Novel Oral Anticoagulant Based Versus Vitamin K Antagonist Based Double Therapy Among Stented Patients With Atrial Fibrillation: Insights From the PIONEER AF-PCI Trial.

BACKGROUND: Among stented patients with atrial fibrillation, double therapy with a novel oral anticoagulant plus single antiplatelet therapy (SAPT) reduces bleeding or cardiovascular rehospitalizations compared with a vitamin K antagonist (VKA) based triple therapy regimen. A recent study demonstrated that apixaban based double therapy reduced bleeding compared with VKA based double therapy. However, it remains unknown whether rivaroxaban based double therapy is superior to a VKA based double therapy. METHODS: Patient with stented atrial fibrillation (n=2124) were randomized to 3 groups: rivaroxaban 15 mg od plus a P2Y12 inhibitor (Group 1, n=709); rivaroxaban 2.5 mg bid plus dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT; Group 2, n=709); and warfarin plus DAPT (Group 3, n=706). Before randomization, subjects were stratified according to a prespecified duration of DAPT (1, 6, or 12 months). After the prespecified DAPT duration, subjects in Group 2 were switched to rivaroxaban 15 mg plus low dose aspirin, and those in Group 3 were switched to VKA plus low dose aspirin. The Wei, Lin, and Weissfeld time to multiple events method was used to compare the occurrence of all bleeding and cardiovascular rehospitalizations among subjects on a novel oral anticoagulant versus VKA based double therapy. RESULTS: A total of 906 subjects were prespecified to a 1 or 6 months DAPT duration and received at least one dose of study drug. Twenty subjects (3.3%) assigned to novel oral anticoagulant+SAPT, and 15 (5.1%) subjects assigned to VKA+SAPT experienced multiple rehospitalizations. In total, 124 (20.3%) events occurred among subjects on novel oral anticoagulant+SAPT compared with 87 (29.6%) among subjects on VKA+SAPT (hazard ratio=0.65 [95% CI, 0.45-0.93], P=0.008). CONCLUSIONS: Among stented patients with atrial fibrillation, rivaroxaban plus SAPT was superior to warfarin plus SAPT in lowering total bleeding and cardiovascular rehospitalization. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT01830543.

Selective Serotonin Reuptake Inhibitors and Bleeding Risk in Anticoagulated Patients With Atrial Fibrillation: An Analysis From the ROCKET AF Trial.

Background There is concern that selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors ( SSRI s) substantially increase bleeding risk in patients taking anticoagulants. Methods and Results We studied 737 patients taking SSRI s in the ROCKET AF (Rivaroxaban Once Daily Oral Direct Factor Xa Inhibition Compared With Vitamin K Antagonism for Prevention of Embolism and Stroke Trial in Atrial Fibrillation) trial of rivaroxaban compared with warfarin for the prevention of stroke/systemic embolism in patients with atrial fibrillation. These patients were propensity score matched 1:1 to 737 patients not taking SSRI s. The primary outcome measure was major and nonmajor clinically relevant bleeding events, the principal safety outcome in ROCKET AF . Over a mean 1.6 years of follow-up, the rate of major/ nonmajor clinically relevant bleeding was 18.57 events/100 patient-years for SSRI users versus 16.84 events/100 patient-years for matched comparators, adjusted hazard ratio ( aHR ) of 1.16 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.95-1.43). The aHR s were similar in patients taking rivaroxaban ( aHR 1.11 [95% CI, 0.82-1.51]) and those taking warfarin ( aHR 1.21 [95% CI, 0.91-1.60]). For the rarer outcome of major bleeding, the aHR for SSRI users versus those not taking SSRI s was 1.13 (95% CI, 0.62-2.06) for rivaroxaban; for warfarin, the aHR was higher, at 1.58 (95% CI , 0.96-2.60) but not statistically significantly elevated. Conclusions We found no significant increase in bleeding risk when SSRI s were combined with anticoagulant therapy, although there was a suggestion of increased bleeding risk with SSRI s added to warfarin. While physicians should be vigilant regarding bleeding risk, our results provide reassurance that SSRI s can be safely added to anticoagulants in patients with atrial fibrillation . Clinical Trial Registration URL : https://www.clinicaltrials.gov . Unique identifier: NCT 00403767.

Rivaroxaban for Thromboprophylaxis after Hospitalization for Medical Illness.

BACKGROUND: Patients who are hospitalized for medical illness remain at risk for venous thromboembolism after discharge, but the role of extended thromboprophylaxis in the treatment of such patients is a subject of controversy. METHODS: In this randomized, double-blind trial, medically ill patients who were at increased risk for venous thromboembolism on the basis of a modified International Medical Prevention Registry on Venous Thromboembolism (IMPROVE) score of 4 or higher (scores range from 0 to 10, with higher scores indicating a higher risk of venous thromboembolism) or a score of 2 or 3 plus a plasma d-dimer level of more than twice the upper limit of the normal range (defined according to local laboratory criteria) were assigned at hospital discharge to either once-daily rivaroxaban at a dose of 10 mg (with the dose adjusted for renal insufficiency) or placebo for 45 days. The primary efficacy outcome was a composite of symptomatic venous thromboembolism or death due to venous thromboembolism. The principal safety outcome was major bleeding. RESULTS: Of the 12,024 patients who underwent randomization, 12,019 were included in the intention-to-treat analysis. The primary efficacy outcome occurred in 50 of 6007 patients (0.83%) who were given rivaroxaban and in 66 of 6012 patients (1.10%) who were given placebo (hazard ratio, 0.76; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.52 to 1.09; P=0.14). The prespecified secondary outcome of symptomatic nonfatal venous thromboembolism occurred in 0.18% of patients in the rivaroxaban group and 0.42% of patients in the placebo group (hazard ratio, 0.44; 95% CI, 0.22 to 0.89). Major bleeding occurred in 17 of 5982 patients (0.28%) in the rivaroxaban group and in 9 of 5980 patients (0.15%) in the placebo group (hazard ratio, 1.88; 95% CI, 0.84 to 4.23). CONCLUSIONS: Rivaroxaban, given to medical patients for 45 days after hospital discharge, was not associated with a significantly lower risk of symptomatic venous thromboembolism and death due to venous thromboembolism than placebo. The incidence of major bleeding was low. (Funded by Janssen Research and Development; MARINER ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02111564 .).

Total bleeding with rivaroxaban versus warfarin in patients with atrial fibrillation receiving antiplatelet therapy after percutaneous coronary intervention.

Among atrial fibrillation (AF) patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), rivaroxaban with background antiplatelet therapy significantly reduced the first occurrence of bleeding compared to triple therapy with warfarin. This study hypothesized that total bleeding events, including those beyond the first event, would be reduced with rivaroxaban-based regimens. In the PIONEER AF-PCI trial, 2099 patients in the modified intention-to-treat population were randomized to three groups and followed for 12 months: (1) rivaroxaban 15 mg once daily plus a P2Y12 inhibitor (N = 696); (2) rivaroxaban 2.5 mg twice daily plus dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) (N = 706); and (3) dose-adjusted warfarin plus DAPT (N = 697). Descriptive statistics for the number of subjects who experienced one or more bleeding events were calculated. The total number of bleeding events was compared across treatment groups using the Wei, Lin, and Weissfeld method. A total of 514 and 439 events of clinically significant bleeding and bleeding requiring medical attention occurred throughout the study. Compared to triple therapy with warfarin, rivaroxaban-based regimen was associated with a reduction in total events of clinically significant bleeding (Group 1 vs. Group 3: HR 0.64 [95% CI 0.49-0.85], p < 0.001, NNT = 11; Group 2 vs. Group 3: HR 0.62 [95% CI 0.48-0.80], p < 0.001, NNT = 10). Similarly, rivaroxaban reduced the total bleeding events requiring medical attention (Group 1 vs. Group 3: HR 0.66 [95% CI 0.49-0.89], p < 0.001, NNT = 14; Group 2 vs. Group 3: HR 0.64 [95% CI 0.48-0.85], p = 0.002, NNT = 13). Rivaroxaban-based regimen reduced the total bleeding events compared with VKA-based triple therapy in stented AF patients. One clinically significant bleeding event could be prevented with rivaroxaban use for every 10-11 patients treated, and one bleeding requiring medical attention could be prevented with rivaroxaban for every 13-14 patients treated. These data provide evidence that total bleeding events, including those beyond the first event, are reduced with rivaroxaban-based antithrombotic regimens. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov . Unique identifier: NCT01830543 (PIONEER AF-PCI).

Outcome of Patients Receiving Thrombolytic Therapy While on Rivaroxaban for Nonvalvular Atrial Fibrillation (from Rivaroxaban Once Daily Oral Direct Factor Xa Inhibition Compared With Vitamin K Antagonism for Prevention of Stroke and Embolism Trial in Atrial Fibrillation).

The safety of intravenous thrombolysis in patients taking rivaroxaban has not been well established. We retrospectively analyzed the outcomes of all patients who received thrombolytic therapy in the 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). A review of medical and adverse event records for patients receiving thrombolytic therapy while enrolled in ROCKET AF was performed to determine their baseline characteristics, indications for thrombolysis, and type of agent used. Safety end points were 30-day post-thrombolytic rates of stroke, bleeding, and mortality. A total of 28 patients in ROCKET AF received thrombolytic therapy, with 19 patients on rivaroxaban and 9 patients on warfarin. Ischemic stroke was the most common indication for thrombolysis (n = 10), and alteplase was the most commonly used fibrinolytic agent (n = 14). Of the 19 patients in the rivaroxaban group, there were 2 nonfatal bleeding events and 2 deaths, mostly occurring when thrombolytic therapy was administered within 48 hours of the last rivaroxaban dose. Of the 9 patients in the warfarin group, there was 1 nonfatal bleeding event and 3 deaths, most occurring when thrombolytic therapy was administered outside of 48 hours from the last warfarin dose. In conclusion, these observations suggest that careful assessment of the time since the last dose may be of clinical significance in patients on novel oral anticoagulants who require emergent thrombolysis.

Efficacy and safety of rivaroxaban versus warfarin in patients from mainland China with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation: A subgroup analysis from the ROCKET AF trial.

BACKGROUND: The ROCKET AF study evaluated once-daily rivaroxaban versus dose-adjusted warfarin for the prevention of stroke and systemic embolism in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF). In this analysis, we compared rivaroxaban with warfarin in patients with AF from China, East Asia, and the rest of the world (ROW). METHODS AND RESULTS: We assessed baseline demographics and interaction of treatment effects of rivaroxaban versus warfarin among patients from mainland China, other East Asian countries, and ROW. Of the 14,236 patients enrolled in the per-protocol population, 495 were from mainland China, 433 from other East-Asian regions, and 13,308 from the rest of the world (ROW). At baseline, patients from China had significantly higher rates of previous stroke/transient ischemic attack (TIA) compared with patients from other East Asian regions and ROW (79.6%, 44.6%, 51.6% respectively; p<0.0001) and lower rates of VKA use (33.7%, 66.7%, 63.4%, respectively; p<0.0001). The rates of stroke or systemic embolism among those on warfarin while on treatment was 5.23% in patients from China, 1.82% in those from other East Asian regions, and 2.07% from ROW; on rivaroxaban, the rates were 2.29% in patients from China, 1.86% in those from other east Asian regions, and 1.67% from ROW. There were no significant treatment-by-region interactions for any efficacy or safety outcome (all p>0.12). Numerically higher rates of intracranial bleeding were seen in patients from China receiving warfarin versus rivaroxaban. CONCLUSIONS: In patients from China, rates of intracranial hemorrhage were numerically lower among those receiving rivaroxaban and consistent with the overall trial. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov/. Unique identifier: NCT00403767.

Use of concomitant aspirin in patients with atrial fibrillation: Findings from the ROCKET AF trial.

BACKGROUND: We aimed to investigate the relationship between aspirin use and clinical outcomes in patients enrolled in 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), in particular, those with known coronary artery disease (CAD). METHODS: Patients in ROCKET AF, comparing rivaroxaban and warfarin, were analyzed. Aspirin use was assessed at baseline. Stroke and systemic embolism, myocardial infarction, death, and major or nonmajor clinically relevant (NMCR) bleeding were compared between groups. Multivariable modeling was done adjusting for baseline risk factors. RESULTS: A total of 5,205 (36.5%) patients were receiving aspirin at baseline (mean dose 99.2mg); 30.6% of those had known CAD. Patients receiving aspirin were more likely to have prior myocardial infarction (22% vs 14%; P<.001) and heart failure (68% vs 59%; P<.001). Relative efficacy of rivaroxaban versus warfarin was similar with and without aspirin use for both stroke/systemic embolism (P=.95 for interaction), and major or NMCR bleeding (P=.76 for interaction). After adjustment, aspirin use was associated with similar rates of stroke/systemic embolism (hazard ratio [HR] 1.16, 95% CI 0.98-1.37; P=.094) but higher rates of all-cause death (HR 1.27, 95% CI 1.13-1.42; P<.0001) and major or NMCR bleeding (HR 1.32, 95% CI 1.21-1.43; P<.0001). There was a significant interaction between no CAD at baseline and aspirin for all-cause death (P=.009). CONCLUSIONS: Aspirin use at baseline was associated with an increased risk for bleeding and all-cause death in ROCKET AF, a risk most pronounced in patients without known CAD. Although these findings may reflect unmeasured clinical factors, further investigation is warranted to determine optimal aspirin use in patients with AF.

Use of Dual Antiplatelet Therapy and Patient Outcomes in Those Undergoing Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: The ROCKET AF Trial.

OBJECTIVES: The authors assessed the use of dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) and outcomes in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) during the ROCKET AF (Rivaroxaban Once Daily Oral Direct Factor Xa Inhibition Compared with Vitamin K Antagonism for Prevention of Stroke and Embolism Trial in Atrial Fibrillation). BACKGROUND: The frequency, patterns, and outcomes when adding DAPT to non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants in the setting of PCI in patients with AF are largely unknown. METHODS: The study population included all patients in the treatment group of the ROCKET AF trial divided by the receipt of PCI during follow-up. Clinical characteristics, PCI frequency, and rates of DAPT were reported. Clinical outcomes were adjudicated independently as part of the trial. RESULTS: Among 14,171 patients, 153 (1.1%) underwent PCI during a median 806 days of follow-up. Patients treated with rivaroxaban were significantly less likely to undergo PCI compared with warfarin-treated patients (61 vs. 92; p = 0.01). Study drug was continued during PCI in 81% of patients. Long-term DAPT (≥30 days) was used in 37% and single antiplatelet therapy in 34%. A small number switched from DAPT to monotherapy within 30 days of PCI (n = 19 [12.3%]) and 15% of patients received no antiplatelet therapy after PCI. Rates of stroke/systemic embolism and major bleeding events were high in post-PCI patients (4.5/100 patient-years and 10.2/100 patient-years) in both treatment groups. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with AF at moderate to high risk for stroke, PCI occurred in <1% per year. DAPT was used in a variable manner, with the majority of patients remaining on study drug after PCI. Rates of both thrombotic and bleeding events were high after PCI, highlighting the need for studies to determine the optimal antithrombotic therapy.

Bivariate evaluation of thromboembolism and bleeding in clinical trials of anticoagulants in patients with atrial fibrillation.

Clinical trials of antithrombotic therapy require a cohesive assessment of benefit and risk. A new graphical method to represent the bivariate relation of benefit and risk in trials of antithrombotic drugs is described and illustrated using published data from the four major registration clinical trials of non-vitamin K oral anticoagulants (NOACs) totalling 71,683 patients for prevention of thromboembolic events (TE) in patients with atrial fibrillation (RE-LY, ROCKET AF, ARISTOTLE, and ENGAGE-AF TIMI48). A curve representing a null hypothesis defines a region of benefit on a two-dimensional plane. Trial results are summarised by a rectangle defined by standard 95 % confidence intervals (CI) for thrombosis and bleeding risks. Benefit is judged by whether the confidence rectangle contains the null curve. The treatment effect is measured by the distance from the null curve to the opposing corners of the confidence rectangle (termed "corner distance (CD)"). Across trials NOACs reduced the absolute risk of TE compared to warfarin by 0.30 % (95 % CI: -0.56 % to -0.05 %) and reduced major bleeding by 0.88 % (95 % CI: -1.26 % to -0.51 %). Bivariate evaluation showed NOAC superiority to warfarin overall and elucidated dose differences; low dose edoxaban increased bivariate TE-bleeding risk 0.08 % (CD = -0.85 % to 0.78 %), whereas high dose edoxaban reduced risk 1.41 % (CD = -2.07 % to -0.70 %). In conclusion, bivariate evaluation facilitates visual assessment of the safety-efficacy profile of antithrombotic drugs. Its application to trials in atrial fibrillation found NOACs superior to warfarin without substantial differences between agents.

Native valve disease in patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation on warfarin or rivaroxaban.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the characteristics and outcomes of patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) and aortic stenosis (AS) with patients with AF with mitral regurgitation (MR) or aortic regurgitation (AR) and patients without significant valve disease (no SVD). METHODS: Using 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) data, we analysed efficacy and safety outcomes, adjusting hazard ratios (HRs) for potential confounders using Cox regression analysis. RESULTS: Among 14 119 intention-to-treat ROCKET AF trial patients, a trial that excluded patients with mitral stenosis or artificial valve prosthesis, 214 had AS with or without other valve abnormalities, 1726 had MR or AR and 12 179 had no SVD. After adjusting for prognostic factors, the composite of stroke, systemic embolism or vascular death increased approximately twofold in patients with AS (AS 10.84, MR or AR 4.54 and no SVD 4.31 events per 100 patient-years, p=0.0001). All-cause death also significantly increased (AS 11.22, MR or AR 4.90 and no SVD 4.39 events per 100 patient-years, p=0.0003). Major bleeding occurred more frequently in AS (adjusted HR 1.61, confidence intervals (CI) 1.03 to 2.49, p<0.05) and MR or AR (HR 1.30, 1.07 to 1.57, p<0.01) than in no SVD, but there was no difference between AS and MR or AR (HR 1.24, 0.78 to 1.97). The relative efficacy of rivaroxaban versus warfarin was consistent among patients with and without valvular disease. Rivaroxaban was associated with higher rates of major bleeding than warfarin in patients with MR or AR (HR 1.63, 1.15 to 2.31). CONCLUSIONS: We found that patients with AF and AS on oral anticoagulants may have distinctly different efficacy and safety outcomes than patients with MR or AR or no SVD. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT00403767; Post-results.

Clinical characteristics and outcomes with rivaroxaban vs. warfarin in patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation but underlying native mitral and aortic valve disease participating in the ROCKET AF trial.

AIMS: We investigated clinical characteristics and outcomes of patients with significant valvular disease (SVD) in the 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) trial. METHODS AND RESULTS: ROCKET AF excluded patients with mitral stenosis or artificial valve prostheses. We used Cox regression to adjust comparisons for potential confounders. Among 14 171 patients, 2003 (14.1%) had SVD; they were older and had more comorbidities than patients without SVD. The rate of stroke or systemic embolism with rivaroxaban vs. warfarin was consistent among patients with SVD [2.01 vs. 2.43%; hazard ratio (HR) 0.83, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.55-1.27] and without SVD (1.96 vs. 2.22%; HR 0.89, 95% CI 0.75-1.07; interaction P = 0.76). However, rates of major and non-major clinically relevant bleeding with rivaroxaban vs. warfarin were higher in patients with SVD (19.8% rivaroxaban vs. 16.8% warfarin; HR 1.25, 95% CI 1.05-1.49) vs. those without (14.2% rivaroxaban vs. 14.1% warfarin; HR 1.01, 95% CI 0.94-1.10; interaction P = 0.034), even when controlling for risk factors and potential confounders. In intracranial haemorrhage, there was no interaction between patients with and without SVD where the overall rate was lower among those randomized to rivaroxaban. CONCLUSIONS: Many patients with 'non-valvular atrial fibrillation' have significant valve lesions. Their risk of stroke is similar to that of patients without SVD after controlling for stroke risk factors. Efficacy of rivaroxaban vs. warfarin was similar in patients with and without SVD; however, the observed risk of bleeding was higher with rivaroxaban in patients with SVD but was the same among those without SVD. Atrial fibrillation patients with and without SVD experience the same stroke-preventive benefit of oral anticoagulants.

Novel oral anticoagulants in patients with renal insufficiency: a meta-analysis of randomized trials.

BACKGROUND: Recent reports suggest altered antithrombotic efficacy and higher risk of bleeding with new oral anticoagulants (NOACs) in patients with renal insufficiency. A meta-analysis was performed to evaluate the efficacy and safety with recommended doses of NOAC compared with conventional treatment in patients with renal insufficiency. METHODS: PubMed, Cochrane Library, EMBASE, EBSCO, Web of Science, and CINAHL databases were searched from January 1, 2001 through March 23, 2014. Randomized controlled trials that compared NOACs (rivaroxaban, apixaban, and dabigatran) with comparators (vitamin K antagonist/warfarin, low molecular weight heparin, aspirin, placebo) were selected. We defined moderate renal insufficiency as creatinine clearance (estimated glomerular filtration rate [eGFR]) of 30-49 mL/min, and mild renal insufficiency as eGFR 50-79 mL/min. RESULTS: There were 40,693 patients with renal insufficiency in 10 trials. Compared with other anticoagulants in patients with mild renal insufficiency there was significantly less major or clinically relevant nonmajor bleeding (odds ratio [OR], 0.81; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.72-0.90) and stroke or systemic embolism (OR, 0.70; 95% CI, 0.54-0.92) with NOACs. Using random effects meta-analysis, there was significantly less stroke or systemic embolism (OR, 0.72; 95% CI, 0.57-0.92) and a trend toward less major or clinically relevant nonmajor bleeding (OR, 0.82; 95% CI, 0.59-1.14) with the NOACs among patients with moderate renal insufficiency, and this became statistically significant when evaluated using a fixed effects model. NOACs showed efficiency comparable with conventional anticoagulants for prevention of venous thromboembolism or related mortality. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with renal insufficiency, recommended doses of novel anticoagulants are noninferior and relatively safe compared with conventional anticoagulants.

Use and outcomes of antiarrhythmic therapy in patients with atrial fibrillation receiving oral anticoagulation: results from the ROCKET AF trial.

BACKGROUND: Antiarrhythmic drugs (AADs) and anticoagulation are mainstays of atrial fibrillation (AF) treatment. OBJECTIVE: To study the use and outcomes of AAD therapy in anticoagulated patients with AF. METHODS: Patients in the Rivaroxaban Once Daily Oral Direct Factor Xa Inhibition Compared with Vitamin K Antagonism for Prevention of Stroke and Embolism Trial in Atrial Fibrillation trial (N = 14,264) were stratified by AAD use at baseline: amiodarone, other AAD, or no AAD. Multivariable adjustment was performed to compare stroke, bleeding, and death across AAD groups as well as across treatment assignment (rivaroxaban or warfarin). RESULTS: Of 14,264 patients randomized, 1681 (11.8%) were treated with an AAD (1144 [8%] with amiodarone and 537 [3.8%] with other AADs). Amiodarone-treated patients were less often female (38% vs 48%), had more persistent AF (64% vs 40%), and more concomitant heart failure (71% vs 41%) than were patients receiving other AADs. Patients receiving no AAD more closely resembled amiodarone-treated patients. Time in therapeutic range was significantly lower in warfarin-treated patients receiving amiodarone than in those receiving no AAD (50% vs 58%; P < .0001). Compared with no AAD, neither amiodarone (adjusted hazard ratio [HR] 0.98; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.74-1.31; P = .9) nor other AADs (adjusted HR 0.66; 95% CI 0.37-1.17; P = .15) were associated with increased mortality. Similar results were observed for embolic and bleeding outcomes. Treatment effects of rivaroxaban vs warfarin in patients receiving no AAD were consistent with results from the overall trial (primary end point: adjusted HR 0.82; 95% CI 0.68-0.98; Pinteraction = .06; safety end point: adjusted HR 1.12; 95% CI 0.90-1.24; Pinteraction = .33). CONCLUSION: Treatment with AADs was not associated with increased morbidity or mortality in anticoagulated patients with AF. The effect of amiodarone on outcomes in patients receiving rivaroxaban requires further investigation.

Relationship between time in therapeutic range and comparative treatment effect of rivaroxaban and warfarin: results from the ROCKET AF trial.

BACKGROUND: Time in therapeutic range (TTR) is a standard quality measure of the use of warfarin. We assessed the relative effects of rivaroxaban versus warfarin at the level of trial center TTR (cTTR) since such analysis preserves randomized comparisons. METHODS AND RESULTS: TTR was calculated using the Rosendaal method, without exclusion of international normalized ratio (INR) values performed during warfarin initiation. Measurements during warfarin interruptions >7 days were excluded. INRs were performed via standardized finger-stick point-of-care devices at least every 4 weeks. The primary efficacy endpoint (stroke or non-central nervous system embolism) was examined by quartiles of cTTR and by cTTR as a continuous function. Centers with the highest cTTRs by quartile had lower-risk patients as reflected by lower CHADS2 scores (P<0.0001) and a lower prevalence of prior stroke or transient ischemic attack (P<0.0001). Sites with higher cTTR were predominantly from North America and Western Europe. The treatment effect of rivaroxaban versus warfarin on the primary endpoint was consistent across a wide range of cTTRs (P value for interaction=0.71). The hazard of major and non-major clinically relevant bleeding increased with cTTR (P for interaction=0.001), however, the estimated reduction by rivaroxaban compared with warfarin in the hazard of intracranial hemorrhage was preserved across a wide range of threshold cTTR values. CONCLUSIONS: The treatment effect of rivaroxaban compared with warfarin for the prevention of stroke and systemic embolism is consistent regardless of cTTR.

Edoxaban versus warfarin in patients with atrial fibrillation.

BACKGROUND: Edoxaban is a direct oral factor Xa inhibitor with proven antithrombotic effects. The long-term efficacy and safety of edoxaban as compared with warfarin in patients with atrial fibrillation is not known. METHODS: We conducted a randomized, double-blind, double-dummy trial comparing two once-daily regimens of edoxaban with warfarin in 21,105 patients with moderate-to-high-risk atrial fibrillation (median follow-up, 2.8 years). The primary efficacy end point was stroke or systemic embolism. Each edoxaban regimen was tested for noninferiority to warfarin during the treatment period. The principal safety end point was major bleeding. RESULTS: The annualized rate of the primary end point during treatment was 1.50% with warfarin (median time in the therapeutic range, 68.4%), as compared with 1.18% with high-dose edoxaban (hazard ratio, 0.79; 97.5% confidence interval [CI], 0.63 to 0.99; P<0.001 for noninferiority) and 1.61% with low-dose edoxaban (hazard ratio, 1.07; 97.5% CI, 0.87 to 1.31; P=0.005 for noninferiority). In the intention-to-treat analysis, there was a trend favoring high-dose edoxaban versus warfarin (hazard ratio, 0.87; 97.5% CI, 0.73 to 1.04; P=0.08) and an unfavorable trend with low-dose edoxaban versus warfarin (hazard ratio, 1.13; 97.5% CI, 0.96 to 1.34; P=0.10). The annualized rate of major bleeding was 3.43% with warfarin versus 2.75% with high-dose edoxaban (hazard ratio, 0.80; 95% CI, 0.71 to 0.91; P<0.001) and 1.61% with low-dose edoxaban (hazard ratio, 0.47; 95% CI, 0.41 to 0.55; P<0.001). The corresponding annualized rates of death from cardiovascular causes were 3.17% versus 2.74% (hazard ratio, 0.86; 95% CI, 0.77 to 0.97; P=0.01), and 2.71% (hazard ratio, 0.85; 95% CI, 0.76 to 0.96; P=0.008), and the corresponding rates of the key secondary end point (a composite of stroke, systemic embolism, or death from cardiovascular causes) were 4.43% versus 3.85% (hazard ratio, 0.87; 95% CI, 0.78 to 0.96; P=0.005), and 4.23% (hazard ratio, 0.95; 95% CI, 0.86 to 1.05; P=0.32). CONCLUSIONS: Both once-daily regimens of edoxaban were noninferior to warfarin with respect to the prevention of stroke or systemic embolism and were associated with significantly lower rates of bleeding and death from cardiovascular causes. (Funded by Daiichi Sankyo Pharma Development; ENGAGE AF-TIMI 48 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00781391.).

Clinical outcomes with rivaroxaban in patients transitioned from vitamin K antagonist therapy: a subgroup analysis of a randomized trial.

BACKGROUND: In ROCKET AF (Rivaroxaban Once-Daily, Oral, Direct Factor Xa Inhibition Compared With Vitamin K Antagonism for Prevention of Stroke and Embolism Trial in Atrial Fibrillation), a large randomized, clinical trial, rivaroxaban was noninferior to warfarin in preventing stroke or systemic embolism in patients with atrial fibrillation. OBJECTIVE: To determine the efficacy and safety of rivaroxaban compared with warfarin among vitamin K antagonist (VKA)-naive and VKA-experienced patients. DESIGN: Prespecified subgroup analysis. (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT00403767). SETTING: Global. PATIENTS: 14,264 persons with atrial fibrillation. MEASUREMENTS: Interaction of the relative treatment effect of rivaroxaban and warfarin on stroke or systemic embolism among VKA-naive and VKA-experienced patients. RESULTS: Overall, 7897 (55.4%) patients were VKA-experienced and 6367 (44.6%) were VKA-naive. The effect of rivaroxaban versus warfarin on stroke or systemic embolism was consistent: Rates per 100 patient-years of follow-up were 2.32 versus 2.87 for VKA-naive patients (hazard ratio [HR], 0.81 [95% CI, 0.64 to 1.03]) and 1.98 versus 2.09 for VKA-experienced patients (HR, 0.94 [CI, 0.75 to 1.18]; interaction P = 0.36). During the first 7 days, rivaroxaban was associated with more bleeding than warfarin (HR in VKA-naive patients, 5.83 [CI, 3.25 to 10.44], and in VKA-experienced patients, 6.66 [CI, 3.83 to 11.58]; interaction P = 0.53). After 30 days, rivaroxaban was associated with less bleeding than warfarin in VKA-naive patients (HR, 0.84 [CI, 0.74 to 0.95]) and similar bleeding in VKA-experienced patients (HR, 1.06 [CI, 0.96 to 1.17]; interaction P = 0.003). LIMITATION: The trial was not designed to detect differences in these subgroups. CONCLUSION: The efficacy of rivaroxaban in VKA-experienced and VKA-naive patients was similar to that of the overall trial. There were more bleeding events within 7 days of study drug initiation with rivaroxaban, but after 30 days, rivaroxaban was associated with less bleeding in VKA-naive patients and similar bleeding in VKA-experienced patients. This information may be useful to clinicians considering a transition to rivaroxaban for patients receiving VKA therapy. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: Johnson & Johnson and Bayer HealthCare.