Intravenous iron supplementation does not increase infectious disease risk in hemodialysis patients: a nationwide cohort-based case-crossover study.

BACKGROUND: Studies have reported conflicting findings on the infection risk posed by intravenous iron supplementation among hemodialysis (HD) patients. We used a novel study design to assess associations between intravenous iron and infectious diseases. METHODS: Patients initiating HD between 1998 and 2008 were extracted from Taiwan's National Health Insurance Research Database. Their first infectious disease in the period between 1.5 years after dialysis initiation and 2010 was identified and defined as the index date. Through the case-crossover design, the odds of exposure to intravenous iron within the 1-month period immediately preceding the index date (i.e., the case period) were compared with iron exposure in three different matched control periods for the same enrollee, thus possibly reducing some unmeasured confounders. RESULTS: A total of 1410 patients who met our enrollment criteria were extracted from incident HD patients. The odds of intravenous iron exposure during the case period versus total control periods exhibited no significant difference (odds ratio: 1.000, 95% confidence interval: 0.75-1.33). In subgroup analyses, this association remained nonsignificant across patients with diabetes mellitus, heart failure, chronic lung disease, venous catheter for HD, and higher iron load. CONCLUSIONS: We found that intravenous iron supplementation did not increase short-term infection risk among HD patients.

Effectiveness and Safety of Four Direct Oral Anticoagulants in Asian Patients With Nonvalvular Atrial Fibrillation.

BACKGROUND: Whether four direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) are superior to warfarin in Asian patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF) remains unclear. METHODS: This nationwide retrospective cohort study was based on data from Taiwan's National Health Insurance Research Database from June 1, 2012, to December 31, 2017, covering patients with NVAF taking edoxaban (n = 4,577), apixaban (n = 9,952), rivaroxaban (n = 33,022), dabigatran (n = 22,371), and warfarin (n = 19,761). Propensity score weighting was used to balance covariates across study groups. Patients were followed up until occurrence of study outcomes or end date of study. RESULTS: Edoxaban, apixaban, and rivaroxaban were associated with a lower risk of ischemic stroke/systemic embolism than warfarin. All DOACs had a lower risk of major bleeding than warfarin. Apixaban was associated with a lower risk of major bleeding than rivaroxaban and dabigatran, whereas the risk of major bleeding was comparable between edoxaban and apixaban. The reduced risks of thromboembolism/major bleeding for the four DOACs persisted in high-risk subgroups, including those with chronic kidney disease, elderly patients (age ≥ 75 years), secondary stroke prevention, or CHA2DS2-VASc score (congestive heart failure, hypertension, age ≥ 75 years, diabetes mellitus, previous stroke/transient ischemic attack, vascular disease, age 65-74 years, and female sex) ≥ 4. A total of 2,924 (64%), 6,359 (64%), 31,108 (94%), and 19,821 (89%) patients received low-dose edoxaban (15-30 mg/d), apixaban (2.5 mg bid), rivaroxaban (10-15 mg/d), and dabigatran (110 mg bid), respectively. The effectiveness/safety outcomes with the four low-dose DOACs compared with warfarin were consistent with the main analysis. CONCLUSIONS: In the largest real-world practice study among Asian patients with NVAF, four DOACs were associated with a comparable or lower risk of thromboembolism, and a lower risk of bleeding than warfarin. There was consistency even among high-risk subgroups and whether standard-or low-dose regimens were compared.

Thromboembolic, Bleeding, and Mortality Risks of Rivaroxaban and Dabigatran in Asians With Nonvalvular Atrial Fibrillation.

BACKGROUND: It is unclear whether the non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulant agents rivaroxaban and dabigatran are superior to warfarin for efficacy and safety outcomes in Asians with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF). OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to compare the risk for thromboembolic events, bleeding, and mortality associated with rivaroxaban and dabigatran versus warfarin in Asians with NVAF. METHODS: A nationwide retrospective cohort study was conducted of consecutive patients with NVAF taking rivaroxaban (n = 3,916), dabigatran (n = 5,921), or warfarin (n = 5,251) using data collected from the Taiwan National Health Insurance Research Database between February 1, 2013 and December 31, 2013. The propensity score weighting method was used to balance covariates across study groups. Patients were followed until the first occurrence of any study outcome or the study end date (December 31, 2013). RESULTS: A total of 3,425 (87%) and 5,301 (90%) patients were taking low-dose rivaroxaban (10 to 15 mg once daily) and dabigatran (110 mg twice daily), respectively. Compared with warfarin, both rivaroxaban and dabigatran significantly decreased the risk for ischemic stroke or systemic embolism (p = 0.0004 and p = 0.0006, respectively), intracranial hemorrhage (p = 0.0007 and p = 0.0005, respectively), and all-cause mortality (p < 0.0001 and p < 0.0001, respectively) during the short follow-up period. In comparing the 2 non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulant agents with each other, no differences were found regarding risk for ischemic stroke or systemic embolism, intracranial hemorrhage, myocardial infarction, or mortality. Rivaroxaban carried a significantly higher risk for hospitalization for gastrointestinal bleeding than dabigatran (p = 0.0416), but on-treatment analysis showed that the risk for hospitalized gastrointestinal bleeding was similar between the 2 drugs (p = 0.5783). CONCLUSIONS: In real-world practice among Asians with NVAF, both rivaroxaban and dabigatran were associated with reduced risk for ischemic stroke or systemic embolism, intracranial hemorrhage, and all-cause mortality without significantly increased risk for acute myocardial infarction or hospitalization for gastrointestinal bleeding compared with warfarin.