic anticoagulation maintenance stability (international normalized ratio [INR] between 2.0 and 3.0) and evaluate the incidence of thromboembolic and hemorrhagic complications arising from inadequate anticoagulation.Methods: Randomized double-blind clinical trial with patients undergoing current oral anticoagulant treatment but with INR below the therapeutic target during the past 3 weeks, randomized for warfarin or phenprocoumon. Medication dosages were adjusted in compliance with a predetermined algorithm.Results: With 62 patients randomized into two groups of 31 each during the first five weeks of the study, phenprocoumon was found to be more unstable than warfarin. From the sixth INR measurement onwards, the stability of the INR value improved in the phenprocoumon group, but with no statistical significance. There were no significant differences in the side effects of the drugs.Conclusion: Warfarin demonstrated greater effectiveness for INR stability than phenprocoumon.

A comparative analysis of models used to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of dabigatran versus warfarin for the prevention of stroke in atrial fibrillation.

BACKGROUND: A number of models exploring the cost-effectiveness of dabigatran versus warfarin for stroke prevention in atrial fibrillation have been published. These studies found dabigatran was generally cost-effective, considering well-accepted willingness-to-pay thresholds, but estimates of the incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) varied, even in the same setting. The objective of this study was to compare the findings of the published economic models and identify key model features accounting for differences. METHODS: All aspects of the economic evaluations were reviewed: model approach, inputs, and assumptions. A previously published model served as the reference model for comparisons of the selected studies in the US and UK settings. The reference model was adapted, wherever possible, using the inputs and key assumptions from each of the other published studies to determine if results could be reproduced in the reference model. Incremental total costs, incremental quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), and ICERs (cost per QALY) were compared between each study and the corresponding adapted reference model. The impact of each modified variable or assumption was tracked separately. RESULTS: The selected studies were in the US setting (2), the Canadian setting (1), and the UK setting (2). All models used the Randomized Evaluation of Long-Term Anticoagulation study (RE-LY) as the main source for clinical inputs, and all used a Markov modelling approach, except one that used discrete event simulation. The reference model had been published in the Canadian and UK settings. In the UK setting, the reference model reported an ICER of UK£4,831, whereas the other UK-based analysis reported an ICER of UK£23,082. When the reference model was modified to use the same population characteristics, cost inputs, and utility inputs, it reproduced the results of the other model (ICER UK£25,518) reasonably well. Key reasons for the different results between the two models were the assumptions on the event utility decrement and costs associated with intracranial haemorrhage, as well as the costs of warfarin monitoring and disability following events. In the US setting, the reference model produced an ICER similar to the ICER from one of the US models (US$15,115/QALY versus US$12,386/QALY, respectively) when modelling assumptions and input values were transferred into the reference model. Key differences in results could be explained by the population characteristics (age and baseline stroke risk), utility assigned to events and specific treatments, adjustment of stroke and intracranial haemorrhage risk over time, and treatment discontinuation and switching. The reference model was able to replicate the QALY results, but not the cost results, reported by the other US cost-effectiveness analysis. The parameters driving the QALY results were utility values by disability levels as well as utilities assigned to specific treatments, and event and background mortality rates. CONCLUSIONS: Despite differences in model designs and structures, it was mostly possible to replicate the results published by different authors and identify variables responsible for differences between ICERs using a reference model approach. This enables a better interpretation of published findings by focusing attention on the assumptions underlying the key model features accounting for differences.

Beyond the bloody mess: hematologic assessment.

Hematologic assessment is part of the routine assessment of acute and critically ill patients. Nurses must be aware of the reference ranges for complete blood cell counts and common coagulation profiles. A case study is presented of an elderly patient, taking warfarin for atrial fibrillation, who falls and sustains a head laceration. The subsequent assessment, hospital course, and treatments required are outlined.

Dabigatran versus rivaroxaban for the prevention of stroke and systemic embolism in atrial fibrillation in Canada. Comparative efficacy and cost-effectiveness.

Canadian patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) in whom anticoagulation is appropriate have two new choices for anticoagulation for prevention of stroke and systemic embolism--dabigatran etexilate (dabigatran) and rivaroxaban. Based on the RE-LY and ROCKET AF trial results, we investigated the cost-effectiveness of dabigatran (twice daily dosing of 150 mg or 110 mg based on patient age) versus rivaroxaban from a Canadian payer perspective. A formal indirect treatment comparison (ITC) of dabigatran versus rivaroxaban was performed, using dabigatran clinical event rates from RE-LY for the safety-on-treatment population, adjusted to the ROCKET AF population. A previously described Markov model was modified to simulate anticoagulation treatment using ITC results as inputs. Model outputs included total costs, event rates, and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs). The ITC found when compared to rivaroxaban, dabigatran had a lower risk of intracranial haemorrhage (ICH) (relative risk [RR] = 0.38; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.21 - 0.67) and stroke (RR = 0.62; 95%CI 0.45-0.87). Over a lifetime horizon, the model found dabigatran-treated patients experienced fewer ICHs (0.33 dabigatran vs. 0.71 rivaroxaban) and ischaemic strokes (3.40 vs. 3.96) per 100 patient-years, and accrued more QALYs (6.17 vs. 6.01). Dabigatran-treated patients had lower acute care and long-term follow-up costs per patient ($52,314 vs. $53,638) which more than offset differences in drug costs ($7,299 vs. $6,128). In probabilistic analysis, dabigatran had high probability of being the most cost-effective therapy at common thresholds of willingness-to-pay (93% at a $20,000/QALY threshold). This study found dabigatran is economically dominant versus rivaroxaban for prevention of stroke and systemic embolism among Canadian AF patients.