A non-canonical vitamin K cycle is a potent ferroptosis suppressor.

Ferroptosis, a non-apoptotic form of cell death marked by iron-dependent lipid peroxidation1, has a key role in organ injury, degenerative disease and vulnerability of therapy-resistant cancers2. Although substantial progress has been made in understanding the molecular processes relevant to ferroptosis, additional cell-extrinsic and cell-intrinsic processes that determine cell sensitivity toward ferroptosis remain unknown. Here we show that the fully reduced forms of vitamin K-a group of naphthoquinones that includes menaquinone and phylloquinone3-confer a strong anti-ferroptotic function, in addition to the conventional function linked to blood clotting by acting as a cofactor for γ-glutamyl carboxylase. Ferroptosis suppressor protein 1 (FSP1), a NAD(P)H-ubiquinone reductase and the second mainstay of ferroptosis control after glutathione peroxidase-44,5, was found to efficiently reduce vitamin K to its hydroquinone, a potent radical-trapping antioxidant and inhibitor of (phospho)lipid peroxidation. The FSP1-mediated reduction of vitamin K was also responsible for the antidotal effect of vitamin K against warfarin poisoning. It follows that FSP1 is the enzyme mediating warfarin-resistant vitamin K reduction in the canonical vitamin K cycle6. The FSP1-dependent non-canonical vitamin K cycle can act to protect cells against detrimental lipid peroxidation and ferroptosis.

Oral Anticoagulants Beyond Warfarin.

Direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) have largely replaced vitamin K antagonists, mostly warfarin, for the main indications for oral anticoagulation, prevention and treatment of venous thromboembolism, and prevention of embolic stroke in atrial fibrillation. While DOACs offer practical, fixed-dose anticoagulation in many patients, specific restrictions or contraindications may apply. DOACs are not sufficiently effective in high-thrombotic risk conditions such as antiphospholipid syndrome and mechanical heart valves. Patients with cancer-associated thrombosis may benefit from DOACs, but the bleeding risk, particularly in those with gastrointestinal or urogenital tumors, must be carefully weighed. In patients with frailty, excess body weight, and/or moderate-to-severe chronic kidney disease, DOACs must be cautiously administered and may require laboratory monitoring. Reversal agents have been developed and approved for life-threatening bleeding. In addition, the clinical testing of potentially safer anticoagulants such as factor XI(a) inhibitors is important to further optimize anticoagulant therapy in an increasingly elderly and frail population worldwide.

Efficacy and Safety of Non-Vitamin-K Antagonist Oral Anticoagulants Versus Warfarin Across the Spectrum of Body Mass Index and Body Weight: An Individual Patient Data Meta-Analysis of 4 Randomized Clinical Trials of Patients With Atrial Fibrillation.

BACKGROUND: The efficacy and safety of non-vitamin-K antagonist oral anticoagulants (NOACs) across the spectrum of body mass index (BMI) and body weight (BW) remain uncertain. METHODS: We analyzed data from COMBINE AF (A Collaboration Between Multiple Institutions to Better Investigate Non-Vitamin K Antagonist Oral Anticoagulant Use in Atrial Fibrillation), which pooled patient-level data from the 4 pivotal randomized trials of NOAC versus warfarin in patients with atrial fibrillation. The primary efficacy and safety outcomes were stroke or systemic embolic events (stroke/SEE) and major bleeding, respectively; secondary outcomes were ischemic stroke/SEE, intracranial hemorrhage, death, and the net clinical outcome (stroke/SEE, major bleeding, or death). Each outcome was examined across BMI and BW. Because few patients had a BMI <18.5 kg/m2 (n=598), the primary analyses were restricted to those with a BMI ≥18.5 kg/m2. RESULTS: Among 58 464 patients, the median BMI was 28.3 (interquartile range, 25.2-32.2) kg/m2, and the median BW was 81.0 (interquartile range, 70.0-94.3) kg. The event probability of stroke/SEE was lower at a higher BMI irrespective of treatment, whereas the probability of major bleeding was lower at a higher BMI with warfarin but relatively unchanged across BMI with NOACs. NOACs reduced stroke/SEE overall (adjusted hazard ratio [HRadj], 0.80 [95% CI, 0.73-0.88]; P<0.001), with a generally consistent effect across BMI (Ptrend across HRs, 0.48). NOACs also reduced major bleeding overall (HRadj, 0.88 [95% CI, 0.82-0.94]; P<0.001), but with attenuation of the benefit at a higher BMI (trend test across BMI [Ptrend], 0.003). The overall treatment effects of NOACs versus warfarin for secondary outcomes were consistent across BMI, with the exception of the net clinical outcome and death. While these outcomes were overall reduced with NOACs (net clinical outcome, HRadj, 0.91 [95% CI, 0.87-0.95]; P<0.001; death, HRadj, 0.91 [95% CI, 0.86-0.97]; P=0.003), these benefits were attenuated at higher BMI (Ptrend, 0.001 and 0.08, respectively). All findings were qualitatively similar when analyzed across BW. CONCLUSIONS: The treatment effect of NOACs versus warfarin in atrial fibrillation is generally consistent for stroke/SEE across the spectrum of BMI and BW, whereas the reduction in major bleeding is attenuated in those with higher BMI or BW. Death and the net clinical outcome are overall reduced with NOACs over warfarin, although there remain uncertainties for these outcomes at a very high BMI and BW.

Rivaroxaban in Rheumatic Heart Disease-Associated Atrial Fibrillation.

BACKGROUND: Testing of factor Xa inhibitors for the prevention of cardiovascular events in patients with rheumatic heart disease-associated atrial fibrillation has been limited. METHODS: We enrolled patients with atrial fibrillation and echocardiographically documented rheumatic heart disease who had any of the following: a CHA2DS2VASc score of at least 2 (on a scale from 0 to 9, with higher scores indicating a higher risk of stroke), a mitral-valve area of no more than 2 cm2, left atrial spontaneous echo contrast, or left atrial thrombus. Patients were randomly assigned to receive standard doses of rivaroxaban or dose-adjusted vitamin K antagonist. The primary efficacy outcome was a composite of stroke, systemic embolism, myocardial infarction, or death from vascular (cardiac or noncardiac) or unknown causes. We hypothesized that rivaroxaban therapy would be noninferior to vitamin K antagonist therapy. The primary safety outcome was major bleeding according to the International Society of Thrombosis and Hemostasis. RESULTS: Of 4565 enrolled patients, 4531 were included in the final analysis. The mean age of the patients was 50.5 years, and 72.3% were women. Permanent discontinuation of trial medication was more common with rivaroxaban than with vitamin K antagonist therapy at all visits. In the intention-to-treat analysis, 560 patients in the rivaroxaban group and 446 in the vitamin K antagonist group had a primary-outcome event. Survival curves were nonproportional. The restricted mean survival time was 1599 days in the rivaroxaban group and 1675 days in the vitamin K antagonist group (difference, -76 days; 95% confidence interval [CI], -121 to -31; P<0.001). A higher incidence of death occurred in the rivaroxaban group than in the vitamin K antagonist group (restricted mean survival time, 1608 days vs. 1680 days; difference, -72 days; 95% CI, -117 to -28). No significant between-group difference in the rate of major bleeding was noted. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with rheumatic heart disease-associated atrial fibrillation, vitamin K antagonist therapy led to a lower rate of a composite of cardiovascular events or death than rivaroxaban therapy, without a higher rate of bleeding. (Funded by Bayer; INVICTUS ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02832544.).

Direct Oral Anticoagulants Versus Warfarin Across the Spectrum of Kidney Function: Patient-Level Network Meta-Analyses From COMBINE AF.

BACKGROUND: There is uncertainty surrounding the use of direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) in patients with kidney dysfunction. METHODS: Using the COMBINE AF (A Collaboration Between Multiple Institutions to Better Investigate Non-Vitamin K Antagonist Oral Anticoagulant Use in Atrial Fibrillation) database (data from RE-LY [Randomized Evaluation of Long-term Anticoagulation Therapy], 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], ARISTOTLE [Apixaban for Reduction in Stroke and Other Thromboembolic Events in Atrial Fibrillation], and ENGAGE AF-TIMI 48 [Effective Anticoagulation With Factor Xa Next Generation in Atrial Fibrillation-Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction 48]), we performed an individual patient-level network meta-analysis to evaluate the safety and efficacy of DOACs versus warfarin across continuous creatinine clearance (CrCl). A multivariable Cox model including treatment-by-CrCl interaction with random effects was fitted to estimate hazard ratios for paired treatment strategies (standard-dose DOAC, lower-dose DOAC, and warfarin). Outcomes included stroke and systemic embolism (S/SE), major bleeding, intracranial hemorrhage (ICH), and death. RESULTS: Among 71 683 patients (mean age, 70.6±9.4 years; 37.3% female; median follow-up, 23.1 months), the mean CrCl was 75.5±30.5 mL/min. The incidence of S/SE, major bleeding, ICH, and death increased significantly with worsening kidney function. Across continuous CrCl values down to 25 mL/min, the hazard of major bleeding did not change for patients randomized to standard-dose DOACs compared with those randomized to warfarin (Pinteraction=0.61). Compared with warfarin, standard-dose DOAC use resulted in a significantly lower hazard of ICH at CrCl values <122 mL/min, with a trend for increased safety with DOAC as CrCl decreased (6.2% decrease in hazard ratio per 10-mL/min decrease in CrCl; Pinteraction=0.08). Compared with warfarin, standard-dose DOAC use resulted in a significantly lower hazard of S/SE with CrCl <87 mL/min, with a significant treatment-by-CrCl effect (4.8% decrease in hazard ratio per 10-mL/min decrease in CrCl; Pinteraction=0.01). The hazard of death was significantly lower with standard-dose DOACs for patients with CrCl <77 mL/min, with a trend toward increasing benefit with lower CrCl (2.1% decrease in hazard ratio per 10-mL/min decrease in CrCl; Pinteraction=0.08). Use of lower-dose rather than standard-dose DOACs was not associated with a significant difference in incident bleeding or ICH in patients with reduced kidney function but was associated with a higher incidence4 of death and S/SE. CONCLUSIONS: Standard-dose DOACs are safer and more effective than warfarin down to a CrCl of at least 25 mL/min. Lower-dose DOACs do not significantly lower the incidence of bleeding or ICH compared with standard-dose DOACs but are associated with a higher incidence of S/SE and death. These findings support the use of standard-dose DOACs over warfarin in patients with kidney dysfunction.

Comparative Effectiveness and Safety of Direct Oral Anticoagulants and Warfarin in Patients With Atrial Fibrillation and Chronic Liver Disease: A Nationwide Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: The benefit-risk profile of direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) compared with warfarin, and between DOACs in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) and chronic liver disease is unclear. METHODS: We conducted a new-user, retrospective cohort study of patients with AF and chronic liver disease who were enrolled in a large, US-based administrative database between January 1, 2011, and December 31, 2017. We assessed the effectiveness and safety of DOACs (as a class and individually) compared with warfarin, and between DOACs in patients with AF and chronic liver disease. The primary outcomes were hospitalization for ischemic stroke/systemic embolism and hospitalization for major bleeding. Inverse probability treatment weights were used to balance the treatment groups on measured confounders. RESULTS: Overall, 10 209 participants were included, with 4421 (43.2%) on warfarin, 2721 (26.7%) apixaban, 2211 (21.7%) rivaroxaban, and 851 (8.3%) dabigatran. The incidence rates per 100 person-years for ischemic stroke/systemic embolism were 2.2, 1.4, 2.6, and 4.4 for DOACs as a class, apixaban, rivaroxaban, and warfarin, respectively. The incidence rates per 100 person-years for major bleeding were 7.9, 6.5, 9.1, and 15.0 for DOACs as a class, apixaban, rivaroxaban, and warfarin, respectively. After inverse probability treatment weights, the risk of hospitalization for ischemic stroke/systemic embolism was significantly lower between DOACs as a class (hazard ratio [HR], 0.64 [95% CI, 0.46-0.90]) or apixaban (HR, 0.40 [95% CI, 0.19-0.82]) compared with warfarin, but not significantly different between rivaroxaban versus warfarin (HR, 0.76 [95% CI, 0.47-1.21]) or rivaroxaban versus apixaban (HR, 1.73 [95% CI, 0.91-3.29]). Compared with warfarin, the risk of hospitalization for major bleeding was lower with DOACs as a class (HR, 0.69 [95% CI, 0.58-0.82]), apixaban (HR, 0.60 [95% CI, 0.46-0.78]), and rivaroxaban (HR, 0.79 [95% CI, 0.62-1.0]). However, the risk of hospitalization for major bleeding was higher for rivaroxaban versus apixaban (HR, 1.59 [95% CI, 1.18-2.14]). CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with AF and chronic liver disease, DOACs as a class were associated with lower risks of hospitalization for ischemic stroke/systemic embolism and major bleeding versus warfarin. However, the incidence of clinical outcomes among patients with AF and chronic liver disease varied between individual DOACs and warfarin, and in head-to-head DOAC comparisons.

Association between CYP2C9 and VKORC1 genetic polymorphisms and efficacy and safety of warfarin in Chinese patients.

OBJECTIVES: Genetic variation has been a major contributor to interindividual variability of warfarin dosage requirement. The specific genetic factors contributing to warfarin bleeding complications are largely unknown, particularly in Chinese patients. In this study, 896 Chinese patients were enrolled to explore the effect of CYP2C9 and VKORC1 genetic variations on both the efficacy and safety of warfarin therapy. METHODS AND RESULTS: Univariate analyses unveiled significant associations between two specific single nucleotide polymorphisms rs1057910 in CYP2C9 and rs9923231 in VKORC1 and stable warfarin dosage ( P  < 0.001). Further, employing multivariate logistic regression analysis adjusted for age, sex and height, the investigation revealed that patients harboring at least one variant allele in CYP2C9 exhibited a heightened risk of bleeding events compared to those with the wild-type genotype (odds ratio = 2.16, P  = 0.04). Moreover, a meta-analysis conducted to consolidate findings confirmed the associations of both CYP2C9 (rs1057910) and VKORC1 (rs9923231) with stable warfarin dosage. Notably, CYP2C9 variant genotypes were significantly linked to an increased risk of hemorrhagic complications ( P  < 0.00001), VKORC1 did not demonstrate a similar association. CONCLUSION: The associations found between specific genetic variants and both stable warfarin dosage and bleeding risk might be the potential significance of gene detection in optimizing warfarin therapy for improving patient efficacy and safety.

'X' marks the spot! Utilising factor Xa inhibitors to optimise thromboprophylaxis in multiple myeloma.

Venous thromboembolism (VTE) remains a significant cause of morbidity and mortality among multiple myeloma patients. Chang and colleagues' findings indicate that factor Xa inhibitors are as effective as warfarin in preventing VTE without raising the risk of gastrointestinal or intracranial bleeding complications. Commentary on: Chang et al. The comparative efficacy and safety of factor Xa inhibitors and warfarin for primary thromboprophylaxis in multiple myeloma patients undergoing immunomodulatory therapy. Br J Haematol 2024;205:473-477.

The comparative efficacy and safety of factor Xa inhibitors and warfarin for primary thromboprophylaxis in multiple myeloma patients undergoing immunomodulatory therapy.

There are limited data on the optimal choice of anticoagulation in multiple myeloma (MM) patients receiving immunomodulatory drugs (IMiDs). We conducted a propensity score-matched cohort study using the TriNetX database to compare the efficacy and safety of factor Xa inhibitors and warfarin in this patient population. Compared to warfarin, factor Xa inhibitors had a similar risk of deep vein thrombosis (hazard ratio [HR]: 1.11 [95% CI: 0.50-2.46]) or pulmonary embolism (HR: 1.08 [95% CI: 0.59-2.00]). There were no differences in the risk of gastrointestinal or intracranial bleeding. Factor Xa inhibitor-treated patients had lower all-cause mortality (HR: 0.56 [95% CI: 0.36-0.86]) compared with warfarin. These data suggest that factor Xa inhibitors had similar safety and efficacy compared with warfarin for MM patients on IMiDs.

Combination anticoagulation strategy in pregnancy with mechanical valves: The KYBELE study.

BACKGROUND: Optimal first-trimester anticoagulation is still challenging in pregnant women with mechanical heart valves (MHVs) requiring high-dose warfarin. This multicenter prospective study aims to determine the optimal anticoagulation regimens for pregnant patients with MHVs. METHODS: All women were allocated to one of three treatment options during first trimester including lone low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH), combination of LMWH + 2.5 mg warfarin, and LMWH+4 mg warfarin. Primary maternal outcome included a combination of death, thromboembolism, severe bleeding, and need for treatment of mechanical valve thrombosis (MVT). Any fetal loss was determined as primary fetal outcome. RESULTS: The study included 78 pregnancies in 65 women with MHVs. Primary maternal outcome rate was 44%, 12.5%, 3.5%, respectively. The rates of primary maternal outcome (44 vs 3.5%, P < .001), obstructive MVT (16 vs 0%, P = .04), MVT requiring treatment (28 vs 0%, P = .003), and cerebral embolism (24 vs 3.4%, P = .041) were found to be significantly higher in lone LMWH group compared to LMWH + 4 mg warfarin group. Moreover, the rates of primary maternal outcome (12.5 vs 44%, P = .015) and treatment for MHV thrombus (4.2 vs 28%, P = .049) were significantly lower in LMWH + 2.5 mg warfarin group compared to lone LMWH group. The incidences of fetal loss were 8 (32%) in the lone LMWH group, 8 (33.3%) in LMWH + 2.5 mg warfarin group, and 11 (37.9%) in LMWH + 4 mg warfarin group (P = .890 for 3-group).Warfarin related-embryopathy was not observed in any case. CONCLUSIONS: The combined anticoagulation strategy of LMWH plus low-dose warfarin during the first trimester of pregnancy may result in less maternal complications with comparable fetal outcomes in patients with MHVs. CONDENSED ABSTRACT: Low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) is thought to be safer for the fetus, however it is suspected to be less protective for the mother. To solve this dilemma, the authors suggested a novel anticoagulation strategy in pregnant women with prosthetic valves. Seventy-eight pregnancies of 65 women (median age 32 [27-35] years) were included in the study. A combination of LMWH and a reduced dose warfarin were associated with low rates of thrombus-related complications in pregnant patients with mechanical heart valves.

Being precise with anticoagulation to reduce adverse drug reactions: are we there yet?

Anticoagulants are potent therapeutics widely used in medical and surgical settings, and the amount spent on anticoagulation is rising. Although warfarin remains a widely prescribed oral anticoagulant, prescriptions of direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) have increased rapidly. Heparin-based parenteral anticoagulants include both unfractionated and low molecular weight heparins (LMWHs). In clinical practice, anticoagulants are generally well tolerated, although interindividual variability in response is apparent. This variability in anticoagulant response can lead to serious incident thrombosis, haemorrhage and off-target adverse reactions such as heparin-induced thrombocytopaenia (HIT). This review seeks to highlight the genetic, environmental and clinical factors associated with variability in anticoagulant response, and review the current evidence base for tailoring the drug, dose, and/or monitoring decisions to identified patient subgroups to improve anticoagulant safety. Areas that would benefit from further research are also identified. Validated variants in VKORC1, CYP2C9 and CYP4F2 constitute biomarkers for differential warfarin response and genotype-informed warfarin dosing has been shown to reduce adverse clinical events. Polymorphisms in CES1 appear relevant to dabigatran exposure but the genetic studies focusing on clinical outcomes such as bleeding are sparse. The influence of body weight on LMWH response merits further attention, as does the relationship between anti-Xa levels and clinical outcomes. Ultimately, safe and effective anticoagulation requires both a deeper parsing of factors contributing to variable response, and further prospective studies to determine optimal therapeutic strategies in identified higher risk subgroups.

Comparative Safety and Effectiveness of Warfarin or Rivaroxaban Versus Apixaban in Patients With Advanced CKD and Atrial Fibrillation: Nationwide US Cohort Study.

RATIONALE & OBJECTIVE: Head-to-head data comparing the effectiveness and safety of oral anticoagulants in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) and advanced chronic kidney disease (CKD) are lacking. We compared the safety and effectiveness of warfarin or rivaroxaban versus apixaban in patients with AF and non-dialysis-dependent CKD stage 4/5. STUDY DESIGN: Propensity score-matched cohort study. SETTING & PARTICIPANTS: 2 nationwide US claims databases, Medicare and Optum's deidentified Clinformatics Data Mart Database, were searched for the interval from January 1, 2013, through March 31, 2022, for patients with nonvalvular AF and CKD stage 4/5 who initiated warfarin versus apixaban (matched cohort, n=12,488) and rivaroxaban versus apixaban (matched cohort, n = 5,720). EXPOSURES: Warfarin, rivaroxaban, or apixaban. OUTCOMES: Primary outcomes included major bleeding and ischemic stroke. Secondary outcomes included all-cause mortality, major gastrointestinal bleeding, and intracranial bleeding. ANALYTICAL APPROACH: Cox regression was used to estimate HRs, and 1:1 propensity-score matching was used to adjust for 80 potential confounders. RESULTS: Compared with apixaban, warfarin initiation was associated with a higher rate of major bleeding (HR, 1.85; 95% CI, 1.59-2.15), including major gastrointestinal bleeding (1.86; 1.53-2.25) and intracranial bleeding (2.15; 1.42-3.25). Compared with apixaban, rivaroxaban was also associated with a higher rate of major bleeding (1.69; 1.33-2.15). All-cause mortality was similar for warfarin (1.08; 0.98-1.18) and rivaroxaban (0.94; 0.81-1.10) versus apixaban. Furthermore, no statistically significant differences for ischemic stroke were observed for warfarin (1.14; 0.83-1.57) or rivaroxaban (0.71; 0.40-1.24) versus apixaban, but the CIs were wide. Similar results were observed for warfarin versus apixaban in the positive control cohort of patients with CKD stage 3, consistent with randomized trial findings. LIMITATIONS: Few ischemic stroke events, potential residual confounding. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with AF and advanced CKD, rivaroxaban and warfarin were associated with higher rates of major bleeding compared with apixaban, suggesting a superior safety profile for apixaban in this high-risk population. PLAIN-LANGUAGE SUMMARY: Different anticoagulants have been shown to reduce the risk of stroke in patients with atrial fibrillation, such as warfarin and direct oral anticoagulants like apixaban and rivaroxaban. Unfortunately, the large-scale randomized trials that compared direct anticoagulants versus warfarin excluded patients with advanced chronic kidney disease. Therefore, the comparative safety and effectiveness of warfarin, apixaban, and rivaroxaban are uncertain in this population. In this study, we used administrative claims data from the United States to answer this question. We found that warfarin and rivaroxaban were associated with increased risks of major bleeding compared with apixaban. There were few stroke events, with no major differences among the 3 drugs in the risk of stroke. In conclusion, this study suggests that apixaban has a better safety profile than warfarin and rivaroxaban.

Relationship of Warfarin and Apixaban with Vascular Function in Patients with Atrial Fibrillation.

INTRODUCTION: Atrial fibrillation (AF) is associated with endothelial damage/dysfunction. Herein, we tested the hypothesis that brachial artery flow-mediated dilation (FMD) is superior in AF patients taking apixaban compared to warfarin. METHODS: AF patients on apixaban (n = 46; 67 [7] years; mean [standard deviation]; 15 women) and warfarin (n = 27; 73 [9] years (p < 0.01); 11 women) were recruited. Duplex Doppler ultrasound imaging was undertaken during baseline (2 min), cuff inflation (5 min), and following cuff deflation (3 min). FMD was defined as peak increase in brachial artery diameter following cuff deflation and analysed as percentage change in diameter, as a ratio of FMD, shear rate area under the curve (SRAUC; FMD-to-SRAUC), and using SRAUC as a covariate (FMDSR). RESULTS: Baseline artery diameter (4.96 [1.14] vs. 4.89 [0.88] mm), peak diameter (5.12 [1.17] vs. 5.14 [0.93] mm), and FMDSR (3.89 [3.62] vs. 4.80 [3.60] %) were not different between warfarin and apixaban (p > 0.05; analysis of covariance with age, CHA2DS2-VASc, years since AF diagnosis, number of diabetics, alcohol drinkers, and units of alcohol consumed per week as covariates). Stepwise multiple regression identified independent association of fibrillation, hypertension, and increased age with FMD. CONCLUSION: AF patients on warfarin and apixaban exhibit similar endothelium-dependent vasodilation. Increased blood pressure negatively impacts vasodilator capacity in AF patients.

Direct oral anticoagulants over warfarin at discharge associated with improved survival and patency in infra-geniculate bypasses with prosthetic conduits.

OBJECTIVE: There is no consensus on the optimal anticoagulant regimen following lower extremity bypass. Historically, warfarin has been utilized for prosthetic or compromised vein bypasses. Direct-acting oral anticoagulants (DOACs) are increasingly replacing warfarin in this context, but their efficacy in bypass preservation has not been well-studied. Recent studies have shown that DOACs may improve outcomes following bypasses; however, it is unclear if this is dependent upon type of bypass conduit. The goal of this study was to evaluate whether a difference exists between vein and prosthetic infra-geniculate bypasses outcomes based on the anticoagulant utilized on discharge, warfarin or DOAC. METHODS: The Vascular Quality Initiative infra-inguinal bypass database was queried for all patients who underwent an infra-geniculate bypass and were anticoagulation-naive at baseline but were discharged on either warfarin or DOACs. A survival analysis was performed for patients up to 1 year to determine whether the choice of discharge anticoagulation was associated with differences between those with vein vs prosthetic conduits in overall survival, primary patency, risk of amputation, or risk of major adverse limb events (MALE). A multivariable Cox proportional hazards analysis was performed to control for differences in baseline demographic factors between the groups. RESULTS: During the study period (2003-2020), 57,887 patients underwent infra-geniculate bypass. Of these, 3230 (5.5%) were anticoagulated on discharge. There was a similar distribution of anticoagulation between vein (n = 1659; 51.4%) and prosthetic conduits (n = 1571; 48.6%). Thirty-two percent were discharged on DOACs, and 68.0% were discharged on warfarin. For prosthetic conduits, being discharged on a DOAC was associated with improved outcomes on univariate and multivariable analyses revealing lower risk of overall mortality (hazard ratio [HR], 0.61; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.41-0.93; P = .021), loss of primary patency (HR, 0.70; 95% CI, 0.55-0.89; P = .003), risk of amputation (HR, 0.71; 95% CI, 0.54-0.93; P = .013), and risk of MALE (HR, 0.80; 95% CI, 0.64-1.00; P = .048). Patients with a vein bypass had improved univariate outcomes for survival and primary patency; however, with multivariable analysis, there were no significant differences in outcomes between DOAC and warfarin. CONCLUSIONS: Anticoagulation-naive patients who underwent an infra-geniculate prosthetic bypass had higher rates of overall survival, bypass patency, amputation-free survival, and freedom from MALE when discharged on a DOAC compared with warfarin. Those with vein bypasses had similar outcomes regardless of the choice of anticoagulation.

Comparison of direct oral anticoagulants and warfarin in chronic limb-threatening ischemia.

OBJECTIVE: The role of direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) in chronic limb-threatening ischemia after revascularization is unknown. Current evidence-based guidelines do not provide clear guidance on the role of anticoagulation or the selection of anticoagulant. Current practice is highly varied and based on provider and patient preference. The purpose of this study was to measure the impact of different anticoagulants on the incidence of major adverse limb events (MALEs) after revascularization for chronic limb-threatening ischemia, major adverse cardiovascular events (MACEs), all-cause mortality, and hospitalization for major bleeding events. METHODS: This was a single-center, observational, retrospective cohort study. Subjects were eligible if they were 18 years or older; underwent endovascular or open revascularization for chronic limb-threatening ischemia, rest pain, or tissue loss; and were subsequently prescribed apixaban, rivaroxaban, or warfarin. The primary end point was the incidence of MALEs, including above-ankle amputation or major index-limb reintervention, within 1 year of index event. Secondary end points included the rate of all-cause mortality, MACEs, and incidence of International Society on Thrombosis and Haemostasis (ISTH) major bleeding. RESULTS: From January 1, 2017, to September 20, 2022, 141 patients met the inclusion and exclusion criteria and were reviewed. The median age was 67 years, with 92 patients prescribed apixaban or rivaroxaban and 49 patients prescribed warfarin. Of these, 42 patients were prescribed triple antithrombotic therapy, 88 dual antithrombotic therapy, and 13 anticoagulant monotherapy. The primary outcome of 1-year MALEs occurred in 36.7% of the warfarin group and 33.7% of the DOAC group (relative risk [RR], 1.09; 95% CI, 0.53-2.25; P = .72). Secondary outcomes of 1-year MACEs (10.2% vs 4.3%; RR, 2.35; 95% CI, 0.60-9.18; P = .18) and 1-year all-cause mortality (26.5% vs 16.3%; RR, 1.63; 95% CI, 0.70-3.78; P = .15) did not differ between the groups. The secondary safety outcome of 1-year ISTH major bleeding occurred in 16.3% of the warfarin group and 4.3% of the DOAC group (RR, 3.76; 95% CI, 1.07-13.19; P = .015). CONCLUSIONS: In patients with chronic limb-threatening ischemia who were revascularized and prescribed anticoagulation with apixaban, rivaroxaban, or warfarin on discharge, no difference in MALEs, MACEs, or all-cause mortality was found. However, 1-year admissions for ISTH major bleeding were significantly higher among patients prescribed warfarin. A randomized trial may confirm these findings.

Outcomes of Warfarin Home INR Monitoring vs Office-Based Monitoring: a Retrospective Claims-Based Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Home INR testing (patient self-testing) is feasible and effective for warfarin patients but little is known about real-world differences in outcomes for patients using PST versus laboratory-based INR monitoring. OBJECTIVE: To compare the safety/efficacy of patient self-testing of real-world warfarin therapy versus office/lab-based monitoring of therapy. DESIGN/SETTING/PARTICIPANTS/EXPOSURE: A retrospective claims-based analysis of warfarin patients enrolled in the MarketScan® Commercial Claims and Encounters and Medicare databases between January 1, 2013, and March 30, 2020. Stratification was based on INR testing method: patient self-testing versus testing at physicians' offices/local laboratory. The probability of adverse events in each cohort was determined after adjusting for demographic and baseline clinical characteristics using a repeated measures analysis. MAIN MEASURES: Rates of all adverse events: deep venous thrombosis, pulmonary embolism, bleeding, and stroke. A secondary outcome of interest was emergency department visits. KEY RESULTS: A total of 37,837 patients were included in the analysis: 1592 patients in the patient self-testing group and 36,245 in the office-based therapy group. After adjusting for demographic and baseline clinical characteristics, patients in the office-based group had statistically significantly higher rates of all adverse events (incidence rate ratio [IRR]=2.07, 95% CI [1.82, 2.36]), and specific adverse events including thromboembolism (IRR=4.38, 95% CI [3.29, 5.84]), major bleed (IRR=1.45, 95% CI [1.28, 1.64]), and stroke (IRR=1.30, 95% CI [1.05, 1.61]) than patients in the patient self-testing group. Office-based patients also had a statistically significant higher rate of emergency department visits than patient self-testing patients (IRR = 1.65, 95% CI [1.47, 1.84]). CONCLUSIONS/RELEVANCE: This analysis of real-world claims data shows lower rates of stroke, thromboembolism, and major bleeding, as well as fewer emergency department visits, with patient self-testing compared to office-based/lab INR monitoring. Our finding that PST is safe and effective among current users suggests that more patients may benefit from its use.

Anticoagulation in Patients with Chronic Kidney Disease.

BACKGROUND: Both atrial fibrillation and venous thromboembolism (VTE) are highly prevalent among patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD). Until recently, warfarin was the most commonly prescribed oral anticoagulant. Direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) have important advantages and have been shown to be noninferior to warfarin with respect to stroke prevention or recurrent VTE in the general population, with lower bleeding rates. This review article will provide available evidence on the use of DOACs in patients with CKD. SUMMARY: In post hoc analyses of major randomized studies with DOACs for stroke prevention in atrial fibrillation, in the subgroup of participants with moderate CKD, defined as a creatinine clearance (CrCl) of 30-50 mL/min, dabigatran 150 mg and apixaban were associated with lower rates of stroke and systemic embolism, whereas apixaban and edoxaban were associated with lower bleeding and mortality rates, compared with warfarin. In retrospective observational studies in patients with advanced CKD (defined as a CrCl <30 mL/min) and atrial fibrillation, DOACs had similar efficacy with warfarin with numerically lower bleeding rates. All agents warrant dose adjustment in moderate-to-severe CKD. In patients on maintenance dialysis, the VALKYRIE trial, which was designed initially to study the effect of vitamin K on vascular calcification progression, established superiority for rivaroxaban compared with a vitamin K antagonist (VKA) in the extension phase. Two other clinical trials using apixaban (AXADIA and RENAL-AF) in this population were inconclusive due to recruitment challenges and low event rates. In post hoc analyses of randomized studies with DOACs in patients with VTE, in the subgroup of participants with moderate CKD at baseline, edoxaban was associated with lower rates of recurrent VTE, whereas rivaroxaban and dabigatran were associated with lower and higher bleeding rates, respectively, as compared to warfarin. KEY MESSAGES: DOACs have revolutionized the management of atrial fibrillation and VTE, and they should be preferred over warfarin in patients with moderate-to-severe CKD with appropriate dose adjustment. Therapeutic drug monitoring with a valid technique may be considered to guide clinical management in individualized cases. Current evidence questions the need for oral anticoagulation in patients on maintenance dialysis with atrial fibrillation as both DOACs and VKAs are associated with high rates of major bleeding.

Effectiveness and Safety of Non-Vitamin K Oral Anticoagulants versus Warfarin in Patients with Atrial Fibrillation and Previous Stroke: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

INTRODUCTION: Current evidence regarding the clinical outcomes of non-vitamin K oral anticoagulants (NOACs) versus warfarin in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) and previous stroke is inconclusive, especially in patients with previous intracranial haemorrhage (ICrH). We aim to undertake a systematic review and meta-analysis assessing the effectiveness and safety of NOACs versus warfarin in AF patients with a history of stroke. METHODS: We searched studies published up to December 10, 2022, on PubMed, Medline, Embase, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials. Studies on adults with AF and previous ischaemic stroke (IS) or IrCH receiving either NOACs or warfarin and capturing outcome events (thromboembolic events, ICrH, and all-cause mortality) were eligible for inclusion. RESULTS: Six randomized controlled trials (RCTs) (including 19,489 patients with previous IS) and fifteen observational studies (including 132,575 patients with previous IS and 13,068 patients with previous ICrH) were included. RCT data showed that compared with warfarin, NOACs were associated with a significant reduction in thromboembolic events (odds ratio [OR]: 0.85, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.75-0.96), ICrH (OR: 0.57, 95% CI: 0.36-0.90), and all-cause mortality (OR: 0.88, 95% CI: 0.80-0.98). In analysing observational studies, similar results were retrieved. Moreover, patients with previous ICrH had a lower OR on thromboembolic events than those with IS (OR: 0.66, 95% CI: 0.46-0.95 vs. OR: 0.80, 95% CI: 0.70-0.93) in the comparison between NOACs and warfarin. CONCLUSIONS: Observational data showed that in AF patients with previous stroke, NOACs showed better clinical performance compared to warfarin and the benefits of NOACs were more pronounced in patients with previous IrCH versus those with IS. RCT data also showed NOACs are superior to warfarin. However, current RCTs only included AF patients who survived an IS, and further large RCTs focused on patients with previous ICrH are warranted.

Six-week low-molecular-weight heparin versus 12-week warfarin for calf deep vein thrombosis: A randomized, prospective, open-label study.

Current guidelines suggest a 3-month anticoagulant treatment course for isolated distal deep vein thrombosis (IDDVT), but shorter durations of treatment are frequently prescribed in clinical practice. We investigated whether a 6-week treatment with low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) at intermediate dosage can be an effective and safe alternative to vitamin K antagonists (VKA) in patients with IDDVT (non-inferiority trial). In a multicenter, open-label, randomized trial, 260 outpatients with symptomatic IDDVT were randomly assigned to receive either LMWH followed by VKA for 12 weeks or LMWH 1 mg/kg subcutaneously twice a day for 2 weeks followed by 1 mg/kg subcutaneously once a day for 4 weeks. The follow-up was 6 months and the primary endpoint was the composite measure of recurrent venous thromboembolism (VTE) defined as: recurrence or extension of IDDVT, proximal DVT, and pulmonary embolism (PE). The study was stopped prematurely due to slow recruiting rates. The primary efficacy outcome occurred in 14 patients receiving LMWH (10.8%) and in five patients receiving VKA (3.8%); risk difference was 0.069 (95% CI: 0.006-0.132), hazard ratio 2.8 (95% CI: 1.04-7.55). There was one PE in the VKA group and one proximal DVT in the LMWH group. IDDVT recurrence was 10.0% in the LMWH group versus 3.1% in the VKA group (p = .024). Two patients had clinically relevant bleedings (1.6%) in the LMWH group versus one (0.8%) in VKA group (p = .56). In conclusion, VKA for 12 weeks seems superior to LMWH for 6 weeks in reducing the risk of VTE recurrences in our cohort of outpatients with IDDVT.

Impact of Oral Anticoagulation on Clinical Outcomes in Postoperative Atrial Fibrillation.

INTRODUCTION: The impact of postoperative oral anticoagulation (OAC) with warfarin on postoperative atrial fibrillation (POAF) after coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) was the focus of this examination of patients from the randomized endo-vein graft prospective (REGROUP) Trial. MATERIAL AND METHODS: REGROUP was a prospective randomized Veterans Affairs cooperative study comparing endoscopic versus open vein harvest in elective CABG patients (March 2014-April 2017) at 16 Veterans Affairs facilities. This study compared new-onset POAF patients who were treated with warfarin versus no-warfarin. Outcomes included stroke during active follow-up and a major adverse cardiac event composite of mortality, acute myocardial infarction, and repeat revascularization during active and passive follow-up. RESULTS: Of the 316/1103 (28.6%) of REGROUP patients who developed new-onset POAF, 45 patients were excluded - mainly for preoperative warfarin use. Of the remaining 269 patients, 85 received OAC with warfarin (OAC group); 184 did not (no-OAC group). Stroke rates during active follow-up (32 [IQR 24-38] mo) were 3.5% OAC group versus 5.4% no-OAC group (P = 0.76); major adverse cardiac eventrates were 20% OAC versus 11.4% no-OAC (P = 0.06). On longer follow-up of (median 4.61 [IQR 3.9-5.1] y), discharge OAC use was associated with all-cause mortality after adjusting for Society of Thoracic Surgeons mortality risk (20.0% versus 11.4% no-OAC use; HR = 2.00, 95% CI: 1.05-3.81, P = 0.035). CONCLUSIONS: REGROUP patients with POAF treated with OAC had similar stroke and higher mortality rates versus no-OAC patients. Further investigation of the risk-benefit ratio of OAC in post-CABG patients and which POAF patient subgroups might derive the most benefit with anticoagulation appears warranted.