Comparison of High- and Low-Dose Rivaroxaban Regimens in Elderly East Asian Patients With Atrial Fibrillation.

BACKGROUND: 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, rivaroxaban 20 mg was the on-label dose, and the dose-reduction criterion for rivaroxaban was a creatinine clearance of < 50 mL/min. Some Asian countries are using reduced doses label according to the J-ROCKET AF trial. The aim of this study was to assess the safety and efficacy of a high-dose rivaroxaban regimen (HDRR, 20/15 mg) and low-dose rivaroxaban regimen (LDRR, 15/10 mg) among elderly East Asian patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) in real-world practice. METHODS: This study was a multicenter, prospective, non-interventional observational study designed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of rivaroxaban in AF patients > 65 years of age with or without renal impairment. RESULTS: A total of 1,093 patients (mean age, 72.8 ± 5.8 years; 686 [62.9%] men) were included in the analysis, with 493 patients allocated to the HDRR group and 598 patients allocated to the LDRR group. A total of 765 patients received 15 mg of rivaroxaban (203 in the HDRR group and 562 in the LDRR group). There were no significant differences in the incidence rates of major bleeding (adjusted hazard ratio [HR], 0.64; 95% confidential interval [CI], 0.21-1.93), stroke (adjusted HR, 3.21; 95% CI, 0.54-19.03), and composite outcomes (adjusted HR, 1.13; 95% CI, 0.47-2.69) between the HDRR and LDRR groups. CONCLUSION: This study revealed the safety and effectiveness of either dose regimen of rivaroxaban in an Asian population for stroke prevention of AF. Considerable numbers of patients are receiving LDRR therapy in real-world practice in Asia. Both regimens were safe and effective for these patients. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04096547.

Perioperative Treatment with Rivaroxaban and Dabigatran on Changes of Coagulation and Platelet Activation Biomarkers following Left Atrial Appendage Closure.

Insufficient data exist regarding the investigation of the impact of novel oral anticoagulants (NOACs) on coagulation activation biomarkers in the context of left atrial appendage closure (LAAC) and device-related thrombosis (DRT). The study was designed to investigate the changes and presence of coagulation activation biomarkers between different antithrombotic strategies following LAAC. A total of 120 nonvalvular atrial fibrillation patients intolerant of long-term anticoagulants, who underwent successful WATCHMAN closure implantation, were enrolled (rivaroxaban, n = 82; dabigatran, n = 38). Blood samples were obtained from left atrium (LA) and left atrial appendage (LAA) during the operation and fasting blood samples on the same day of LAAC and 45 days after discharge. The biochemical indicators, thrombin-antithrombin complex (TAT), soluble P-selectin (sP-selectin), von Willebrand factor (vWF), and CD40 ligand (CD40L), were measured by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay. The primary endpoints of this study were the efficacy and safety characteristics of different antithrombotic strategies, including DRT incidence, stroke or transient ischemic attack, systemic embolism, and clinical major and nonmajor bleeding complications during the follow-up of 180 days. The results revealed that TAT, vWF, sP-selectin, and CD40L levels in vein were significantly reduced by 2.4% (p = 0.043), 5.0% (p < 0.001), 8.7% (p < 0.001), and 2.5% (p = 0.043) from their baseline levels after rivaroxaban treatment. Conversely, no significant changes were detected in the dabigatran group. Furthermore, the plasma levels of platelet activation biomarkers (CD40L and sP-selectin) in both LA and LAA groups were significantly lower after anticoagulation with rivaroxaban, as compared to dabigatran treatment (CD40L: 554.62 ± 155.54 vs. 445.02 ± 130.04 for LA p = 0.0013, 578.51 ± 156.28 vs. 480.13 ± 164.37 for LAA p = 0.0052; sP-selectin: 2849.07 ± 846.69 vs. 2225.54 ± 799.96 for LA p = 0.0105, 2915.52 ± 1402.40 vs. 2203.41 ± 1061.67 for LAA p = 0.0022). Notably, the present study suggests that rivaroxaban may be more effective in the prevention of DRT for patients undergoing LAAC.

Clot time ratio (CTR) and treatment outcomes in Apixaban-treated atrial fibrillation patients.

There are clinical situations where information about the anticoagulant effects of Apixaban could be useful. Specialised methods for measuring Apixaban concentrations are not available at all medical laboratories while methods for measuring the functional effects of Apixaban, using clot time ratio (CTR), can be performed in most medical laboratories around the clock using well-established measurement procedures. The aim of this study was to investigate CTR in trough and peak samples during Apixaban treatment of atrial fibrillation and to correlate the findings to bleeds and thrombotic events. Three trough- and three peak samples from 61 patients (31 on Apixaban 5 mg twice daily and 30 on Apixaban 2.5 mg twice daily) were analysed with MRX PT DOAC. Patients were followed for 30 + /-15 months, and bleeds and thrombotic events were documented. The effect of Apixaban could be measured with MRX PT DOAC and there was a statistically significant difference between CTR in trough samples compared to peak samples (p < 0.001). A total of 21 patients suffered bleeds during follow-up; two patients suffered major bleeds, and 19 suffered minor bleeds. Patients with major bleeds had both mean peak- and mean trough CTR above the respective first to third quartile (Q1-Q3) range. Four patients suffered thromboembolic events. Generally, the peak CTRs were below or in the lower end of the peak Q1-Q3 for these patients. The new test MRX PT DOAC can be used to measure the effect of Apixaban during the treatment of atrial fibrillation. High mean peak- and mean trough CTR were seen in 2 patients with major bleeds, and low peak CTR was seen in 4 patients with thromboembolic events.

Toward Genetic Testing of Rivaroxaban? Insights from a Systematic Review on the Role of Genetic Polymorphism in Rivaroxaban Therapy.

BACKGROUND: Investigations into the rivaroxaban response from the perspective of genetic variation have been relatively recent and wide in scope, whereas there is no consensus on the necessity of genetic testing of rivaroxaban. Thus, this systematic review aims to thoroughly evaluate the relationship between genetic polymorphisms and rivaroxaban outcomes. METHODS: The PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), and Chinese databases were searched to 23 October 2022. We included cohort studies reporting the pharmacogenetic correlation of rivaroxaban. Outcomes measured included efficacy (all-cause mortality, thromboembolic events and coagulation-related tests), safety (major bleeding, clinically relevant non-major bleeding [CRNMB] and any hemorrhage), and pharmacokinetic outcomes. A narrative synthesis was performed to summarize findings from individual studies according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses and the reporting guideline for Synthesis Without Meta-Analysis. RESULTS: A total of 12 studies published between 2019 and 2022 involving 1364 patients were included. Ten, one, and six studies focused on the ABCB1, ABCG2, and CYP gene polymorphisms, respectively. Pharmacokinetic outcomes accounted for the majority of the outcomes reported (n = 11), followed by efficacy (n = 5) [including prothrombin time (PT) or international normalized ratio (n = 3), platelet inhibition rate (PIR) or platelet reactivity units (PRUs; n = 1), thromboembolic events (n = 1)], and safety (n = 5) [including major bleeding (n = 2), CRNMB (n = 2), any hemorrhage (n = 1)]. For ABCB1 gene polymorphism, the relationship between PT and ABCB1 rs1045642 was inconsistent across studies, however there was no pharmacogenetic relationship with other efficacy outcomes. Safety associations were found in ABCB1 rs4148738 and major bleeding, ABCB1 rs4148738 and CRNMB, ABCB1 rs1045642 and CRNMB, and ABCB1 rs2032582 and hemorrhage. Pharmacokinetic results were inconsistent among studies. For ABCG2 gene polymorphism, no correlation was observed between ABCG2 rs2231142 and dose-adjusted trough concentration (Cmin/D). For CYP gene polymorphisms, PIR or PRUs have a relationship with CYP2C19 rs12248560, however bleeding or pharmacokinetic effects did not show similar results. CONCLUSIONS: Currently available data are insufficient to confirm the relationship between clinical or pharmacokinetic outcomes of rivaroxaban and gene polymorphisms. Proactive strategies are advised as a priority in clinical practice rather than detection of SNP genotyping. CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRATION: PROSPERO registration number CRD42022347907.

Safety outcomes of direct oral anticoagulants in older adults with atrial fibrillation: a systematic review and meta-analysis of (subgroup analyses from) randomized controlled trials.

Balancing stroke prevention and risk of bleeding in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) is challenging. Direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) are by now considered standard of care for treating patients with AF in international guidelines. Our objective was to assess the safety of long-term intake of DOACs in older adults with AF. We included RCTs in elderly (≥ 65 years) patients with AF. A systematic search in MEDLINE and EMBASE was performed on 19 April 2022. For determination of risk of bias, the RoB 2 tool was applied. We pooled outcomes using random-effects meta-analyses. The quality of evidence was assessed using GRADE. Eleven RCTs with a total of 63,374 patients were identified. Two RCTs compared apixaban with either warfarin or aspirin, four edoxaban with either placebo, aspirin, or vitamin K antagonists (VKAs), two dabigatran with warfarin and three rivaroxaban with warfarin. DOACs probably reduce mortality in elderly patients with AF (HR 0.89 95%CI 0.77 to 1.02). Low-dose DOACs likely reduce bleeding compared to VKAs (HR ranged from 0.47 to 1.01). For high-dose DOACS the risk of bleeding varied widely (HR ranged from 0.80 to 1.40). We found that low-dose DOACs probably decrease mortality in AF patients. Moreover, apixaban and probably edoxaban are associated with fewer major or clinically relevant bleeding (MCRB) events compared to VKAs. For dabigatran and rivaroxaban, the risk of MCRB varies depending on dose. Moreover, subgroup analyses indicate that in the very old (≥ 85) the risk for MCRB events might be increased when using DOACs.Registration: PROSPERO: CRD42020187876.

Switching from Dual Antiplatelet Therapy with Aspirin Plus a P2Y12 Inhibitor to Dual Pathway Inhibition with Aspirin Plus Vascular-Dose Rivaroxaban: The Switching Anti-Platelet and Anti-Coagulant Therapy (SWAP-AC) Study.

BACKGROUND: To date, there are no data on switching to dual pathway inhibition (DPI) patients who have completed a guideline-recommended dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) regimen. OBJECTIVES: To assess the feasibility of switching from DAPT to DPI and to compare the pharmacodynamic (PD) profiles of these treatments. METHODS: This was a prospective, randomized, PD study conducted in 90 patients with chronic coronary syndrome (CCS) on DAPT with aspirin (81 mg/qd) plus a P2Y12 inhibitor (clopidogrel [75 mg/qd; n = 30], ticagrelor [90 mg/bid; n = 30], or prasugrel [10 mg/qd; n = 30]). Patients in each cohort were randomized to maintain DAPT or switch to DPI (aspirin 81 mg/qd plus rivaroxaban 2.5 mg/bid). PD assessments included: VerifyNow P2Y12 reaction units; light transmittance aggregometry following stimuli with adenosine diphosphate (ADP), tissue factor (TF), and a combination of collagen, ADP, and TF (maximum platelet aggregation %); thrombin generation (TG). Assays were performed at baseline and 30 days postrandomization. RESULTS: Switching from DAPT to DPI occurred without major side effects. DAPT was associated with enhanced P2Y12 inhibition, while DPI with reduced TG. Platelet-mediated global thrombogenicity (primary endpoint) showed no differences between DAPT and DPI in the ticagrelor (14.5% [0.0-63.0] vs. 20.0% [0.0-70.0]; p = 0.477) and prasugrel (20.0% [0.0-66.0] vs. 4.0% [0.0-70.0]; p = 0.482), but not clopidogrel (27.0% [0.0-68.0] vs. 53.0% [0.0-81.0]; p = 0.011), cohorts. CONCLUSION: In patients with CCS, switching from different DAPT regimens to DPI was feasible, showing enhanced P2Y12 inhibition with DAPT and reduced TG with DPI, with no differences in platelet-mediated global thrombogenicity between DPI and ticagrelor- and prasugrel-, but not clopidogrel-, based DAPT. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: http://www. CLINICALTRIALS: gov Unique Identifier: NCT04006288.

Calibration-free electrochemical sensor to monitor factor-Xa inhibitors at the point-of-care anticoagulation therapy.

This article presents a novel proof of concept for the blood plasma quantification of clinically relevant concentrations of direct oral anticoagulants, DOACs, including rivaroxaban and edoxaban, as well as low-molecular-weight heparins, LMWHs, such as enoxaparin and dalteparin, utilising a calibration-free disposable electrochemical sensor with co-facing electrodes. A dose-response curve was generated for rivaroxaban and edoxaban to demonstrate the sensor's ability to detect ≥9.00 ng mL-1 rivaroxaban and quantify it in the 11.0-140 ng mL-1 range. Similarly, the lower detection limit for edoxaban was 12.9 ng mL-1, with a quantification range of 16.8-140 ng mL-1. The significance of this sensor lies in its ability to quantify rivaroxaban and edoxaban below 30 ng mL-1, which is crucial in emergency care centres when patients undergoing DOAC therapy require emergency surgery or reversal of DOACs due to bleeding or ischemic stroke. Furthermore, the sensor can detect ≥0.016 IU mL-1 enoxaparin and ≥0.013 IU mL-1 dalteparin and quantify them in the 0.025-0.75 and 0.019-0.75 IU mL-1 range, respectively. Additionally, a dose-response curve was presented to demonstrate the potential ability of this sensor to quantify factor-Xa inhibitors independently of which DOACs or LMWHs are used. With the assay completed in less than 30 s using a minimal volume of 7 µL sample, the possibility to work at physiological pH and under calibration-free format makes this assay an excellent candidate for point-of-care testing.

Dual antithrombotic therapy dose-dependently alters hemostatic plug structure and function.

BACKGROUND: Antithrombotic medications carry an inherent risk of bleeding, which may be exacerbated when anticoagulant and antiplatelet therapeutics are combined. Prior studies have shown different effects of antiplatelet vs anticoagulant drugs on the structure and function of hemostatic plugs in vivo. OBJECTIVES: We examined whether dual antithrombotic treatment consisting of combined antiplatelet and anticoagulant therapeutics alters hemostatic plug structure and function differently from treatment with either therapeutic alone. METHODS: Mice were treated with the P2Y12 antagonist clopidogrel and the factor Xa inhibitor rivaroxaban across a range of doses, either alone or in combination. The hemostatic response was assessed using a mouse jugular vein puncture injury model. Platelet accumulation and fibrin deposition were evaluated using quantitative multiphoton fluorescence microscopy, and bleeding times were recorded. RESULTS: Mice treated with clopidogrel alone exhibited a decrease in platelet accumulation at the site of injury, with prolonged bleeding times only at the highest doses of clopidogrel used. Mice treated with rivaroxaban alone instead showed a reduction in fibrin deposition with no impact on bleeding. Mice treated with both clopidogrel and rivaroxaban exhibited platelet and fibrin accumulation that was similar to that with either drug given alone; however, dual antithrombotic therapy resulted in impaired hemostasis at doses that had no impact on bleeding when given in isolation. CONCLUSION: Combined administration of antiplatelet and anticoagulant therapeutics exacerbates bleeding as compared to that with either drug alone, potentially via combined loss of both adenosine 5'-diphosphate- and thrombin-mediated platelet activation. These findings enhance our understanding of the bleeding risk associated with dual antithrombotic therapy.

Treatment of cancer-associated venous thromboembolism: A focus on special populations.

Current evidence-based clinical practice guidelines recommend the use of both low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) and direct factor Xa inhibitors (apixapan, edoxaban and rivaroxaban) as first-line options for the treatment of venous thromboembolism (VTE) in patients with cancer. However, most of these guidelines refer to the general cancer patient population and provide limited guidance for specific subgroups of patients at particularly high risk of bleeding, such as those with gastrointestinal cancers, primary or metastatic brain tumors, thrombocytopenia, or renal impairment. In these complex populations, the management of cancer-associated thrombosis (CAT) poses unique challenges and requires a nuanced approach based on the primum non nocere principle. This comprehensive review critically examines the relevant literature and discusses the therapeutic options currently available for the management of CAT in these special situations.

Benefits and Harms of Standard Versus Reduced-Dose Direct Oral Anticoagulant Therapy for Older Adults With Multiple Morbidities and Atrial Fibrillation.

Background Dose reduction of direct oral anticoagulant (DOAC) medications is inconsistently applied to older adults with multiple morbidities, potentially due to perceived harms and unknown benefits of standard dosing. Methods and Results Using 2013 to 2017 US Medicare claims linked to Minimum Data Set records, we conducted a retrospective cohort study. We identified DOAC initiators (apixaban, dabigatran, rivaroxaban) aged ≥65 years with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation residing in a nursing home. We estimated inverse-probability of treatment weights for DOAC dose using propensity scores. We examined safety (hospitalization for major bleeding) and effectiveness outcomes (all-cause mortality, thrombosis [myocardial infarction, stroke, systemic embolism, venous thromboembolism]). We estimated hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% CIs using cause-specific hazard-regression models. Of 21 878 DOAC initiators, 48% received reduced dosing. The mean age of residents was 82.0 years, 66% were female, and 31% had moderate/severe cognitive impairment. After estimating inverse-probability of treatment weights, standard dosing was associated with a higher rate of bleeding (HR, 1.18 [95% CI, 1.03-1.37]; 9.4 versus 8.0 events per 100 person-years). Standard-dose therapy was associated with the highest rates of bleeding among those aged >80 years (9.1 versus 6.7 events per 100 person-years) and with a body mass index <30 kg/m2 (9.4 versus 7.4 events per 100 person-years). There was no association of dosing with mortality (HR, 0.99 [95% CI, 0.96-1.06]) or thrombotic events (HR, 1.16 [95% CI, 0.96-1.41]). Conclusions In this nationwide study of nursing home residents with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation, we found a higher rate of bleeding and little difference in effectiveness of standard versus reduced-dose DOAC treatment. Our results support the use of reduced-dose DOACs for many older adults with multiple morbidities.

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.

Trends in prescribing and outcomes in obese versus non-obese patients receiving rivaroxaban therapy: an observational study using real-world data.

PURPOSE: To investigate real-world prescribing trends and clinical outcomes based on body mass index (BMI) categorization in patients who received rivaroxaban therapy. METHODS: This was a retrospective cohort study involving all patients who received rivaroxaban therapy across all Hamad Medical Corporation (HMC) hospitals from 2015 to 2020. RESULTS: The number of patients initiated on rivaroxaban therapy significantly increased from 152 (3.3%) in 2015 to 1342 (28.9%) in 2020 (p <0.001). Within BMI categories, a similar increasing trend was observed in underweight, normal, and overweight patients, while from 2018 to 2020, there was a decreasing trend in rivaroxaban prescribing in all obese classes. The prevalence rate of all-cause mortality differed significantly between the BMI groups, with the highest mortality being among morbidly obese patients (BMI ≥ 40 kg/m2) (p< 0.001). On the other hand, no significant differences were found between the BMI groups in terms of bleeding, pulmonary embolism, deep vein thrombosis and stroke incidences. Multivariate logistic regression analyses showed that the likelihood of all-cause mortality was significantly higher in overweight and all categories of obese patients compared to underweight patients: overweight (OR: 5.3, 95% CI: 2.3-11.9, p< 0.001); obese class 1 (OR: 5.4, 95% CI: 2.3 - 12.2, p< 0.001); obese class 2 (OR: 6.5, 95% CI: 2.7 - 15.6, p< 0.001); and obese class 3 (OR: 3.7, 95% CI: 1.6 - 8.7, p = 0.003). CONCLUSIONS: Rivaroxaban prescribing has significantly increased over the years across general population, with a noticeable decline in obese population during the last few years (from 2018 onwards). Furthermore, an appreciable association was evident between all-cause mortality and BMI of these patients.

Comparison of the efficacy and safety between rivaroxaban and dabigatran in the treatment of acute portal vein thrombosis in cirrhosis.

BACKGROUND: New oral anticoagulants (NOACs) have been becoming prevalent in recent years and are increasingly used in the treatment of port vein thrombosis. The difference of the efficacy and safety between rivaroxaban and dabigatran remains unclear in the treatment of cirrhotic patients with acute portal vein thrombosis (PVT). METHODS: This retrospective study included all consecutive cirrhotic patients with acute portal vein thrombosis in our institute from January 2020 to December 2021. The patients received oral anticoagulation with rivaroxaban or dabigatran. The demographic, clinical, and imaging data of patients were collected. The diagnosis of acute PVT was confirmed by imaging examinations. The severity of liver cirrhosis was assessed using Child-Pugh score and Model for End-Stage Liver Disease (MELD) score. Outcomes included recanalization (complete, partial, and persistent occlusion), liver function, bleedings, and survival. The log-rank test was used to compare Kaplan-Meier distributions of time-to-event outcomes. The Cox proportional hazards model was used to calculate hazard ratios (HRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). RESULTS: A total of 94 patients were included, 52 patients (55%) received rivaroxaban and 42 (45%) with dabigatran. The complete and partial recanalization of PVT was observed in 41 patients. There was no significant difference in complete recanalization, partial recanalization, and persistent occlusion between the two groups. With multivariate analysis, D-dimer (HR 1.165, 95% CI 1.036-1.311, p = 0.011) was independent predictors of complete recanalization. The Child-Pugh score (p = 0.001) was significantly improved in both two groups after anticoagulation, respectively. However, there was no difference between the two groups. The probability of survival was 94%, 95% in the rivaroxaban and dabigatran groups (log-rank p = 0.830). Major bleedings were reported in 3 patients (6%) in rivaroxaban group and 1 patient (2%) in dabigatran group (p = 0.646). Six patients (12%) in rivaroxaban group experienced minor bleeding, and five (12%) from dabigatran group (p = 0.691). CONCLUSIONS: The efficacy and safety were comparable between rivaroxaban and dabigatran in the treatment of cirrhotic patients with acute portal vein thrombosis. And D-dimer can contribute to the prediction of PVT recanalization in cirrhotic patients.

Association of type of oral anticoagulation with risk of bleeding in 45,114 patients with venous thromboembolism during initial and extended treatment-A nationwide register-based study.

BACKGROUND: Safety data for different anticoagulant medications in venous thromboembolism (VTE) are scarce, in particular for extended treatment. OBJECTIVES: To compare major bleeding rates depending on the choice of anticoagulation during initial (first 6 months) and extended treatment (6 months up to 5 years). METHODS: A nationwide register-based study including cancer-free patients with a first-time VTE between 2014 and 2020. Cox proportional hazards models were used to compare bleeding rates. RESULTS: We included 6558 patients on warfarin, 18,196 on rivaroxaban, and 19,498 on apixaban. At 6 months, 4750 (72.4%) remained on warfarin, 11,366 (62.5%) on rivaroxaban, and 11,940 (61.2%) on apixaban. During initial treatment, major bleeding rates were 3.86 (95% CI 3.14-4.58), 2.93 (2.55-3.31), and 1.95 (1.65-2.25) per 100 patient-years for warfarin, rivaroxaban, and apixaban, respectively, yielding adjusted hazard ratios (aHRs) of 0.89 (95% CI 0.71-1.12) for rivaroxaban versus warfarin, 0.55 (0.43-0.71) for apixaban versus warfarin, and 0.62 (0.50-0.76) for apixaban versus rivaroxaban. During extended treatment, major bleeding rates were 1.55 (1.19-1.91), 1.05 (0.85-1.26), and 0.96 (0.78-1.15) per 100 patient-years for warfarin, rivaroxaban, and apixaban, respectively, with aHRs of 0.72 (0.53-0.99) for rivaroxaban versus warfarin, 0.60 (0.44-0.82) for apixaban versus warfarin, and 0.85 (0.64-1.12) for apixaban versus rivaroxaban. Previous bleeding and increasing age were risk factors for bleeding both during initial and extended treatment. CONCLUSION: Apixaban had a lower bleeding risk than warfarin or rivaroxaban during initial treatment. During extended treatment, bleeding risk was similar for apixaban and rivaroxaban, and higher with warfarin.

Comparison of bleeding and ischemic events with apixaban vs. rivaroxaban in triple antithrombotic therapy regimens.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the risk of readmissions for major bleeding within one year between apixaban and rivaroxaban as a component of triple antithrombotic therapy. METHODS: This study was a multicenter, retrospective cohort study conducted at two academic medical centers in the Western New York and New York City region between July 1, 2011 and September 25, 2019. Adult patients were included if they were diagnosed with atrial fibrillation or venous thromboembolism and discharged on new triple antithrombotic therapy. The primary outcome compared the rates of 1-year readmission for major bleeding between apixaban and rivaroxaban groups. Secondary outcomes included rate of ischemic outcomes. Time to event analysis was determined with a Kaplan-Meier plot and Cox proportional hazard ratios (HR). RESULTS: A total of 378 patients were included in the study, 212 in the apixaban group and 166 in the rivaroxaban group. Within 1 year, readmission for major bleeding events occurred in six (2.8%) patients in the apixaban group and four (2.4%) patients in the rivaroxaban group ( P  = 1.000). After adjustment, the major bleeding event rate was not statistically significantly different between apixaban and rivaroxaban [adjusted hazard ratio (aHR) 0.68, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.12-3.77; P  = 0.6624]. Higher albumin levels were identified to be protective against major bleeding related readmission events (aHR 0.18, 95% CI 0.05-0.63; P  = 0.0072). The ischemic outcome occurred in seven (3.3%) patients in the apixaban group and three (1.8%) in the rivaroxaban group ( P  = 0.7368). CONCLUSION: Use of apixaban or rivaroxaban in a triple antithrombotic regimen was not associated with bleeding or ischemic outcomes.

Secondary right atrial thrombosis in three dogs: Antithrombotics therapy and echocardiographic follow-up.

Three dogs were diagnosed with right atrial thrombosis, thought to be secondary to systemic diseases. Specifically, two cases had hyperadrenocorticism and one case was diagnosed with pancreatitis with acute renal injury. In all cases, the thrombi were found within the right atrium, necessitating a differentiation from cardiac neoplasia. In all three cases, the structures assumed to be thrombi had irregular margins with interspersed hypoechoic regions, which were later confirmed as thrombi based on the responsiveness to therapy. All three cases were prescribed with the combination of clopidogrel and rivaroxaban.The thrombi gradually disappeared after initiation of the combination therapy. Complete resolution of right atrial thrombosis was noted in each dog treated with clopidogrel and rivaroxaban. This combination therapy appears to be safe and well tolerated. Diligent observation of the echocardiographic findings and clinical course allows the diagnosis of thrombosis.

Initial therapeutic anticoagulation with rivaroxaban compared to prophylactic therapy with heparins in moderate to severe COVID-19: results of the COVID-PREVENT randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: COVID-19 is associated with a prothrombotic state. Current guidelines recommend prophylactic anticoagulation upon hospitalization. METHODS: COVID-PREVENT, an open-label, multicenter, randomized, clinical trial enrolled patients (≥ 18 years) with moderate to severe COVID-19 and age-adjusted D-dimers > 1.5 upper limit of normal (ULN). The participants were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive either therapeutic anticoagulation with rivaroxaban 20 mg once daily or thromboprophylaxis with a heparin (SOC) for at least 7 days followed by prophylactic anticoagulation with rivaroxaban 10 mg once daily for 28 days or no thromboprophylaxis. The primary efficacy outcome was the D-dimer level and the co-primary efficacy outcome the 7-category ordinal COVID-19 scale by WHO at 7 days post randomization. The secondary outcome was time to the composite event of either venous or arterial thromboembolism, new myocardial infarction, non-hemorrhagic stroke, all-cause death or progression to intubation and invasive ventilation up to 35 days post randomization. RESULTS: The primary efficacy outcome D-dimer at 7 days was not different between patients assigned to therapeutic (n = 55) or prophylactic anticoagulation (n = 56) (1.21 mg/L [0.79, 1.86] vs 1.27 mg/L [0.79, 2.04], p = 0.78). In the whole study population D-dimer was significantly lower at 7 days compared to baseline (1.05 mg/L [0.75, 1.48] vs 1.57 mg/L [1.13, 2.19], p < 0.0001). Therapy with rivaroxaban compared to SOC was not associated an improvement on the WHO 7-category ordinal scale at 7 days (p = 0.085). Rivaroxaban improved the clinical outcome measured by the score in patients with a higher baseline D-dimer > 2.0 ULN (exploratory analysis; 0.632 [0.516, 0.748], p = 0.026). The secondary endpoint occurred in 6 patients (10.9%) in the rivaroxaban group and in 12 (21.4%) in the SOC group (time-to-first occurrence of the components of the secondary outcome: HR 0.5; 95% CI 0.15-1.67; p = 0.264). There was no difference in fatal or non-fatal major or clinically relevant non-major bleeding between the groups. CONCLUSIONS: Therapeutic anticoagulation with rivaroxaban compared to prophylactic anticoagulation with a heparin did not improve surrogates of clinical outcome in patients with moderate to severe COVID-19. Whether initial rivaroxaban at therapeutic doses might be superior to thromboprophylaxis in patients with COVID-19 and a high risk as defined by D-dimer > 2 ULN needs confirmation in further studies.

Safety and Effectiveness of Direct Oral Anticoagulants for the Treatment of Gastrointestinal Cancer-Associated Venous Thromboembolism.

BACKGROUND: Patients with gastrointestinal cancer (GICA) are at high risk for venous thromboembolism (VTE). Data from randomized clinical trials in cancer-associated VTE suggest that direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) conferred similar or superior efficacy but a heterogeneous safety profile in patients with GICA. We compared the safety and effectiveness of DOACs in patients with GICA and VTE at MD Anderson Cancer Center. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This was a retrospective chart review of patients with GICA and VTE receiving treatment with DOACs for a minimum of 6 months. Primary outcomes were the proportion of patients experiencing major bleeding (MB), clinically relevant non-major bleeding (CRNMB), and recurrent VTE. Secondary outcomes were time to bleeding and recurrent VTE. RESULTS: A cohort of 433 patients with GICA who were prescribed apixaban (n = 300), or rivaroxaban (n = 133) were included. MB occurred in 3.7% (95% confidence interval [CI] 2.1-5.9), CRNMB in 5.3% (95% CI 3.4-7.9), and recurrent VTE in 7.4% (95% CI 5.1-10.3). The cumulative incidence rates of CRNMB and recurrent VTE were not significantly different when comparing apixaban to rivaroxaban. CONCLUSION: Apixaban and rivaroxaban had a similar risk of recurrent VTE and bleeding and could be considered as anticoagulant options in selected patients with GICA and VTE.

ORal anticoaGulants in diAbetic and Nondiabetic patients with nOn-valvular atrial fibrillatioN (ORGANON).

BACKGROUND: Diabetes represents a pro-thrombotic condition. OBJECTIVES: The primary objective was to evaluate the effects of Vitamin K Antagonist (VKA) compared to direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) in diabetic and nondiabetic patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation, newly diagnosed. The secondary objective was to evaluate the effects on the risk of bleeding. METHODS: We enrolled 300 patients with newly diagnosed atrial fibrillation. One hundred and sixteen patients were taking warfarin, 31 acenocumarol, 22 dabigatran, 80 rivaroxaban, 34 apixaban, and 17 edoxaban. We evaluated: anthropometric parameters, glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c), fasting and post-prandial glucose (FPG, and PPG), lipid profile, Lp(a), small and dense low-density lipoprotein (SD-LDL), oxidized LDL (Ox-LDL), I-troponin (I-Tn), creatinine, transaminases, iron, red blood cells (RBC); hemoglobin (Hb), platelets (PLT), fibrinogen, D-dimer, anti-thrombin III, C-reactive protein (Hs-CRP), Metalloproteinases-2 (MMP-2), Metalloproteinases-9 (MMP-9), and incidence of bleeding. RESULTS: We did not record any differences among nondiabetic patients between VKA and DOACs. However, when we considered diabetic patients, we found a slight, but significant improvement of triglycerides and SD-LDL. As regards incidence of bleeding, minor bleeding was more frequent in VKA diabetic group compared to DOACs diabetic group; furthermore, the incidence of major bleeding was higher with VKA in nondiabetic and diabetic group, compared to patients with DOACs. Among DOACs, we recorded a higher incidence of bleeding (minor and major) with dabigatran compared to rivaroxaban, apixaban and edoxaban in nondiabetic and diabetic patients. CONCLUSION: DOACs seem to be metabolically favourable in diabetic patients. Regarding incidence of bleeding, DOACs with the exception of dabigatran, seem better than VKA in diabetic patients.