Rivaroxaban in Patients with Heart Failure, Sinus Rhythm, and Coronary Disease.

BACKGROUND: Heart failure is associated with activation of thrombin-related pathways, which predicts a poor prognosis. We hypothesized that treatment with rivaroxaban, a factor Xa inhibitor, could reduce thrombin generation and improve outcomes for patients with worsening chronic heart failure and underlying coronary artery disease. METHODS: In this double-blind, randomized trial, 5022 patients who had chronic heart failure, a left ventricular ejection fraction of 40% or less, coronary artery disease, and elevated plasma concentrations of natriuretic peptides and who did not have atrial fibrillation were randomly assigned to receive rivaroxaban at a dose of 2.5 mg twice daily or placebo in addition to standard care after treatment for an episode of worsening heart failure. The primary efficacy outcome was the composite of death from any cause, myocardial infarction, or stroke. The principal safety outcome was fatal bleeding or bleeding into a critical space with a potential for causing permanent disability. RESULTS: Over a median follow-up period of 21.1 months, the primary end point occurred in 626 (25.0%) of 2507 patients assigned to rivaroxaban and in 658 (26.2%) of 2515 patients assigned to placebo (hazard ratio, 0.94; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.84 to 1.05; P=0.27). No significant difference in all-cause mortality was noted between the rivaroxaban group and the placebo group (21.8% and 22.1%, respectively; hazard ratio, 0.98; 95% CI, 0.87 to 1.10). The principal safety outcome occurred in 18 patients who took rivaroxaban and in 23 who took placebo (hazard ratio, 0.80; 95% CI, 0.43 to 1.49; P=0.48). CONCLUSIONS: Rivaroxaban at a dose of 2.5 mg twice daily was not associated with a significantly lower rate of death, myocardial infarction, or stroke than placebo among patients with worsening chronic heart failure, reduced left ventricular ejection fraction, coronary artery disease, and no atrial fibrillation. (Funded by Janssen Research and Development; COMMANDER HF ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01877915 .).

Rivaroxaban versus warfarin in patients with atrial fibrillation enrolled in Latin America: Insights from ROCKET AF.

BACKGROUND: ROCKET AF demonstrated the efficacy and safety of rivaroxaban compared with warfarin for the prevention of stroke and systemic embolism (SE) in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF). We examined baseline characteristics and outcomes in patients enrolled in Latin America compared with the rest of the world (ROW). METHODS: ROCKET AF enrolled 14,264 patients from 45 countries. Of these, 1,878 (13.2%) were from 7 Latin American countries. The clinical characteristics and outcomes (adjusted by baseline characteristics) of these patients were compared with 12,293 patients from the ROW. Treatment outcomes of rivaroxaban compared with warfarin were also stratified by region. RESULTS: The annual rate of stroke/SE was similar in those from Latin American and ROW (P= .63), but all-cause and vascular death were significantly higher than in ROW (HR 1.40, 95% CI 1.20-1.64; HR 1.38, 95% CI 1.14-1.68; P< .001). Rates of major or nonmajor clinically relevant bleeding tended to be lower in Latin America (HR 0.89, 95% CI 0.80-1.0; P= .05). Rates of stroke and/or SE were similar with rivaroxaban and warfarin in patients from Latin America and ROW (HR 0.83, 95% CI 0.54-1.29 vs HR 0.89, 95% CI 0.75-1.07; interaction P= .77). CONCLUSIONS: Patients with AF in Latin America had similar rates of stroke and/or SE, higher rates of vascular death, and lower rates of bleeding compared with patients in the ROW. The effect of rivaroxaban compared with warfarin in Latin America was similar to the ROW. Further studies analyzing patient- and country-specific determinants of these regional differences in Latin America are warranted.

Impact of polyvascular disease on patients with atrial fibrillation: Insights from ROCKET AF.

BACKGROUND: We investigated the impact of polyvascular disease in patients enrolled in ROCKET AF. METHODS: Cox regression models were used to assess clinical outcomes and treatment effects of rivaroxaban compared with warfarin in patients with atrial fibrillation and coronary, peripheral, or carotid artery disease, or any combination of the 3. RESULTS: A total of 655 (4.6%) patients had polyvascular disease (≥2 disease locations), and 3,391 (23.8%) had single-arterial bed disease. Patients with polyvascular disease had similar rates of stroke/systemic embolism but higher rates of cardiovascular and bleeding events when compared with those without vascular disease. Use of rivaroxaban compared with warfarin was associated with higher rates of stroke in patients with polyvascular disease (hazard ratio [HR] 2.41, 95% CI 1.05-5.54); however, this was not seen in patients with single-bed (HR 0.90, 95% CI 0.64-1.28) or no vascular disease (HR 0.85, 95% CI 0.69-1.04; interaction P = .058). There was a significant interaction for major or nonmajor clinically relevant bleeding in patients with polyvascular (HR 1.23, 95% CI 0.91-1.65) and single-bed vascular disease (HR 1.30, 95% CI 1.13-1.49) treated with rivaroxaban compared with warfarin when compared with those without vascular disease (HR 0.95, 95% CI 0.87-1.04; interaction P = .0006). Additional antiplatelet therapy in this population did not improve stroke or cardiovascular outcomes. CONCLUSION: The use of rivaroxaban compared with warfarin was associated with a higher risk of stroke and bleeding in patients with polyvascular disease enrolled in ROCKET AF. Further studies are needed to understand the optimal management of this high-risk population.

On-Treatment Outcomes in Patients With Worsening Renal Function With Rivaroxaban Compared With Warfarin: Insights From ROCKET AF.

BACKGROUND: Despite rapid clinical adoption of novel anticoagulants, it is unknown whether outcomes differ among patients with worsening renal function (WRF) taking these new drugs compared with warfarin. We aimed to determine whether the primary efficacy (stroke or systemic embolism) and safety (major bleeding and nonmajor clinically relevant bleeding) end points from the ROCKET AF trial (Rivaroxaban Once-Daily, Oral, Direct Factor Xa Inhibition Compared With Vitamin K Antagonism for Prevention of Stroke and Embolism Trial in Atrial Fibrillation trial) differed among participants with WRF taking rivaroxaban and those taking warfarin. METHODS: After excluding patients without at least 1 follow-up creatinine measurement (n=1624), we included all remaining patients (n=12 612) randomly assigned to either rivaroxaban or dose-adjusted warfarin. On-treatment WRF (a decrease of >20% from screening creatinine clearance measurement at any time point during the study) was evaluated as a time-dependent covariate in Cox proportional hazards models. RESULTS: Baseline characteristics were generally similar between patients with stable renal function (n=9292) and WRF (n=3320). Rates of stroke or systemic embolism, myocardial infarction, and bleeding were also similar, but WRF patients experienced a higher incidence of vascular death versus stable renal function (2.21 versus 1.41 events per 100 patient-years; P=0.026). WRF patients who were randomized to receive rivaroxaban had a reduction in stroke or systemic embolism compared with those taking warfarin (1.54 versus 3.25 events per 100 patient-years) that was not seen in patients with stable renal function who were randomized to receive rivaroxaban (P=0.050 for interaction). There was no difference in major or nonmajor clinically relevant bleeding among WRF patients randomized to warfarin versus rivaroxaban. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with on-treatment WRF, rivaroxaban was associated with lower rates of stroke and systemic embolism compared with warfarin, without an increase in the composite bleeding end point. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT00403767.

Polypharmacy and the Efficacy and Safety of Rivaroxaban Versus Warfarin in the Prevention of Stroke in Patients With Nonvalvular Atrial Fibrillation.

BACKGROUND: Patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) often take multiple medications. METHODS AND RESULTS: We examined characteristics and compared adjusted outcomes between rivaroxaban and warfarin according to number of concomitant baseline medications and the presence of combined cytochrome P450 3A4 and P-glycoprotein inhibitors 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) study. At baseline, 5101 patients (36%) were on 0 to 4 medications, 7298 (51%) were on 5 to 9, and 1865 (13%) were on ≥ 10. Although polypharmacy was not associated with higher risk of stroke or non-central nervous system embolism (adjusted hazard ratio, 1.02 for ≥ 10 versus 0-4 medications; 95% confidence interval, 0.76-1.38), it was associated with higher risks of the combined end point of stroke, non-central nervous system embolism, vascular death, or myocardial infarction (adjusted hazard ratio, 1.41 for ≥ 10 versus 0-4 medications; 95% confidence interval, 1.18-1.68) and nonmajor clinically relevant or major bleeding (adjusted hazard ratio, 1.47 for ≥ 10 versus 0-4 medications; 95% confidence interval, 1.31-1.65). There was no significant difference in primary efficacy (adjusted interaction P=0.99) or safety outcomes (adjusted interaction P=0.87) between treatment groups by number of medications. Patients treated with 0 to 4 medications had lower rates of major bleeding with rivaroxaban (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.71; 95% confidence interval, 0.52-0.95; interaction P=0.0074). There was no evidence of differential outcomes in those treated with ≥ 1 combined cytochrome P450 3A4 and P-glycoprotein inhibitors. CONCLUSIONS: In a population of patients with atrial fibrillation, two thirds were on ≥ 5 medications. Increasing medication use was associated with higher risk of bleeding but not stroke. Rivaroxaban was tolerated across complex patients on multiple medications. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT00403767.

Digoxin use in patients with atrial fibrillation and adverse cardiovascular outcomes: a retrospective analysis of 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).

BACKGROUND: Digoxin is a widely used drug for ventricular rate control in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF), despite a scarcity of randomised trial data. We studied the use and outcomes of digoxin in 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 (ROCKET AF). METHODS: For this retrospective analysis, we included and classified patients from ROCKET AF on the basis of digoxin use at baseline and during the study. Patients in ROCKET AF were recruited from 45 countries and had AF and risk factors putting them at moderate-to-high risk of stroke, with or without heart failure. We used Cox proportional hazards regression models adjusted for baseline characteristics and drugs to investigate the association of digoxin with all-cause mortality, vascular death, and sudden death. ROCKET AF was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00403767. FINDINGS: In 14,171 randomly assigned patients, digoxin was used at baseline in 5239 (37%). Patients given digoxin were more likely to be female (42% vs 38%) and have a history of heart failure (73% vs 56%), diabetes (43% vs 38%), and persistent AF (88% vs 77%; p<0·0001 for each comparison). After adjustment, digoxin was associated with increased all-cause mortality (5·41 vs 4·30 events per 100 patients-years; hazard ratio 1·17; 95% CI 1·04-1·32; p=0·0093), vascular death (3·55 vs 2·69 per 100 patient-years; 1·19; 1·03-1·39, p=0·0201), and sudden death (1·68 vs 1·12 events per 100 patient-years; 1·36; 1·08-1·70, p=0·0076). INTERPRETATION: Digoxin treatment was associated with a significant increase in all-cause mortality, vascular death, and sudden death in patients with AF. This association was independent of other measured prognostic factors, and although residual confounding could account for these results, these data show the possibility of digoxin having these effects. A randomised trial of digoxin in treatment of AF patients with and without heart failure is needed. FUNDING: Janssen Research & Development and Bayer HealthCare AG.

Blood pressure control and stroke or bleeding risk in anticoagulated patients with atrial fibrillation: Results from the ROCKET AF Trial.

BACKGROUND: We conducted a retrospective analysis examining the association between systolic blood pressure (SBP) or hypertension bracket and stroke risk in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF). METHODS: The study included 14,256 anticoagulated patients in the ROCKET AF trial. Cox proportional hazards models were used to compare the risk of adverse outcomes by European Society of Cardiology hypertension bracket and screening SBP. RESULTS: In total, 90.5% of patients had hypertension (55.8% controlled, 34.6% uncontrolled). The adjusted risk of stroke or systemic embolism (SE) increased significantly for every 10-mm Hg increase in screening SBP (hazard ratio [HR] 1.07, 95% CI 1.02-1.13). There was a trend toward an increased adjusted risk of stroke or SE in patients with controlled (HR 1.22, 95% CI 0.89-1.66) and uncontrolled hypertension (HR 1.42, 95% CI 1.03-1.95) (P = .06). In contrast, the adjusted risk of major bleeding was similar between hypertensive brackets and did not vary significantly by screening SBP. The benefit of rivaroxaban versus warfarin in preventing stroke or SE was consistent among patients regardless of SBP (P interaction = .69). CONCLUSIONS: In a trial of anticoagulated patients with AF, increasing screening SBP was independently associated with stroke and SE, and one-third of patients had uncontrolled hypertension. The relative effectiveness and safety of rivaroxaban versus warfarin were consistent across all levels of screening SBP. A single SBP may be an important factor in reducing the overall risk of stroke and SE in anticoagulated patients with AF.

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.

Hospitalizations in patients with atrial fibrillation: an analysis from ROCKET AF.

AIMS: The high costs associated with treatment for atrial fibrillation (AF) are primarily due to hospital care, but there are limited data to understand the reasons for and predictors of hospitalization in patients with AF. METHODS AND RESULTS: The ROCKET AF trial compared rivaroxaban with warfarin for stroke prophylaxis in AF. We described the frequency of and reasons for hospitalization during study follow-up and utilized Cox proportional hazards models to assess for baseline characteristics associated with all-cause hospitalization. Of 14 171 patients, 14% were hospitalized at least once. Of 2614 total hospitalizations, 41% were cardiovascular including 4% for AF; of the remaining, 12% were for bleeding. Compared with patients not hospitalized, hospitalized patients were older (74 vs. 72 years), and more frequently had diabetes (46 vs. 39%), prior MI (23 vs. 16%), and paroxysmal AF (19 vs. 17%), but less frequently had prior transient ischaemic attack/stroke (49 vs. 56%). After multivariable adjustment, lung disease [hazard ratio (HR) 1.46, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.29-1.66], diabetes [1.22, (1.11-1.34)], prior MI [1.27, (1.13-1.42)], and renal dysfunction [HR 1.07 per 5 unit GFR < 65 mL/min, (1.04-1.10)] were associated with increased hospitalization risk. Treatment assignment was not associated with differential rates of hospitalization. CONCLUSION: Nearly 1 in 7 of the moderate-to-high-risk patients with AF enrolled in this trial was hospitalized within 2 years, and both AF and bleeding were rare causes of hospitalization. Further research is needed to determine whether care pathways directed at comorbid conditions among AF patients could reduce the need for and costs associated with hospitalization.

Higher risk of death and stroke in patients with persistent vs. paroxysmal atrial fibrillation: results from the ROCKET-AF Trial.

AIM: Anticoagulation prophylaxis for stroke is recommended for at-risk patients with either persistent or paroxysmal atrial fibrillation (AF). We compared outcomes in patients with persistent vs. paroxysmal AF receiving oral anticoagulation. METHODS AND RESULTS: Patients randomized 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 (n = 14 264) were grouped by baseline AF category: paroxysmal or persistent. Multivariable adjustment was performed to compare thrombo-embolic events, bleeding, and death between groups, in high-risk subgroups, and across treatment assignment (rivaroxaban or warfarin). Of 14 062 patients, 11 548 (82%) had persistent AF and 2514 (18%) had paroxysmal AF. Patients with persistent AF were marginally older (73 vs. 72, P = 0.03), less likely female (39 vs. 45%, P < 0.0001), and more likely to have previously used vitamin K antagonists (64 vs. 56%, P < 0.0001) compared with patients with paroxysmal AF. In patients randomized to warfarin, time in therapeutic range was similar (58 vs. 57%, P = 0.94). Patients with persistent AF had higher adjusted rates of stroke or systemic embolism (2.18 vs. 1.73 events per 100-patient-years, P = 0.048) and all-cause mortality (4.78 vs. 3.52, P = 0.006). Rates of major bleeding were similar (3.55 vs. 3.31, P = 0.77). Rates of stroke or systemic embolism in both types of AF did not differ by treatment assignment (rivaroxaban vs. warfarin, Pinteraction = 0.6). CONCLUSION: In patients with AF at moderate-to-high risk of stroke receiving anticoagulation, those with persistent AF have a higher risk of thrombo-embolic events and worse survival compared with paroxysmal AF.

Outcomes of temporary interruption of rivaroxaban compared with warfarin in patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation: results from 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).

BACKGROUND: During long-term anticoagulation in atrial fibrillation, temporary interruptions (TIs) of therapy are common, but the relationship between patient outcomes and TIs has not been well studied. We sought to determine reasons for TI, the characteristics of patients undergoing TI, and the relationship between anticoagulant and outcomes among patients with TI. METHODS AND RESULTS: 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 randomized, double-blind, double-dummy study of rivaroxaban and warfarin in nonvalvular atrial fibrillation, baseline characteristics, management, and outcomes, including stroke, non-central nervous system systemic embolism, death, myocardial infarction, and bleeding, were reported in participants who experienced TI (3-30 days) for any reason. The at-risk period for outcomes associated with TI was from TI start to 30 days after resumption of study drug. In 14 236 participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug, 4692 (33%) experienced TI. Participants with TI were similar to the overall ROCKET AF population in regard to baseline clinical characteristics. Only 6% (n=483) of TI incidences involved bridging therapy. Stroke/systemic embolism rates during the at-risk period were similar in rivaroxaban-treated and warfarin-treated participants (0.30% versus 0.41% per 30 days; hazard ratio [confidence interval]=0.74 [0.36-1.50]; P=0.40). Risk of major bleeding during the at-risk period was also similar in rivaroxaban-treated and warfarin-treated participants (0.99% versus 0.79% per 30 days; hazard ratio [confidence interval]=1.26 [0.80-2.00]; P=0.32). CONCLUSIONS: TI of oral anticoagulation is common and is associated with substantial stroke risks and bleeding risks that were similar among patients treated with rivaroxaban or warfarin. Further investigation is needed to determine the optimal management strategy in patients with atrial fibrillation requiring TI of anticoagulation. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT00403767.

Efficacy and safety of rivaroxaban compared with warfarin among elderly patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation 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).

BACKGROUND: Nonvalvular atrial fibrillation is common in elderly patients, who face an elevated risk of stroke but difficulty sustaining warfarin treatment. The oral factor Xa inhibitor rivaroxaban was noninferior to warfarin 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). This prespecified secondary analysis compares outcomes in older and younger patients. METHODS AND RESULTS: There were 6229 patients (44%) aged ≥75 years with atrial fibrillation and ≥2 stroke risk factors randomized to warfarin (target international normalized ratio=2.0-3.0) or rivaroxaban (20 mg daily; 15 mg if creatinine clearance <50 mL/min), double blind. The primary end point was stroke and systemic embolism by intention to treat. Over 10 866 patient-years, older participants had more primary events (2.57% versus 2.05%/100 patient-years; P=0.0068) and major bleeding (4.63% versus 2.74%/100 patient-years; P<0.0001). Stroke/systemic embolism rates were consistent among older (2.29% rivaroxaban versus 2.85% warfarin per 100 patient-years; hazard ratio=0.80; 95% confidence interval, 0.63-1.02) and younger patients (2.00% versus 2.10%/100 patient-years; hazard ratio=0.95; 95% confidence interval, 0.76-1.19; interaction P=0.313), as were major bleeding rates (≥75 years: 4.86% rivaroxaban versus 4.40% warfarin per 100 patient-years; hazard ratio=1.11; 95% confidence interval, 0.92-1.34; <75 years: 2.69% versus 2.79%/100 patient-years; hazard ratio=0.96; 95% confidence interval, 0.78-1.19; interaction P=0.336). Hemorrhagic stroke rates were similar in both age groups; there was no interaction between age and rivaroxaban response. CONCLUSIONS: Elderly patients had higher stroke and major bleeding rates than younger patients, but the efficacy and safety of rivaroxaban relative to warfarin did not differ with age, supporting rivaroxaban as an alternative for the elderly.

Efficacy and safety of rivaroxaban in patients with diabetes and nonvalvular atrial fibrillation: 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).

BACKGROUND: The prevalence of both atrial fibrillation (AF) and diabetes mellitus (DM) are rising, and these conditions often occur together. Also, DM is an independent risk factor for stroke in patients with AF. We aimed to examine the safety and efficacy of rivaroxaban vs warfarin in patients with nonvalvular AF and DM in a prespecified secondary analysis of the ROCKET AF trial. METHODS: We stratified the ROCKET AF population by DM status, assessed associations with risk of outcomes by DM status and randomized treatment using Cox proportional hazards models, and tested for interactions between randomized treatments. For efficacy, primary outcomes were stroke (ischemic or hemorrhagic) or non-central nervous system embolism. For safety, the primary outcome was major or nonmajor clinically relevant bleeding. RESULTS: The 5,695 patients with DM (40%) in ROCKET AF were younger, were more obese, and had more persistent AF, but fewer had previous stroke (the CHADS2 score includes DM and stroke). The relative efficacy of rivaroxaban and warfarin for prevention of stroke and systemic embolism was similar in patients with (1.74 vs 2.14/100 patient-years, hazard ratio [HR] 0.82) and without (2.12 vs 2.32/100 patient-years, HR 0.92) DM (interaction P = .53). The safety of rivaroxaban vs warfarin regarding major bleeding (HRs 1.00 and 1.12 for patients with and without DM, respectively; interaction P = .43), major or nonmajor clinically relevant bleeding (HRs 0.98 and 1.09; interaction P = .17), and intracerebral hemorrhage (HRs 0.62 and 0.72; interaction P = .67) was independent of DM status. Adjusted exploratory analyses suggested 1.3-, 1.5-, and 1.9-fold higher 2-year rates of stroke, vascular mortality, and myocardial infarction in DM patients. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: The relative efficacy and safety of rivaroxaban vs warfarin was similar in patients with and without DM, supporting use of rivaroxaban as an alternative to warfarin in diabetic patients with AF.

Management of major bleeding events in patients treated with rivaroxaban vs. warfarin: results from the ROCKET AF trial.

AIMS: There are no data regarding management and outcomes of major bleeding events in patients treated with oral factor Xa inhibitors. METHODS AND RESULTS: Using data from ROCKET AF, we analysed the management and outcomes of major bleeding overall and according to the randomized treatment. During a median follow-up of 1.9 years, 779 (5.5%) patients experienced major bleeding at a rate of 3.52 events/100 patient-years with a similar event rate in each arm (n = 395 rivaroxaban vs. n = 384 warfarin). The median number of transfused packed red blood cells (PRBC) per episode was similar in both arms [2 (25th, 75th: 2, 4) units]. Overall, few transfusions of whole blood (n = 14), platelets (n = 10), or cryoprecipitate (n = 2) were used. Transfusion of fresh frozen plasma (FFP) was significantly less in the rivaroxaban arm (n = 45 vs. n = 81 units) after adjustment for covariates [odds ratio (OR) 0.43 (95% CI 0.29-0.66); P < 0.0001]. Prothrombin complex concentrates (PCC) were administered less in the rivaroxaban arm (n = 4 vs. n = 9). Outcomes after major bleeding, including stroke or non-central nervous system embolism (4.7% rivaroxaban vs. 5.4% warfarin; HR 0.89; 95% CI 0.42-1.88) and all-cause death (20.4% rivaroxaban vs. 26.1% warfarin; HR 0.69, 95% CI 0.46-1.04) were similar in patients treated with rivaroxaban and warfarin (interaction P = 0.51 and 0.11). CONCLUSION: Among high-risk patients with atrial fibrillation who experienced major bleeding in ROCKET AF, the use of FFP and PCC was less among those allocated rivaroxaban compared with warfarin. However, use of PRBCs and outcomes after bleeding were similar among patients randomized to rivaroxaban or to warfarin.

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.

Ischaemic cardiac outcomes in patients with atrial fibrillation treated with vitamin K antagonism or factor Xa inhibition: results from the ROCKET AF trial.

AIMS: We investigated the prevalence of prior myocardial infarction (MI) and incidence of ischaemic cardiovascular (CV) events among atrial fibrillation (AF) patients. METHODS AND RESULTS: In ROCKET AF, 14 264 patients with nonvalvular AF were randomized to rivaroxaban or warfarin. The key efficacy outcome for these analyses was CV death, MI, and unstable angina (UA). This pre-specified analysis was performed on patients while on treatment. Rates are per 100 patient-years. Overall, 2468 (17%) patients had prior MI at enrollment. Compared with patients without prior MI, these patients were more likely to be male (75 vs. 57%), on aspirin at baseline (47 vs. 34%), have prior congestive heart failure (78 vs. 59%), diabetes (47 vs. 39%), hypertension (94 vs. 90%), higher mean CHADS2 score (3.64 vs. 3.43), and fewer prior strokes or transient ischaemic attacks (46 vs. 54%). CV death, MI, or UA rates tended to be lower in patients assigned rivaroxaban compared with warfarin [2.70 vs. 3.15; hazard ratio (HR) 0.86, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.73-1.00; P = 0.0509]. CV death, MI, or UA rates were higher in those with prior MI compared with no prior MI (6.68 vs. 2.19; HR 3.04, 95% CI 2.59-3.56) with consistent results for CV death, MI, or UA for rivaroxaban compared with warfarin in prior MI compared with no prior MI (P interaction = 0.10). CONCLUSION: Prior MI was common and associated with substantial risk for subsequent cardiac events. Patients with prior MI assigned rivaroxaban compared with warfarin had a non-significant 14% reduction of ischaemic cardiac events.

Renal dysfunction as a predictor of stroke and systemic embolism in patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation: validation of the R(2)CHADS(2) index in 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) and ATRIA (AnTicoagulation and Risk factors In Atrial fibrillation) study cohorts.

BACKGROUND: We sought to define the factors associated with the occurrence of stroke and systemic embolism in a large, international atrial fibrillation (AF) trial. METHODS AND RESULTS: 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), 14 264 patients with nonvalvular AF and creatinine clearance ≥30 mL/min were randomized to rivaroxaban or dose-adjusted warfarin. Cox proportional hazards modeling was used to identify factors at randomization independently associated with the occurrence of stroke or non-central nervous system embolism based on intention-to-treat analysis. A risk score was developed in ROCKET AF and validated in ATRIA (AnTicoagulation and Risk factors In Atrial fibrillation), an independent AF patient cohort. Over a median follow-up of 1.94 years, 575 patients (4.0%) experienced primary end-point events. Reduced creatinine clearance was a strong, independent predictor of stroke and systemic embolism, second only to prior stroke or transient ischemic attack. Additional factors associated with stroke and systemic embolism included elevated diastolic blood pressure and heart rate, as well as vascular disease of the heart and limbs (C-index 0.635). A model that included creatinine clearance (R(2)CHADS(2)) improved net reclassification index by 6.2% compared with CHA(2)DS(2)VASc (C statistic=0.578) and by 8.2% compared with CHADS(2) (C statistic=0.575). The inclusion of creatinine clearance <60 mL/min and prior stroke or transient ischemic attack in a model with no other covariates led to a C statistic of 0.590.Validation of R(2)CHADS(2) in an external, separate population improved net reclassification index by 17.4% (95% confidence interval, 12.1%-22.5%) relative to CHADS(2). CONCLUSIONS: In patients with nonvalvular AF at moderate to high risk of stroke, impaired renal function is a potent predictor of stroke and systemic embolism. Stroke risk stratification in patients with AF should include renal function. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: URL: http://www.ClinicalTrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT00403767.

Intracranial hemorrhage among patients with atrial fibrillation anticoagulated with warfarin or rivaroxaban: the rivaroxaban once daily, oral, direct factor Xa inhibition compared with vitamin K antagonism for prevention of stroke and embolism trial in atrial fibrillation.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Intracranial hemorrhage (ICH) is a life-threatening complication of anticoagulation. METHODS: We investigated the rate, outcomes, and predictors of ICH in 14 264 patients with 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 (ROCKET AF). Cox proportional hazards modeling was used. RESULTS: During 1.94 years (median) of follow-up, 172 patients (1.2%) experienced 175 ICH events at a rate of 0.67% per year. The significant, independent predictors of ICH were race (Asian: hazard ratio, 2.02; 95% CI, 1.39-2.94; black: hazard ratio, 3.25; 95% CI, 1.43-7.41), age (1.35; 1.13-1.63 per 10-year increase), reduced serum albumin (1.39; 1.12-1.73 per 0.5 g/dL decrease), reduced platelet count below 210×10(9)/L (1.08; 1.02-1.13 per 10×10(9)/L decrease), previous stroke or transient ischemic attack (1.42; 1.02-1.96), and increased diastolic blood pressure (1.17; 1.01-1.36 per 10 mm Hg increase). Predictors of a reduced risk of ICH were randomization to rivaroxaban (0.60; 0.44-0.82) and history of congestive heart failure (0.65; 0.47-0.89). The ability of the model to discriminate individuals with and without ICH was good (C-index, 0.69; 95% CI, 0.64-0.73). CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with atrial fibrillation treated with anticoagulation, the risk of ICH was higher among Asians, blacks, the elderly, and in those with previous stroke or transient ischemic attack, increased diastolic blood pressure, and reduced platelet count or serum albumin at baseline. The risk of ICH was significantly lower in patients with heart failure and in those who were randomized to rivaroxaban instead of warfarin. The external validity of these findings requires testing in other atrial fibrillation populations.

Rivaroxaban versus warfarin in nonvalvular atrial fibrillation.

BACKGROUND: The use of warfarin reduces the rate of ischemic stroke in patients with atrial fibrillation but requires frequent monitoring and dose adjustment. Rivaroxaban, an oral factor Xa inhibitor, may provide more consistent and predictable anticoagulation than warfarin. METHODS: In a double-blind trial, we randomly assigned 14,264 patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation who were at increased risk for stroke to receive either rivaroxaban (at a daily dose of 20 mg) or dose-adjusted warfarin. The per-protocol, as-treated primary analysis was designed to determine whether rivaroxaban was noninferior to warfarin for the primary end point of stroke or systemic embolism. RESULTS: In the primary analysis, the primary end point occurred in 188 patients in the rivaroxaban group (1.7% per year) and in 241 in the warfarin group (2.2% per year) (hazard ratio in the rivaroxaban group, 0.79; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.66 to 0.96; P<0.001 for noninferiority). In the intention-to-treat analysis, the primary end point occurred in 269 patients in the rivaroxaban group (2.1% per year) and in 306 patients in the warfarin group (2.4% per year) (hazard ratio, 0.88; 95% CI, 0.74 to 1.03; P<0.001 for noninferiority; P=0.12 for superiority). Major and nonmajor clinically relevant bleeding occurred in 1475 patients in the rivaroxaban group (14.9% per year) and in 1449 in the warfarin group (14.5% per year) (hazard ratio, 1.03; 95% CI, 0.96 to 1.11; P=0.44), with significant reductions in intracranial hemorrhage (0.5% vs. 0.7%, P=0.02) and fatal bleeding (0.2% vs. 0.5%, P=0.003) in the rivaroxaban group. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with atrial fibrillation, rivaroxaban was noninferior to warfarin for the prevention of stroke or systemic embolism. There was no significant between-group difference in the risk of major bleeding, although intracranial and fatal bleeding occurred less frequently in the rivaroxaban group. (Funded by Johnson & Johnson and Bayer; ROCKET AF ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00403767.).

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.