Efficacy and Safety of Direct Oral Anticoagulants for Stroke Prevention in Older Patients With Atrial Fibrillation: A Network Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.

BACKGROUND: Although older patients with atrial fibrillation are at heightened risk of thromboembolic and bleeding events, their optimal treatment choice remains uncertain. METHODS AND RESULTS: This meta-analysis was conducted according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. We searched the PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane databases for randomized controlled trials that compared thromboembolic or bleeding outcomes between a direct oral anticoagulant (DOAC) and a vitamin K antagonist (VKA) and reported outcomes for patients aged ≥75 years with atrial fibrillation. The efficacy outcome was the composite of stroke and systemic embolism. Safety outcomes included major bleeding, any clinically relevant bleeding, and intracranial hemorrhage. Each DOAC and VKA was compared pairwise in a network meta-analysis. High- and low-dose regimens and factor IIa and Xa inhibitors were also compared. Seven randomized controlled trials were included in the analysis. Stroke and systemic embolism risks did not differ significantly among DOACs. There were no significant differences in major bleeding between each DOAC and VKA. Intracranial hemorrhage risk was significantly lower with dabigatran, apixaban, and edoxaban than with VKA and rivaroxaban, which had similar risks. High-dose regimens led to lower risks of stroke or systemic embolism compared with VKA and low-dose regimens, with both doses having similar bleeding risks. CONCLUSIONS: In patients aged ≥75 years with atrial fibrillation, DOACs were associated with fewer thromboembolic events compared with VKA, whereas dabigatran, apixaban, and edoxaban were associated with lower risks of intracranial hemorrhage compared with VKA and rivaroxaban. REGISTRATION: URL: www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/. Unique identifier: CRD42022329557.

Comparison of Low-Dose Direct Acting Anticoagulant and Warfarin in patients Aged ≥80 years With Atrial Fibrillation.

Low dose direct acting oral anticoagulants (LDDOACS) were approved for elderly atrial Fibrillation (AF) patients with limited information. A retrospective analysis collecting baseline characteristics and outcomes in AF patients ≥ 80 prescribed LDDOAC or warfarin (W), from a multidisciplinary practice between 1/1/11 (First LDDOAC available) and 5/31/17 was conducted. From 9660 AF patients, 514 ≥ 80 received a LDDOAC and 422 W. A multivariable comparison found LDDOAC patients were older (p <0.001), had lower creatinine clearance (CrCl) (p = 0.006), used more anti-platelet drugs (p <0.001), and more often had new onset AF verses those prescribed W (p <0.001). There were no clinically significant differences among those patients receiving Dabigatran 75 mgs BID (D), Rivaroxaban 15mgs (R) or Apixaban 2.5mgs BID (A). Forty-eight and 50% of the patients remained on their LDDOAC or W for the observation period (p = 0.55). Stroke/systemic embolism (SSE) and CNS bleeds were 1.16 vs 2.22%/yr., (p = 0.143) and 1.46 vs 0.93%/yr., (p = 0.24). Mortality and major bleeds were 6.26 vs 1.67%/yr., and 12.3vs 3.77%/yr. (p <0.001). SSE were 1.1%/yr for D, R, and A (p = 0.94). CNS bleeds were 2.2 for D, 1.7 for R and 0.8%/yr. for A: p = 0.53. Major bleeding was: 14.3 for D, 14.1 for R and 9.1%/yr. for A, p = 0.048 (with A < R, p = 0.01). Mortality was 5.5 for D, 4.2 for R and 9.5% for A, p = 0.031. In conclusion, half the patients remained on their assigned anti-coagulant. SSE and intracranial bleed rates were similar and low. Major bleeds and deaths were different between groups emphasizing the need for prospective randomized trials in this growing population with AF.

Effectiveness and Safety of Direct Oral Anticoagulants Versus Warfarin in Patients With Valvular Atrial Fibrillation : A Population-Based Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: Direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) are increasingly used in place of warfarin, but evidence about their effectiveness and safety in patients with valvular atrial fibrillation (AF) remains limited. OBJECTIVE: To assess the effectiveness and safety of DOACs compared with warfarin in patients with valvular AF. DESIGN: New-user retrospective propensity score-matched cohort study. SETTING: U.S.-based commercial health care database from 1 January 2010 to 30 June 2019. PARTICIPANTS: Adults with valvular AF who were newly prescribed DOACs or warfarin. MEASUREMENTS: The primary effectiveness outcome was a composite of ischemic stroke or systemic embolism. The primary safety outcome was a composite of intracranial or gastrointestinal bleeding. RESULTS: Among a total of 56 336 patients with valvular AF matched on propensity score, use of DOACs (vs. warfarin) was associated with lower risk for ischemic stroke or systemic embolism (hazard ratio [HR], 0.64 [95% CI, 0.59 to 0.70]) and major bleeding events (HR, 0.67 [CI, 0.63 to 0.72]). The results for the effectiveness and safety outcomes remained consistent for apixaban (HRs, 0.54 [CI, 0.47 to 0.61] and 0.52 [CI, 0.47 to 0.57], respectively) and rivaroxaban (HRs, 0.74 [CI, 0.64 to 0.86] and 0.87 [CI, 0.79 to 0.96], respectively); with dabigatran, results were consistent for the major bleeding outcome (HR, 0.81 [CI, 0.68 to 0.97]) but not for effectiveness (HR, 1.03 [CI, 0.81 to 1.31]). LIMITATION: Relatively short follow-up; inability to ascertain disease severity. CONCLUSION: In this comparative effectiveness study using practice-based claims data, patients with valvular AF who were new users of DOACs had lower risks for ischemic stroke or systemic embolism and major bleeding than new users of warfarin. These data may be used to guide risk-benefit discussions regarding anticoagulant choices for patients with valvular AF. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: None.

Clinical and Economic Outcomes Among Nonvalvular Atrial Fibrillation Patients With Coronary Artery Disease and/or Peripheral Artery Disease.

To address literature gaps on treatment with real-world evidence, this study compared effectiveness, safety, and cost outcomes in NVAF patients with coronary or peripheral artery disease (CAD, PAD) prescribed apixaban versus other oral anticoagulants. NVAF patients aged ≥65 years co-diagnosed with CAD/PAD initiating warfarin, apixaban, dabigatran, or rivaroxaban were selected from the US Medicare population (January 1, 2013 to September 30, 2015). Propensity score matching was used to match apixaban versus warfarin, dabigatran, and rivaroxaban cohorts. Cox models were used to evaluate the risk of stroke/systemic embolism (SE), major bleeding (MB), all-cause mortality, and a composite of stroke/myocardial infarction/all-cause mortality. Generalized linear and two-part models were used to compare stroke/SE, MB, and all-cause costs between cohorts. A total of 33,269 warfarin-apixaban, 9,335 dabigatran-apixaban, and 33,633 rivaroxaban-apixaban pairs were identified after matching. Compared with apixaban, stroke/SE risk was higher in warfarin (hazard ratio [HR]: 1.93; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.61 to 2.31), dabigatran (HR: 1.69; 95% CI: 1.18 to 2.43), and rivaroxaban (HR: 1.24; 95% CI: 1.01 to 1.51) patients. MB risk was higher in warfarin (HR: 1.67; 95% CI: 1.52 to 1.83), dabigatran (HR: 1.37; 95% CI: 1.13 to 1.68), and rivaroxaban (HR: 1.87; 95% CI: 1.71 to 2.05) patients vs apixaban. Stroke/SE- and MB-related medical costs per-patient per-month were higher in warfarin, dabigatran, and rivaroxaban patients versus apixaban. Total all-cause health care costs were higher in warfarin and rivaroxaban patients compared with apixaban patients. In conclusion, compared with apixaban, patients on dabigatran, rivaroxaban, or warfarin had a higher risk of stroke/SE, MB, and event-related costs.

Effect of Rivaroxaban or Apixaban in Atrial Fibrillation Patients with Stage 4-5 Chronic Kidney Disease or on Dialysis.

BACKGROUND: Anticoagulant treatment in non-valvular atrial fibrillation (AF) patients with severe chronic kidney disease (CKD) or on dialysis remains a matter of debate. The object of this study was to quantify the benefit-risk profiles of rivaroxaban or apixaban versus warfarin in AF patients with stage 4-5 CKD or on dialysis. METHOD: A comprehensive search of the Cochrane Library, PubMed, Ovid, and Google Scholar databases was performed for eligible studies that comparing the effect and safety of rivaroxaban or apixaban versus warfarin in AF patients with stage 4-5 CKD or on dialysis. Hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were abstracted, and then pooled using a random-effects model. RESULTS: A total of seven studies, one post hoc analysis of RCT and six observational cohorts, were included in this meta-analysis. Compared with warfarin use, the use of rivaroxaban or apixaban was significantly associated with reduced risks of all-cause death (HR = 0.82, 95% CI 0.72-0.93) and gastrointestinal bleeding (HR = 0.87, 95% CI 0.80-0.95). There were no significant differences in the risks of stroke or systemic embolism (rivaroxaban, HR = 0.71, 95% CI 0.43-1.19; apixaban, HR = 0.86, 95%CI 0.68-1.09) and major bleeding (rivaroxaban, HR = 0.96, 95% CI 0.64-1.45; apixaban, HR = 0.56, 95%CI 0.28-1.12). CONCLUSIONS: Current evidence suggests that rivaroxaban or apixaban are safe and at least as effective as warfarin in patients with AF and stage 4-5 CKD or on dialysis.

Effectiveness and Safety of Direct Oral Anticoagulants in the Secondary Stroke Prevention of Elderly Patients: Ljubljana Registry of Secondary Stroke Prevention.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: The results of randomised clinical trials (RCTs) on direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) for stroke prevention in patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF) can mostly be applied to primary prevention in relatively young patients, since only a minority of patients included in these trials were receiving DOACs for secondary prevention. The real-life secondary prevention subgroup, comprising mostly elderly and high-risk patients, remains a point of interest where further exploration is needed. Our objective was to explore the effectiveness and safety of DOACs for secondary prevention in the real-life conditions. METHODS: In a six-year (2012-2018) period all consecutive patients with a history of transient ischaemic attack (TIA) or stroke, recorded NVAF and prescription of DOAC, were included in this single-centre registry. Choice of the DOAC and dose was based on the discretion of the attending clinician. Data regarding recurrent stroke/TIA or other embolic events, intracranial haemorrhage, other major bleeding, adherence and potential changes of therapy were collected and analysed. RESULTS: During the study period, 566 patients were prescribed a DOAC for secondary stroke prevention, and follow-up data were available for 510 patients, with an average observational time of 2.6 years. The mean age of patients was 77.9 ± 8.7 years. The mean CHA2DS2-VASc and HAS-BLED scores were 5.1 ± 1.2 and 2.4 ± 0.6, respectively. Dabigatran was prescribed in 66%, apixaban in 21% and rivaroxaban in 13% of patients; 58% of patients were prescribed the reduced dose of DOAC. The overall yearly incidence of recurrent stroke, major bleeding and intracranial bleeding was 1.7%, 1.6% and 0.2%, respectively. Thus, we found similar effectiveness and safety of both standard and reduced dose of DOACs for secondary stroke prevention, compared to the RCT and large registries. CONCLUSIONS: Our real-life data study suggests that secondary stroke prevention with DOACs is as effective and safe as primary prevention, both in standard and reduced doses, in a typical group of patients who are older than patients included in RCTs.

The role of non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants in Asian patients with atrial fibrillation: A PRISMA-compliant article.

BACKGROUND: Given the huge burden of atrial fibrillation (AF) and AF-related stroke in Asia, stroke prevention represents an urgent issue in this region. We herein performed a network meta-analysis to examine the role of non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants (NOACs) in Asian patients with AF. METHODS: A systematic search of the publications was conducted in PubMed and Embase databases for eligible studies until July 2019. The odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were regarded as the effect estimates. The surface under the cumulative ranking area (SUCRA) for the ranking probabilities was calculated. RESULTS: A total of 17 studies were included. For comparisons of NOACs vs warfarin, dabigatran (OR = 0.77, 95% CI 0.68-0.86), rivaroxaban (OR = 0.72, 95% CI 0.65-0.81), apixaban (OR = 0.56, 95% CI 0.49-0.65), but not edoxaban reduced the risk of stroke or systemic embolism, wheres dabigatran (OR = 0.56, 95% CI 0.41-0.76), rivaroxaban (OR = 0.66, 95% CI 0.50-0.86), apixaban (OR = 0.49, 95% CI 0.36-0.66), and edoxaban (OR = 0.34, 95% CI 0.24-0.49) decreased the risk of major bleeding. In reducing the risk of stroke or systemic embolism, apixaban and rivaroxaban ranked the best and second best (SUCRA 0.2% and 31.4%, respectively), followed by dabigatran (50.2%), edoxaban (75.2%), and warfarin (93.0%). In reducing the risk of major bleeding, edoxaban, and apixaban ranked the best and second best (1.5% and 30.8%, respectively), followed by dabigatran (48.4%), rivaroxaban (69.2%), and warfarin (100%). CONCLUSION: NOACs were at least as effective as warfarin, but more safer in Asians with AF. Apixaban was superior to other NOACs for reducing stroke or systemic embolism, while edoxaban showed a better safety profile than other NOACs.

The INVICTUS rheumatic heart disease research program: Rationale, design and baseline characteristics of a randomized trial of rivaroxaban compared to vitamin K antagonists in rheumatic valvular disease and atrial fibrillation.

BACKGROUND: Rheumatic heart disease (RHD) is a neglected disease affecting 33 million people, mainly in low and middle income countries. Yet very few large trials or registries have been conducted in this population. The INVICTUS program of research in RHD consists of a randomized-controlled trial (RCT) of 4500 patients comparing rivaroxaban with vitamin K antagonists (VKA) in patients with RHD and atrial fibrillation (AF), a registry of 17,000 patients to document the contemporary clinical course of patients with RHD, including a focused sub-study on pregnant women with RHD within the registry. This paper describes the rationale, design, organization and baseline characteristics of the RCT and a summary of the design of the registry and its sub-study. Patients with RHD and AF are considered to be at high risk of embolic strokes, and oral anticoagulation with VKAs is recommended for stroke prevention. But the quality of anticoagulation with VKA is poor in developing countries. A drug which does not require monitoring, and which is safe and effective for preventing stroke in patients with valvular AF, would fulfill a major unmet need. METHODS: The INVestIgation of rheumatiC AF Treatment Using VKAs, rivaroxaban or aspirin Studies (INVICTUS-VKA) trial is an international, multicentre, randomized, open-label, parallel group trial, testing whether rivaroxaban 20 mg given once daily is non-inferior (or superior) to VKA in patients with RHD, AF, and an elevated risk of stroke (mitral stenosis with valve area ≤2 cm2, left atrial spontaneous echo-contrast or thrombus, or a CHA2DS2VASc score ≥2). The primary efficacy outcome is a composite of stroke or systemic embolism and the primary safety outcome is the occurrence of major bleeding. The trial has enrolled 4565 patients from 138 sites in 23 countries from Africa, Asia and South America. The Registry plans to enroll an additional 17,000 patients with RHD and document their treatments, and their clinical course for at least 2 years. The pregnancy sub-study will document the clinical course of pregnant women with RHD. CONCLUSION: INVICTUS is the largest program of clinical research focused on a neglected cardiovascular disease and will provide new information on the clinical course of patients with RHD, and approaches to anticoagulation in those with concomitant AF.

Effectiveness and Safety of Apixaban Compared With Rivaroxaban for Patients With Atrial Fibrillation in Routine Practice: A Cohort Study.

Background: Apixaban and rivaroxaban are the most commonly prescribed direct oral anticoagulants for adults with atrial fibrillation, but head-to-head data comparing their safety and effectiveness are lacking. Objective: To compare the safety and effectiveness of apixaban versus rivaroxaban for patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation. Design: New-user, active-comparator, retrospective cohort study. Setting: A U.S. nationwide commercial health care claims database from 28 December 2012 to 1 January 2019. Patients: Adults newly prescribed apixaban (n = 59 172) or rivaroxaban (n = 40 706). Measurements: The primary effectiveness outcome was a composite of ischemic stroke or systemic embolism. The primary safety outcome was a composite of intracranial hemorrhage or gastrointestinal bleeding. Results: 39 351 patients newly prescribed apixaban were propensity score matched to 39 351 patients newly prescribed rivaroxaban. Mean age was 69 years, 40% of patients were women, and mean follow-up was 288 days for new apixaban users and 291 days for new rivaroxaban users. The incidence rate of ischemic stroke or systemic embolism was 6.6 per 1000 person-years for adults prescribed apixaban compared with 8.0 per 1000 person-years for those prescribed rivaroxaban (hazard ratio [HR], 0.82 [95% CI, 0.68 to 0.98]; rate difference, 1.4 fewer events per 1000 person-years [CI, 0.0 to 2.7]). Adults prescribed apixaban also had a lower rate of gastrointestinal bleeding or intracranial hemorrhage (12.9 per 1000 person-years) compared with those prescribed rivaroxaban (21.9 per 1000 person-years), corresponding to an HR of 0.58 (CI, 0.52 to 0.66) and a rate difference of 9.0 fewer events per 1000 person-years (CI, 6.9 to 11.1). Limitation: Unmeasured confounding, incomplete laboratory data. Conclusion: In routine care, adults with atrial fibrillation prescribed apixaban had a lower rate of both ischemic stroke or systemic embolism and bleeding compared with those prescribed rivaroxaban. Primary Funding Source: Division of Pharmacoepidemiology and Pharmacoeconomics, Brigham and Women's Hospital.

Cost-effectiveness of Dabigatran Compared With Rivaroxaban for Prevention of Stroke and Systemic Embolism in Patients With Atrial Fibrillation in China.

PURPOSE: In China, dabigatran and rivaroxaban are the only approved non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants for the treatment of atrial fibrillation (AF). The goal of this article was to assess the cost-effectiveness of dabigatran versus rivaroxaban for the prevention of stroke and systemic embolism in Chinese patients with AF from the perspective of the Chinese health care system. METHODS: A Markov model was constructed to estimate the cost-effectiveness of dabigatran versus rivaroxaban. Clinical events were modeled for a lifetime horizon, based on clinical efficacy data from indirect treatment comparisons. The weighted average of the most recent prices of these 2 drugs was used as the drug acquisition cost. Other costs, including follow-up costs and event costs, were collected by using a survey from a panel of local experts. Utility inputs (health state utilities, clinical event disutilities, and event history utility) were obtained from published literature. Sensitivity analyses that included scenario analyses and a probabilistic sensitivity analysis were conducted to examine the robustness of the economic model. FINDINGS: Over a lifetime, patients treated with dabigatran experienced fewer ischemic strokes (2.14 dabigatran vs 2.61 rivaroxaban) and fewer intracranial hemorrhage (0.48 vs 0.94) per 100 patient-years. In the base case analysis, dabigatran had an incremental cost of ¥28,128 but with higher life years (10.38 vs 10.14) and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) (7.95 vs 7.70). The resulting incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of ¥112,910 per QALY gained and net monetary benefit of ¥12,214 versus rivaroxaban showed that dabigatran was a cost-effective alternative to rivaroxaban. Extensive sensitivity analyses indicated that the results were robust over a wide range of inputs. The probabilistic sensitivity analysis indicated that dabigatran was cost-effective in 84.2% of the 10,000 Monte Carlo simulations compared with rivaroxaban. IMPLICATIONS: Dabigatran reduced the occurrence of clinical events and increased QALYs compared with rivaroxaban. The use of dabigatran for the prevention of stroke and systemic embolism is a cost-effective option compared with rivaroxaban among patients with AF in China.

Real-world outcomes of rivaroxaban treatment in elderly Japanese patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation.

Direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs), such as rivaroxaban, reduce the risk of stroke and systemic embolism in patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF). However, it is still unclear whether the stroke reduction benefit outweighs the bleeding risk in elderly Japanese patients with NVAF. The Xarelto Post-Authorization Safety and Effectiveness Study in Japanese Patients with Atrial Fibrillation (XAPASS) was a real-world, prospective observational, post-marketing surveillance study on the safety and effectiveness of rivaroxaban in Japanese clinical practice. This sub-analysis evaluated the clinical outcomes of elderly patients aged ≥ 75 years. At the 1-year follow-up, there were 4,685 (48.91%) and 4,893 (51.09%) patients aged ≥ 75 and < 75 years, respectively. Safety and effectiveness outcomes were compared between patients aged ≥ 75 years and those aged < 75 years, and among 3 elderly sub-populations (age ranges: 75-79, 80-84, and ≥ 85 years). Patients aged ≥ 75 years had higher rates of major bleeding [2.22 vs. 1.35 events per 100 patient-years, hazard ratio (HR) 1.63, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.17-2.28] and composite of stroke (ischemic or hemorrhagic)/non-central nervous system (non-CNS) systemic embolism (SE)/myocardial infarction (MI) (2.41 vs. 1.21 events per 100 patient-years, HR 1.97, 95% CI 1.40-2.77) compared to patients aged < 75 years. Intracranial hemorrhage rates were < 1 event per 100 patient-years in both groups (0.85 vs. 0.59 events per 100 patient-years, HR 1.43, 95% CI 0.85-2.40). Kaplan-Meier curves of major bleeding and stroke/non-CNS SE/MI showed that no significant differences of cumulative event rates were identified among the 3 elderly sub-populations. Stepwise Cox regression analyses revealed that creatinine clearance (CrCl) (<50 mL/min), hepatic impairment, and hypertension were specific predictors for major bleeding and no specific predictors were found for stroke/non-CNS SE/MI in patients aged ≥ 75 years. In conclusion, safety and effectiveness event rates were higher in patients aged ≥ 75 years compared with those aged < 75 years, yet, no distinct differences were observed among the 3 elderly sub-populations.

Real-world outcomes of rivaroxaban treatment in patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation and worsening renal function.

BACKGROUND: Rivaroxaban is a direct oral anticoagulant administered to reduce the risk of stroke and systemic embolism in patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF). The Xarelto Post-Authorization Safety and Effectiveness Study in Japanese Patients with Atrial Fibrillation (XAPASS) was a prospective, observational, post-marketing surveillance study that examined the safety and effectiveness of rivaroxaban in routine clinical practice. This sub-analysis of the XAPASS investigated the outcomes of patients with worsening renal function (WRF). METHODS: The XAPASS included 11,308 patients with NVAF who began treatment with rivaroxaban. Of 9578 patients who completed 1-year follow-up, the 7509 patients, for whom the change in creatinine clearance could be assessed, were included in the present analysis. Patients with WRF were those with a decrease in creatinine clearance of ≥20% from enrollment to any time point; patients with stable renal function (SRF) were those without such a decrease. Outcomes in patients with WRF versus SRF were compared at 1 year. RESULTS: We identified 1229 patients with WRF and 6280 patients with SRF. Patients with WRF were older and had higher mean CHADS2 and modified HAS-BLED scores compared to patients with SRF. The incidence rates of any bleeding (hazard ratio: 1.12; 95% confidence interval: 0.88-1.41), major bleeding (1.20; 0.75-1.90), and the composite endpoint stroke/systemic embolism/myocardial infarction (1.06; 0.65-1.71) were similar between the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: No association between WRF and occurrence of any bleeding, major bleeding, and stroke/systemic embolism/myocardial infarction was observed in patients with AF on rivaroxaban treatment during 1-year follow-up in real-world clinical practice. Clinicaltrials.gov: NCT01582737.

Non-Vitamin K Antagonist Oral Anticoagulants Versus Warfarin in Patients With Cancer and Atrial Fibrillation: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Background Several studies have investigated the effect of non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants (NOACs) in atrial fibrillation (AF) patients with cancer, but the results remain controversial. Therefore, we conducted a meta-analysis to compare the efficacy and safety of NOACs versus warfarin in this population. Methods and Results We systematically searched the PubMed and Embase databases until February 16, 2019 for studies comparing the effect of NOACs with warfarin in AF patients with cancer. Risk ratios (RRs) with 95% CIs were extracted and pooled by a random-effects model. Five studies involving 8908 NOACs and 12 440 warfarin users were included. There were no significant associations between cancer status and risks of stroke or systemic embolism, major bleeding, or death in AF patients. Compared with warfarin, NOACs were associated with decreased risks of stroke or systemic embolism (RR, 0.52; 95% CI, 0.28-0.99), venous thromboembolism (RR, 0.37, 95% CI, 0.22-0.63), and intracranial or gastrointestinal bleeding (RR, 0.65; 95% CI, 0.42-0.98) and with borderline significant reductions in ischemic stroke (RR, 0.63; 95% CI, 0.40-1.00) and major bleeding (RR, 0.73; 95% CI, 0.53-1.00). In addition, risks of efficacy and safety outcomes of NOACs versus warfarin were similar between AF patients with and without cancer. Conclusions In patients with AF and cancer, compared with warfarin, NOACs had lower or similar rates of thromboembolic and bleeding events and posed a reduced risk of venous thromboembolism.

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).

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.

Tromboc@t Working Group recommendations for management in patients receiving direct oral anticoagulants. / Recomendaciones del Grupo Catalán de Trombosis (Tromboc@t Working Group) para el tratamiento de los pacientes que reciben anticoagulantes orales directos.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: In recent years, direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) have become an alternative to vitamin K antagonists (VKA) for the prevention of stroke and systemic embolism in patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF) as well as for prevention and treatment of deep venous thrombosis. Pivotal trials have demonstrated non-inferiority and potential superiority compared to warfarin, which increases the options of anticoagulant treatment. In our setting, the Anticoagulant Treatment Units (ATUs) and Primary Care Centres (PCCs) play an important role in the education, follow-up, adherence control and management in special situations of anticoagulated patients. These considerations have motivated us to elaborate the present consensus document that aims to establish clear recommendations that incorporate the findings of scientific research into clinical practice to improve the quality of care in the field of anticoagulation. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A group of experts from the Catalan Thrombosis Group (TROMBOC@T) reviewed all published literature from 2009 to 2016, in order to provide recommendations based on clinical evidence. RESULTS: As a result of the project, a set of practical recommendations have been established that will facilitate treatment, education, follow-up and management in special situations of anticoagulated patients with ACODs. CONCLUSIONS: Progressive increase in the use of DOACs calls for measures to establish and homogenise clinical management guidelines for patients anticoagulated with DOACs in ATUs and PCCs.

Treatment and discharge patterns among patients hospitalized with non-valvular atrial fibrillation transitioning from the inpatient to outpatient setting.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate inpatient oral anticoagulant (OAC) treatment, discharge location, and post-discharge OAC treatment for patients hospitalized with non-valvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF). RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: Retrospective study using claims data linked to hospital electronic health records (EHR). Patients (n = 2,484) were hospitalized with a primary (38%) or secondary (62%) diagnosis of AF without evidence of mitral valvular heart disease or valve replacement between January 2009 and September 2013. Inpatient OAC treatment was identified from EHR data. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Inpatient and post-discharge OAC treatment [direct OAC (DOAC; apixaban, rivaroxaban, dabigatran), warfarin, no OAC] and discharge location (long-term care, home health-care, home self-care). RESULTS: Mean age was 72.6 years, 61.2% were male, and 89.5% had a CHA2DS2-VASc score ≥2. Overall, 6.4% received a DOAC, 38.0% warfarin, and 55.6% no OAC during hospitalization. Compared to other treatment groups, patients receiving DOAC were younger and more likely to be male. The majority (72.2%) were discharged to home health-care, 13.2% home self-care, and 6.0% long-term care. Among patients who were treated with warfarin during hospitalization, 40.3% filled a warfarin prescription within 30 days post-discharge, whereas among patients who were treated with a DOAC, 52.4% filled a DOAC prescription within 30 days post-discharge. Some NVAF patients not treated with an OAC during hospitalization filled a prescription for warfarin (18.0%) or DOAC (1.9%) within 30 days post-discharge. Results were similar among patients with CHA2DS2-VASc score ≥2. CONCLUSIONS: Most patients hospitalized for NVAF were discharged to home support, and the majority did not have OAC treatment during hospitalization or the 30 days post-discharge. Additional investigation should be conducted on trends beyond 30 days post-hospitalization, and the reasons for not receiving anticoagulation therapy in patients at moderate-to-severe risk of stroke or systemic embolism. Helping to avoid preventable strokes is an important goal for public health.