rivaroxaban and Embolism

Advancing age is a risk factor for developing non-valvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF) or acute venous thromboembolism (VTE). We assessed the comparative effectiveness, safety, costs, and healthcare utilization associated with rivaroxaban versus warfarin in patients of advanced age managed in the United States (US).. We conducted a systematic review of Medline and Embase through April 2023 to identify real-world evidence (RWE) studies of older adults (at least 65+ years of age) with either NVAF or VTE who received either rivaroxaban or warfarin in the US and reported an outcome of stroke or systemic embolism (SSE), ischemic stroke (IS), recurrent VTE, major bleeding, intracranial hemorrhage, costs, or healthcare resource utilization. We classified each outcome of interest per study as "positive" (lower risk), "negative" (higher risk), or "neutral" based upon the summary effect size of rivaroxaban versus warfarin.. Twenty-nine RWE studies met inclusion criteria, mostly (83%) in NVAF populations. For SSE with rivaroxaban versus warfarin, 68.8% of studies showed positive effects and 31.2% showed neutral outcome. For major bleeding, 57.7% showed neutral effects, 38.5% showed negative effects, and 3.8% of studies showed positive effects with rivaroxaban versus warfarin. Of the two studies reporting cost data, both were positive, showing lower costs for SSE for rivaroxaban versus warfarin and neutral cost for major bleeding costs.. This systematic review supports findings from subgroup analyses of randomized controlled trials that, compared with warfarin, rivaroxaban is associated with generally neutral or positive effects on thrombosis and a mixed picture on bleeding outcomes in older adults with either NVAF or VTE treated in the United States.

Topics: Aged; Anticoagulants; Atrial Fibrillation; Embolism; Hemorrhage; Humans; Retrospective Studies; Rivaroxaban; Stroke; United States; Venous Thromboembolism; Venous Thrombosis; Warfarin

Although older patients with atrial fibrillation are at heightened risk of thromboembolic and bleeding events, their optimal treatment choice remains uncertain.. 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.. 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.. URL: www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/. Unique identifier: CRD42022329557.

Topics: Administration, Oral; Aged; Anticoagulants; Atrial Fibrillation; Dabigatran; Embolism; Hemorrhage; Humans; Intracranial Hemorrhages; Network Meta-Analysis; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Rivaroxaban; Stroke

Although several meta-analyses have examined the effects of off-label underdosing of nonvitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants (NOACs) compared with their recommended doses in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF), they combined different kinds of NOACs in their primary analyses. Herein, we first conducted a meta-analysis to separately assess the effects of off-label underdosing versus on-label dosing of four individual NOACs on adverse outcomes in the AF population.. The PubMed and Embase database were systemically searched until November 2021 to identify the relevant studies. Adjusted hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were pooled by utilizing a random-effects model.. A total of nine studies with 144,797 patients taking NOACs were included in the meta-analysis. In the pooled analysis, off-label underdosing of rivaroxaban was related to an increased risk of stroke or systemic embolism (HR = 1.31, 95% CI 1.05-1.63; p = .02), whereas off-label underdosing of apixaban was associated with a higher risk of all-cause death (HR = 1.21, 95% CI 1.05-1.40; p = .01). When comparing off-label underdosing versus on-label dosing of dabigatran or edoxaban, no differences were found in the primary and secondary clinical outcomes.. Off-label underdosing of rivaroxaban may increase the risk of stroke or systematic embolism, whereas off-label underdosing of apixaban may heighten the incidence of all-cause death.

Topics: Administration, Oral; Anticoagulants; Atrial Fibrillation; Embolism; Humans; Off-Label Use; Pyridones; Rivaroxaban; Stroke; Treatment Outcome

Topics: Anticoagulants; Antithrombins; Dabigatran; Embolism; Factor Xa Inhibitors; Heart Diseases; Heart Ventricles; Hemorrhage; Humans; Odds Ratio; Pyrazoles; Pyridines; Pyridones; Rivaroxaban; Thiazoles; Thrombosis; Warfarin

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

Topics: Anticoagulants; Atrial Fibrillation; Embolism; Hemorrhage; Humans; Patient Acuity; Pyrazoles; Pyridones; Renal Dialysis; Renal Insufficiency, Chronic; Rivaroxaban; Stroke; Warfarin

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

Topics: Administration, Oral; Aged; Anticoagulants; Antithrombins; Asia; Asian People; Atrial Fibrillation; Cost of Illness; Dabigatran; Embolism; Factor Xa Inhibitors; Female; Hemorrhage; Humans; Male; Network Meta-Analysis; Pyrazoles; Pyridines; Pyridones; Rivaroxaban; Safety; Stroke; Thiazoles; Warfarin

Topics: Atrial Fibrillation; Embolism; Factor Xa Inhibitors; Hemorrhage; Humans; Network Meta-Analysis; Obesity, Morbid; Pyrazoles; Pyridones; Rivaroxaban; Stroke

There is a lack of clear benefit and a potential risk of bleeding with direct oral anticoagulant (DOAC) use in chronic kidney disease (CKD) and dialysis patients with atrial fibrillation. The objective of this study was to evaluate how treatment with DOACs affects stroke and bleeding outcomes compared with warfarin or aspirin.. We conducted a systematic review of randomized controlled trials, cohort studies and case series, and searched electronic databases from 1946 to 2017. Studies evaluating stroke and bleeding outcomes with DOAC use in CKD and dialysis patients were included.. From 8008 studies, 10 met the inclusion criteria. For moderate CKD patients (estimated glomerular filtration rate  <60 mL/min/1.73 m2), there was no difference in stroke outcomes between dabigatran 110 mg [hazard ratio (HR) 0.78, 95% confidence interval (95% CI) 0.51-1.21], rivaroxaban (HR 0.82-0.84, 95% CI 0.25-2.69) and edoxaban (HR 0.87, 95% CI 0.65-1.18) versus warfarin. Dabigatran (150 mg twice daily) and apixaban reduced risk of stroke or systemic embolism significantly more than warfarin for moderate CKD patients (HR 0.55, 95% CI 0.34-0.89 and HR 0.61, 95% CI 0.39-0.94, respectively). Edoxaban and apixaban were associated with reduced major bleeding events (HR 0.50-0.76) compared with warfarin. Rivaroxaban and dabigatran 110 mg and 150 mg showed no significant difference in major bleeding versus warfarin. In hemodialysis (HD) patients, there was no difference in stroke outcomes between apixaban, dabigatran [relative risk (RR) 1.71, 95% CI 0.97-2.99] or rivaroxaban (RR 1.8, 95% CI 0.89-3.64) versus warfarin. In HD patients, rivaroxaban and dabigatran were associated with an increased major bleeding risk (RR 1.45-1.76), whereas there was no major bleeding difference with apixaban compared to warfarin.. The heterogeneity of major bleeding and stroke definitions of the 10 included studies.. Clinicians should continue to weigh the risk of stroke versus bleeding before prescribing DOACs in the CKD and dialysis population.

Topics: Administration, Oral; Anticoagulants; Aspirin; Atrial Fibrillation; Dabigatran; Embolism; Glomerular Filtration Rate; Hemorrhage; Humans; Pyrazoles; Pyridines; Pyridones; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Renal Dialysis; Renal Insufficiency, Chronic; Risk Factors; Rivaroxaban; Stroke; Thiazoles; Treatment Outcome; Warfarin

The non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants (NOACs) have been increasingly prescribed in clinical practice for stroke prevention in patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation (AF). Direct comparisons between NOACs in trials are lacking, leaving an important clinical decision-making gap. We aimed to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis to summarize the evidence of observational studies for direct comparative effectiveness and safety amongst NOACs in patients with AF. Conference proceedings and electronic databases including MEDLINE, CINAHL, EMBASE and PUBMED were systematically searched. We included observational studies directly comparing individual NOACs in patients with nonvalvular AF who were aged ≥ 18 years for stroke prevention. Primary outcome included effectiveness outcome (stroke or systemic embolism) and safety outcome (major bleeding). Data were extracted in duplicated by two reviewers independently. A random-effects meta-analysis was conducted to synthesize the data from included observational studies. We used the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) to rate the overall quality of evidence for each outcome. Fifteen studies were included for qualitative synthesis, twelve studies for meta-analyses. It was found that rivaroxaban and dabigatran were similar with regard to risk of stroke or systemic embolism (Hazard ratio [HR] = 1.00, 95% CI 0.91-1.10; evidence quality: low), but rivaroxaban was associated with higher risk of major bleeding (HR = 1.39, 95% CI 1.28-1.50; evidence quality: moderate). Compared with apixaban, a significantly higher risk of major bleeding was observed with rivaroxaban (HR = 1.71, 95% CI 1.51-1.94; evidence quality: low). Apixaban was associated with lower risk of major bleeding, in comparison with dabigatran (HR = 0.80, 95% CI 0.68-0.95; evidence quality: low). No differences in risk of stroke or systemic embolism was observed between rivaroxaban versus apixaban, and apixaban versus dabigatran. In this study, apixaban was found to have the most favorable safety profile amongst the three NOACs. No significant difference was observed in risk of stroke or systemic embolism between the NOACs. Such findings may provide some decision-making support for physicians regarding their choices amongst NOACs in patients with AF.Registration PROSPERO (identifier: CRD42016052908).

Topics: Administration, Oral; Aged; Antithrombins; Atrial Fibrillation; Dabigatran; Embolism; Factor Xa Inhibitors; Female; Hemorrhage; Humans; Male; Middle Aged; Observational Studies as Topic; Pyrazoles; Pyridones; Rivaroxaban; Stroke; Treatment Outcome

Non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants (NOACs) require dose reductions according to patient or clinical factors for patients with atrial fibrillation (AF). In this meta-analysis, we aimed to assess outcomes with reduced-dose NOACs when given as pre-specified in pivotal trials.. Aggregated data abstracted from Phase III trials comparing NOACs with warfarin in patients with AF were assessed by treatment using risk ratios (RRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) stratified by patient eligibility for NOAC dose reduction. Irrespective of treatments, annualized rates of stroke or systemic embolism and major bleeding were higher in patients eligible for reduced-dose NOACs than in those eligible for full-dose NOACs (2.70% vs. 1.60% and 4.35% vs. 2.87%, respectively). Effects of reduced-dose NOACs compared with warfarin in patients eligible for reduced-dose NOACs on stroke or systemic embolism [RR 0.84 (95% CI 0.69-1.03)] and on major bleeding [RR 0.70 (95% CI 0.50-0.97)] were consistent with those of full-dose NOACs relative to warfarin in those eligible for full-dose NOACs [RR 0.86 (95% CI 0.77-0.96) for stroke or systemic embolism and RR 0.87 (95% CI 0.70-1.08) for major bleeding; interaction P, 0.89 and 0.26, respectively]. In addition, NOACs were associated with reduced risks of haemorrhagic stroke, intracranial haemorrhage, fatal bleeding, and death regardless of patient eligibility for NOAC dose reduction (interaction P > 0.05 for each).. Patients eligible for reduced-dose NOACs were at elevated risk of thromboembolic and haemorrhagic complications when treated with anticoagulants. NOACs, when appropriately dose-adjusted, had an improved benefit-harm profile compared with warfarin. Our findings highlight the importance of prescribing reduced-dose NOACs for indicated patient populations.

Topics: Anticoagulants; Atrial Fibrillation; Dose-Response Relationship, Drug; Embolism; Factor Xa Inhibitors; Gastrointestinal Hemorrhage; Hemorrhage; Humans; Intracranial Hemorrhages; Pyrazoles; Pyridines; Pyridones; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Rivaroxaban; Stroke; Thiazoles; Warfarin

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

Topics: Anticoagulants; Atrial Fibrillation; Dabigatran; Embolism; Factor Xa Inhibitors; Gastrointestinal Hemorrhage; Hemorrhage; Humans; Intracranial Hemorrhages; Neoplasms; Pyrazoles; Pyridines; Pyridones; Rivaroxaban; Stroke; Thiazoles; Venous Thromboembolism; Warfarin

Residual cardiovascular risk remains high in patients with atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease despite current antithrombotic therapy. On the other hand, patients with atrial fibrillation have an increased risk of myocardial infarction and cardiovascular death. As a result, a new antithrombotic approach appears necessary to reduce this risk. Areas covered: In this article, the role of rivaroxaban on vascular protection in patients with cardiovascular disease and/or atrial fibrillation was reviewed, with a particular focus, but not limited, on clinical trials. Expert commentary: Previous data have shown that factor Xa plays a key role in the etiopathogenesis of atherothrombosis. Experimental data suggest that rivaroxaban exhibits antiinflammatory and antioxidative stress properties, and may improve endothelial dysfunction. The COMPASS trial showed that among patients with stable atherosclerotic vascular disease, the addition of rivaroxaban 2.5 mg twice daily (vascular dose) to aspirin provided a higher cardiovascular protection than aspirin alone. In ROCKET-AF trial, compared with warfarin, rivaroxaban 20 mg once daily (15 mg if moderate renal dysfunction) (anticoagulant dose) was, at least, as effective as warfarin for the prevention of stroke or systemic embolism among patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation, with a trend toward a reduction in the risk of cardiovascular outcomes. All these data suggest that rivaroxaban might have a vascular protective effect beyond its stroke/systemic embolism preventive activity.

Topics: Atherosclerosis; Atrial Fibrillation; Cardiovascular Diseases; Embolism; Factor Xa Inhibitors; Humans; Rivaroxaban; Stroke

Topics: Administration, Oral; Atrial Fibrillation; Dose-Response Relationship, Drug; Embolism; Factor Xa Inhibitors; Humans; Multicenter Studies as Topic; Peripheral Nervous System Diseases; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Rivaroxaban; Stroke; Vitamin K; Warfarin

Renal impairment increases risk of stroke and systemic embolic events and bleeding in patients with atrial fibrillation. Direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) have varied dependence on renal elimination, magnifying the importance of appropriate patient selection, dosing, and periodic kidney function monitoring. In randomized controlled trials of nonvalvular atrial fibrillation, DOACs were at least as effective and associated with less bleeding compared with warfarin. Each direct oral anticoagulant was associated with reduced risk of stroke and systemic embolic events and major bleeding compared with warfarin in nonvalvular atrial fibrillation patients with mild or moderate renal impairment. Renal function decrease appears less impacted by DOACs, which are associated with a better risk-benefit profile than warfarin in patients with decreasing renal function over time. Limited data address the risk-benefit profile of DOACs in patients with severe impairment or on dialysis.

Topics: Administration, Oral; Anticoagulants; Antithrombins; Atrial Fibrillation; Dabigatran; Embolism; Factor Xa Inhibitors; Hemorrhage; Humans; Pharmaceutical Research; Pyrazoles; Pyridines; Pyridones; Renal Insufficiency; Risk Assessment; Rivaroxaban; Stroke; Therapeutic Equivalency; Thiazoles; Warfarin

Chronic kidney disease (CKD) is an independent risk factor for atrial fibrillation (AF), which is more prevalent among CKD patients than the general population. AF causes stroke or systemic embolism, leading to increased mortality. The conventional antithrombotic prophylaxis agent warfarin is often prescribed for the prevention of stroke, but risk of bleeding necessitates regular therapeutic monitoring. Recently developed direct oral anticoagulants (DOAC) are expected to be useful as alternatives to warfarin.. To assess the efficacy and safety of DOAC including apixaban, dabigatran, edoxaban, and rivaroxaban versus warfarin among AF patients with CKD.. We searched the Cochrane Kidney and Transplant Specialised Register (up to 1 August 2017) through contact with the Information Specialist using search terms relevant to this review. Studies in the Specialised Register are identified through searches of CENTRAL, MEDLINE, and EMBASE, conference proceedings, the International Clinical Trials Register (ICTRP) Search Portal, and ClinicalTrials.gov.. We included all randomised controlled trials (RCTs) which directly compared the efficacy and safety of direct oral anticoagulants (direct thrombin inhibitors or factor Xa inhibitors) with dose-adjusted warfarin for preventing stroke and systemic embolic events in non-valvular AF patients with CKD, defined as creatinine clearance (CrCl) or eGFR between 15 and 60 mL/min (CKD stage G3 and G4).. Two review authors independently selected studies, assessed quality, and extracted data. We calculated the risk ratio (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CI) for the association between anticoagulant therapy and all strokes and systemic embolic events as the primary efficacy outcome and major bleeding events as the primary safety outcome. Confidence in the evidence was assessing using GRADE.. Our review included 12,545 AF participants with CKD from five studies. All participants were randomised to either DOAC (apixaban, dabigatran, edoxaban, and rivaroxaban) or dose-adjusted warfarin. Four studies used a central, interactive, automated response system for allocation concealment while the other did not specify concealment methods. Four studies were blinded while the other was partially open-label. However, given that all studies involved blinded evaluation of outcome events, we considered the risk of bias to be low. We were unable to create funnel plots due to the small number of studies, thwarting assessment of publication bias. Study duration ranged from 1.8 to 2.8 years. The large majority of participants included in this study were CKD stage G3 (12,155), and a small number were stage G4 (390). Of 12,545 participants from five studies, a total of 321 cases (2.56%) of the primary efficacy outcome occurred per year. Further, of 12,521 participants from five studies, a total of 617 cases (4.93%) of the primary safety outcome occurred per year. DOAC appeared to probably reduce the incidence of stroke and systemic embolism events (5 studies, 12,545 participants: RR 0.81, 95% CI 0.65 to 1.00; moderate certainty evidence) and to slightly reduce the incidence of major bleeding events (5 studies, 12,521 participants: RR 0.79, 95% CI 0.59 to 1.04; low certainty evidence) in comparison with warfarin.. Our findings indicate that DOAC are as likely as warfarin to prevent all strokes and systemic embolic events without increasing risk of major bleeding events among AF patients with kidney impairment. These findings should encourage physicians to prescribe DOAC in AF patients with CKD without fear of bleeding. The major limitation is that the results of this study chiefly reflect CKD stage G3. Application of the results to CKD stage G4 patients requires additional investigation. Furthermore, we could not assess CKD stage G5 patients. Future reviews should assess participants at more advanced CKD stages. Additionally, we could not conduct detailed analyses of subgroups and sensitivity analyses due to lack of data.

Topics: Administration, Oral; Anticoagulants; Antithrombins; Atrial Fibrillation; Dabigatran; Embolism; Hemorrhage; Humans; Pyrazoles; Pyridines; Pyridones; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Renal Insufficiency, Chronic; Rivaroxaban; Stroke; Thiazoles; Warfarin

Enzalutamide, a novel, oral androgen receptor antagonist used for the treatment of metastatic, castration-resistant prostate cancer, has been shown to improve overall and progression-free survival, prolong time to initiation of chemotherapy, reduce skeletal-related events, and carry a favorable adverse effect profile. Metastatic prostate cancer is a disease of older men, a population with an increased incidence of medical comorbidities warranting anticoagulation. Prostate cancer itself, along with some of its therapies, is also prothrombotic. Enzalutamide interacts with several anticoagulants through various mechanisms, making their concurrent use clinically challenging. As such, complex decisions about anticoagulation in these patients are frequently encountered by treating physicians. In this review, we describe the potential interactions between enzalutamide and various anticoagulants, and suggest management paradigms based on the current body of knowledge for patients with atrial fibrillation, venous thromboembolism, and mechanical heart valves.

Topics: Androgen Receptor Antagonists; Anticoagulants; Atrial Fibrillation; Benzamides; Dabigatran; Drug Interactions; Embolism; Heart Valve Prosthesis; Heparin, Low-Molecular-Weight; Humans; Male; Nitriles; Phenylthiohydantoin; Prostatic Neoplasms; Pyrazoles; Pyridines; Pyridones; Rivaroxaban; Thiazoles; Venous Thromboembolism; Warfarin

Despite the information provided by clinical trials is important, there are relevant clinical differences between those patients included in clinical trials and data of daily outpatient clinics. As a result, in some cases, the results of randomized clinical trials could not be directly applied to clinical practice. In this context, to perform «real-life» registries is mandatory. In the ROCKET-AF study, rivaroxaban, a once-daily direct oral anticoagulant, was at least as effective as warfarin for preventing stroke or systemic embolism, with similar rates of major bleeding, but with a lesser risk of intracranial, critical and fatal bleedings. In the last years, different large registries have confirmed that rivaroxaban is effective and even safer in real-life patients than in ROCKET-AF. The aim of this review is to update the current evidence about the efficacy, effectiveness and safety of rivaroxaban in real-life patients.

Topics: Anticoagulants; Atrial Fibrillation; Embolism; Hemorrhage; Humans; Rivaroxaban; Stroke; Warfarin

The non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants (NOACs) are replacing warfarin for stroke prevention in many patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation. Edoxaban, an oral factor Xa inhibitor, is the newest entrant in this class. Results of the Effective Anticoagulation with Factor Xa Next Generation in Atrial Fibrillation (ENGAGE AF) study demonstrate that edoxaban is noninferior to warfarin for prevention of stroke and systemic embolic events, and is associated with significantly less major bleeding, including intracranial bleeding, and reduced cardiovascular mortality. With a net clinical benefit over warfarin, edoxaban is well positioned as a choice among the NOACs, which include dabigatran, rivaroxaban, and apixaban. But how will clinicians choose amongst them? The purpose of this paper is to (a) place the ENGAGE AF trial results into context with results of the studies with the other NOACs, and (b) aid clinicians in selection of the right anticoagulant for the right atrial fibrillation patient.

Topics: Administration, Oral; Aged; Anticoagulants; Atrial Fibrillation; Cardiovascular Diseases; Clinical Trials, Phase III as Topic; Dabigatran; Embolism; Factor Xa Inhibitors; Female; Humans; Intracranial Hemorrhages; Male; Pyrazoles; Pyridines; Pyridones; Research Design; Rivaroxaban; Stroke; Thiazoles; Warfarin

Direct oral anticoagulants are being presented as alternatives to warfarin for preventing stroke in patients with atrial fibrillation. Yet direct comparative trials between these agents in prevention of acute limb ischemia (ALI) are unavailable so far.. To conduct an adjusted indirect comparison meta-analysis between direct oral agents for prevention of acute limb ischemia in atrial fibrillation.. We conducted a systematic literature review searching electronic databases (MEDLINE and Embase) and the Cochrane Library from January 1990 through November 2014. Two blinded investigators reviewed all potentially relevant articles in a parallel manner by using a priori defined criteria. To assess the long-term efficacy and safety of these agents, only randomized clinical trials (RCTs) with follow-up durations of >1 year were included. The primary efficacy outcome was the end point of acute limb ischemia and/or extremity embolism.. A total of 44,563 patients from three RCTs met criteria for inclusion. Patients randomized to direct oral anticoagulants had a non-significant decreased risk for acute limb ischemia (risk ratio [RR]: 0.57, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.26-1.2). In the analysis between agents, however, rivaroxaban significantly lowered the risk of ALI compared to warfarin (RR: 0.23, 95% CI: 0.064-0.82), apixaban (RR: 0.26, 95% CI: 0.081-0.83), and dabigatran (RR: 0.24, 95% CI: 0.077-0.83).. Significant differences in prevention of acute limb ischemia may exist between oral anticoagulant agents in patients with atrial fibrillation. Rivaroxaban lowers the risk of limb embolism versus warfarin, apixaban and dabigatran.

Topics: Administration, Oral; Anticoagulants; Atrial Fibrillation; Dabigatran; Embolism; Humans; Ischemia; Leg; Odds Ratio; Pyrazoles; Pyridones; Rivaroxaban; Stroke; Warfarin

This study investigated the efficacy and safety of novel oral anticoagulants (NOACs) in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) and heart failure (HF) by a meta-analysis.. AF is quite prevalent in patients with HF.. Four phase III clinical trials comparing NOACs to warfarin in patients with AF were included. Each patient was defined as affected by HF according to the criteria of the trial in which the patient was enrolled. Pre-specified outcomes were the composite of stroke/systemic embolism (SSE); major, intracranial, and any bleeding; and cardiovascular (CV) and all-cause death.. A total of 55,011 patients were enrolled, 26,384 (48%) with HF, and 28,627 (52%) without HF; 27,518 receiving NOACs and 27,493 receiving warfarin (median, 70 years of age; 36% females; follow-up: 1.5 to 2.8 years). Rates of SSE (relative risk [RR]: 0.98; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.90 to 1.07]; p = 0.68) and major bleeding (RR: 0.95; 95% CI: 0.88 to 1.03; p = 0.21) were comparable in patients with and without HF. HF patients had reduced rates of any (RR: 0.86; 95% CI: 0.81 to 0.91; p < 0.01) and intracranial (RR: 0.74 95% CI: 0.63 to 0.88; p < 0.01) bleeding but increased rates of all-cause (RR: 1.70 95% CI: 1.31 to 2.19; p < 0.01) and CV death (RR: 2.05 95% CI: 1.66 to 2.55; p < 0.01). NOACs, compared with warfarin significantly reduced SSE and major, intracranial, and any bleeding, regardless of the presence or absence of HF (p. Patients with AF and HF had increased mortality but reduced rates of intracranial and any bleeding compared with the no-HF patients, with no differences in rates of SSE and major bleeding. NOACs significantly reduced SSE, major bleeding, and intracranial hemorrhage in HF patients. No interactions in efficacy and safety of NOACs were observed between AF patients with and without HF.

Topics: Administration, Oral; Anticoagulants; Antithrombins; Atrial Fibrillation; Cardiovascular Diseases; Cause of Death; Dabigatran; Embolism; Factor Xa Inhibitors; Heart Failure; Hemorrhage; Humans; Intracranial Hemorrhages; Mortality; Pyrazoles; Pyridines; Pyridones; Rivaroxaban; Stroke; Thiazoles; Treatment Outcome; Warfarin

Atrial fibrillation is a common finding in patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD), which increases markedly the embolism risk. The CHADS2 and HAS-BLED scales, used in the general population to assess the risk/benefit of oral anticoagulation (OAC), underestimate respectively the risk of embolism and haemorrhage in CKD, making it difficult to decide whether to use OAC or not. Based on the available evidence, it seems indicated to use OAC in stage 3 CKD, while it is controversial in advanced stages. New OAC such as dabigatran and rivaroxaban have been approved in stage 3 CKD but their role is still somewhat uncertain.

Topics: Administration, Oral; Anticoagulants; Atrial Fibrillation; Dabigatran; Embolism; Hemorrhage; Humans; Renal Insufficiency, Chronic; Risk Assessment; Risk Factors; Rivaroxaban; Stroke

Atrial fibrillation (AF) is an increasingly common cause of stroke and systemic embolism. While warfarin has been the mainstay of stroke prevention in patients with AF, newer novel oral anticoagulant medications are now available. Rivaroxaban, a direct factor Xa inhibitor with a rapid onset and offset after oral administration, offers potential advantages over warfarin, predominantly due to its predictable pharmacokinetics across wide patient populations. It requires no coagulation monitoring, and only two different doses are needed (20 mg daily for patients with normal renal function and 15 mg daily in those with reduced renal function). A large randomized trial (ROCKET AF) has shown non-inferiority to warfarin for preventing stroke or systemic embolism in the per-protocol population and superiority to warfarin in the on-treatment safety population. Several subanalyses confirm that the treatment effect of rivaroxaban is consistent across different patient subgroups, including those with reduced renal function. The tolerability of rivaroxaban appears similar to that of warfarin, with comparable overall bleeding rates in clinical trials. In ROCKET AF, significantly lower rates of fatal and intracranial bleeding were seen with rivaroxaban, while lower rates of gastrointestinal bleeding were seen with warfarin. Important contraindications to rivaroxaban include valvular AF, the presence of a prosthetic valve (mechanical or bioprosthetic) or valve repair, the need for concurrent dual antiplatelet therapy, and creatinine clearance <30 ml/min. Once-daily dosing and the lack of coagulation monitoring may increase utilization and adherence compared with warfarin, potentially decreasing the large burden of care associated with stroke secondary to AF. Overall, rivaroxaban offers a useful alternative to warfarin for stroke prevention in patients with AF.

Topics: Anticoagulants; Atrial Fibrillation; Creatinine; Embolism; Factor Xa Inhibitors; Hemorrhage; Humans; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Renal Insufficiency; Risk Factors; Rivaroxaban; Stroke

In October 2011, DTB reviewed the use of dabigatran, the first new oral anticoagulant licensed for the prevention of stroke and systemic embolism in adult patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation (AF) and one or more defined risk factors.1 We noted that the potential advantages of dabigatran for many patients with AF and the continuing need to provide warfarin therapy for others, provided an important challenge for the NHS. The use of dabigatran has increased significantly in the UK and two other drugs have been licensed for this indication (▾apixaban-Eliquis, Bristol-Myers Squibb/Pfizer; ▾rivaroxaban-Xarelto, Bayer plc).2-6 In addition, published drug safety alerts have highlighted the risk of serious haemorrhage associated with the use of these drugs.7-9 Here we review the evidence for apixaban and rivaroxaban for the prevention of stroke and systemic embolism in adult patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation.

Topics: Adult; Anticoagulants; Atrial Fibrillation; Benzimidazoles; beta-Alanine; Dabigatran; Embolism; Factor Xa Inhibitors; Hemorrhage; Humans; Morpholines; Pyrazoles; Pyridones; Rivaroxaban; Stroke; Thiophenes

Heparins and vitamin K antagonists (VKA) used commonly are the standard treatment of venous and arterial thromboses. They are very efficient and safe, but have some limitations: iatrogenicity, laboratory monitoring, parenteral use for heparins and fondaparinux. Nowadays, four new inhibitors of factor Xa are used orally (rivaroxaban, apixaban, edoxaban, betrixaban), and they are at least as efficient as heparins and vitamin K antagonists. The objective is to substitute these indirect inhibitors of factor Xa (heparins, low molecular weight heparins and fondaparinux) in the prevention of venous and arterial thromboembolic episodes. The new direct inhibitors do not require routine laboratory monitoring of blood coagulation. They inhibit the extrinsic and the intrinsic pathways of blood coagulation. Rivaroxaban and apixaban are efficacious and safe in the prevention of cerebral infarcts in patients with non-valvular fibrillation. Apixaban is another direct inhibitor of factor Xa used orally which is developed in the same indications as rivaroxaban. Edoxaban and betrixaban are also in development. The objective of this work is to study the pharmacodynamic, pharmacokinetic, the efficacy and safety of these four oral direct factor Xa inhibitors.

Topics: Acute Coronary Syndrome; Administration, Oral; Anticoagulants; Benzamides; Blood Coagulation; Embolism; Factor Xa Inhibitors; Hemorrhage; Hemostatics; Humans; Morpholines; Postoperative Complications; Pyrazoles; Pyridines; Pyridones; Rivaroxaban; Stroke; Thiazoles; Thiophenes; Thrombophilia; Thrombosis

For the last decades vitamin K antagonists have been the most effective anticoagulant treatment of atrial fibrillation. New molecules are being designed, mainly due to the great amount of disadvantages in the management of conventional anticoagulation. Dabigatran, rivaroxaban and apixaban will soon be available as an alternative to warfarin/acenocumarol. All of them have demonstrated to be non-inferior to warfarin in preventing stroke and systemic embolism, with even dabigatran 150 mg bid and apixaban being superior. They have also a lower risk of bleeding, especially regarding severe/fatal and intracranial hemorrhages. This is a real revolution. The advance of these new anticoagulants will be limited only by the higher cost, and will progressively become the protagonists of oral anticoagulation in patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation.

Topics: Administration, Oral; Anticoagulants; Atrial Fibrillation; Azetidines; Benzimidazoles; Benzylamines; beta-Alanine; Dabigatran; Embolism; Humans; Morpholines; Pyrazoles; Pyridines; Pyridones; Rivaroxaban; Stroke; Thiazoles; Thiophenes; Treatment Outcome; Warfarin

Chronic kidney disease and atrial fibrillation (AF) commonly coexist, and data suggest that renal patients have AF rates in excess of double that encountered in the general population. These patients are at increased risk of stroke, regardless of the presence or absence of AF. Furthermore, a lower GFR causes increased thromboembolic risk in patients with AF - independent of other risk factors. The dilemma facing clinicians treating this cohort of patients is that renal insufficiency confers both a thromboembolic and a bleeding risk. Renal disease also commonly coexists with other risk factors for stroke and bleeding such as hypertension and advanced age. Furthermore, bleeding risk tracks stroke risk and many risk factors are common to both thromboembolism and haemorrhage. Patients with severe renal impairment are also actively excluded from the majority of trials for stroke prevention in AF, including those trials which informed the development of stroke risk factor scoring schemes. Therefore, patients with renal disease and AF present a unique management challenge. The available data suggests that the benefit from warfarin in terms of stroke reduction is not as clear as in the general population, and there is an increased risk of bleeding complications and even ectopic vascular calcification. Thus, it is problematic to extrapolate the benefits of warfarin in the general population to a subgroup that has been actively excluded from clinical trials. The new oral anticoagulants have relatively little data in patients with severe renal impairment, and all have an element of renal excretion. There is a need for large randomised control trials in patients with renal insufficiency and on haemodialysis to provide a bank of high-quality scientific data on which clinicians can base their management decisions. Until then, we must adopt a pragmatic approach which involves careful consideration of the relative risk of stroke and bleeding in each individual patient.

Topics: Aged; Anticoagulants; Atrial Fibrillation; Benzimidazoles; beta-Alanine; Clinical Trials as Topic; Comorbidity; Dabigatran; Disease Management; Embolism; Female; Fibrinolytic Agents; Hemorrhage; Humans; Hypertension; Intracranial Embolism; Male; Morpholines; Patient Selection; Pyrazoles; Pyridones; Renal Insufficiency, Chronic; Risk; Risk Factors; Rivaroxaban; Severity of Illness Index; Stroke; Thiophenes; Thrombophilia; Warfarin

Rivaroxaban (Xarelto(®)), a direct factor Xa inhibitor, is approved for the prevention of stroke and systemic embolism in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) in Canada or those with nonvalvular AF (NVAF) in the EU, US and Japan. It is administered at a fixed oral dose and generally does not require routine monitoring of coagulation parameters. In the ROCKET AF trial in patients with NVAF and a moderate to high risk of stroke, oral rivaroxaban 20 mg once daily (15 mg once daily in patients with moderate renal impairment) was noninferior to oral dose-adjusted warfarin once daily in preventing primary endpoint events (i.e. stroke and systemic embolism) in the per-protocol population (primary noninferiority analysis) and superior in the on-treatment safety population (primary superiority analysis). Several ROCKET AF subgroup analyses indicated that the treatment effect of rivaroxaban was consistent across patient subgroups stratified according to baseline factors, including the presence or absence of previous stroke or transient ischaemic attack. Patients with moderate renal impairment receiving the reduced rivaroxaban dosage (15 mg once daily) showed a treatment effect consistent with that seen with rivaroxaban 20 mg once daily in patients with normal renal function. The tolerability profile of rivaroxaban was generally acceptable in ROCKET AF, with no significant difference between rivaroxaban and warfarin in the incidence of major or nonmajor clinically-relevant bleeding events (primary safety endpoint). In the Japanese ROCKET AF trial, rivaroxaban 15 mg once daily (10 mg once daily in patients with moderate renal impairment) was noninferior to oral dose-adjusted warfarin once daily in the incidence of major or nonmajor clinically-relevant bleeding (primary study outcome). Thus, rivaroxaban is a reasonable alternative to warfarin for the prevention of stroke and systemic embolism in patients with NVAF.

Topics: Anticoagulants; Atrial Fibrillation; Cost-Benefit Analysis; Drug Interactions; Embolism; Humans; Morpholines; Rivaroxaban; Stroke; Thiophenes

Orally active small molecules that selectively and specifically inhibit coagulation serine proteases have been developed for clinical use. For some patients these oral direct inhibitors (ODIs) offer substantial benefits over oral vitamin K antagonists (VKA). However, for the majority of patients with good anticoagulant control with VKAs the advantages of the ODIs are primarily convenience and few drug interactions. The drugs are prescribed at fixed dose without the need for monitoring or dose adjustment in the majority of patients and the rapid onset of anticoagulation and short half-life make initiation and interruption of anticoagulation considerably easier than with VKAs. As yet, specific antidotes to ODIs are not available for clinical use but these are in development as rapid reversal agents. As with all anticoagulants produced so far, there is a correlation between intensity of anticoagulation and bleeding. Consequently, the need to consider the balance of benefit and risk in each individual patient is no less important than with VKA therapy. Dabigatran and rivaroxaban have been chosen for this review as examples of a thrombin inhibitor and an inhibitor of factor Xa respectively. The clinical application of these drugs is the focus of the review.

Topics: Administration, Oral; Anticoagulants; Antithrombins; Benzimidazoles; beta-Alanine; Dabigatran; Drug Interactions; Embolism; Factor Xa Inhibitors; Hemorrhage; Humans; Morpholines; Rivaroxaban; Stroke; Thiophenes

The review analyzes the role of atrial fibrillation concurrent with stable manifestations of coronary heart disease when novel oral anticoagulants are used. It gives the results of comparison of the efficacy and safety of warfarin and rivaroxaban in such patients in the large controlled ROCKET-AF trial.

Topics: Anticoagulants; Atrial Fibrillation; Controlled Clinical Trials as Topic; Embolism; Humans; Morpholines; Rivaroxaban; Thiophenes; Warfarin

The new oral anticoagulants are now a reality and are available to clinicians. Although a large number of patients have been included in the many clinical trials of these drugs, there is one population that is always underrepresented - called special populations - such as those aged more than 75 years old, the obese, and patients with renal impairment. This review aims to analyze differences in the efficacy and safety in these special populations recruited in the various trials.

Topics: Administration, Oral; Age Factors; Anticoagulants; Benzimidazoles; Contraindications; Dabigatran; Embolism; Humans; Morpholines; Obesity; Pyrazoles; Pyridines; Pyridones; Renal Insufficiency; Rivaroxaban; Stroke; Thiophenes; Thrombosis

New oral anticoagulants, including apixaban, dabigatran, and rivaroxaban, have been developed as alternatives to warfarin, the standard oral anticoagulation therapy for patients with atrial fibrillation (AF). A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials was performed to compare the efficacy and safety of new oral anticoagulants to those of warfarin in patients with AF. The published research was systematically searched for randomized controlled trials of >1 year in duration that compared new oral anticoagulants to warfarin in patients with AF. Random-effects models were used to pool efficacy and safety data across randomized controlled trials. Three studies, including 44,563 patients, were identified. Patients randomized to new oral anticoagulants had a decreased risk for all-cause stroke and systemic embolism (relative risk [RR] 0.78, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.67 to 0.92), ischemic and unidentified stroke (RR 0.87, 95% CI 0.77 to 0.99), hemorrhagic stroke (RR 0.45, 95% CI 0.31 to 0.68), all-cause mortality (RR 0.88, 95% CI 0.82 to 0.95), and vascular mortality (RR 0.87, 95% CI 0.77 to 0.98). Randomization to a new oral anticoagulant was associated with a lower risk for intracranial bleeding (RR 0.49, 95% CI 0.36 to 0.66). Data regarding the risks for major bleeding (RR 0.88, 95% CI 0.71 to 1.09) and gastrointestinal bleeding (RR 1.25, 95% CI 0.91 to 1.72) were inconclusive. In conclusion, the new oral anticoagulants are more efficacious than warfarin for the prevention of stroke and systemic embolism in patients with AF. With a decreased risk for intracranial bleeding, they appear to have a favorable safety profile, making them promising alternatives to warfarin.

Topics: Administration, Oral; Anticoagulants; Atrial Fibrillation; Benzimidazoles; beta-Alanine; Dabigatran; Embolism; Humans; Morpholines; Pyrazoles; Pyridones; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Rivaroxaban; Stroke; Thiophenes; Warfarin

New oral anticoagulant drugs are emerging as alternatives to warfarin for the prevention of stroke in patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation. Two agents are direct factor Xa inhibitors (rivaroxaban and apixaban), and the third is a direct thrombin inhibitor (dabigatran). They have been separately compared to warfarin in large randomised trials. Our objective was to indirectly compare the three agents to each other for major efficacy and safety outcomes. Studies were assessed for comparability and the odds ratios of selected outcomes for each anticoagulant versus one another were estimated indirectly. The three cohorts differed significantly in terms of CHADS(2) score and the number of individuals with a past history of stroke, transient ischemic attack or systemic embolism. The estimated odds ratio of stroke or systemic embolism was 1.35 for rivaroxaban vs dabigatran 150 mg (p=0.04), 0.97 for rivaroxaban versus dabigatran 110 mg (p=0.81), 1.22 for apixaban versus dabigatran 150 mg (p=0.18), 0.88 for apixaban versus dabigatran 110 mg (p=0.34) and 0.90 for apixaban versus rivaroxaban (p=0.43). The estimated odds ratio of major bleeding was 1.10 for rivaroxaban versus dabigatran 150 mg (p=0.36), 1.28 for rivaroxaban versus dabigatran 110 mg (p=0.02), 0.74 for apixaban versus dabigatran 150 mg (p=0.004), 0.87 for apixaban versus dabigatran 110 mg (p=0.17) and 0.68 for apixaban versus rivaroxaban (p<0.001). In conclusion, the available data indicate no significant difference in efficacy between dabigatran 150 mg and apixaban for the prevention of stroke or systemic embolism in patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation. It appears however that apixaban is associated with less major bleeding than dabigatran 150 mg or rivaroxaban and that rivaroxaban is less effective than dabigatran 150 mg in preventing stroke or systemic embolism. Such an indirect comparison should be used only to generate hypotheses which need to be tested in a dedicated randomised trial comparing the three drugs directly.

Topics: Aged; Anticoagulants; Antithrombins; Atrial Fibrillation; Benzimidazoles; beta-Alanine; Clinical Trials, Phase III as Topic; Dabigatran; Embolism; Factor Xa Inhibitors; Female; Heart Valve Diseases; Hemorrhage; Humans; Ischemic Attack, Transient; Male; Morpholines; Multicenter Studies as Topic; Pyrazoles; Pyridones; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Rivaroxaban; Secondary Prevention; Severity of Illness Index; Stroke; Thiophenes; Thrombophilia; Vitamin K; Warfarin

Vit-K antagonists are the therapy of choice to prevent thromboembolic events due to atrial fibrillation since many years. New oral anticoagulants (NOA) showed encouraging results vs. warfarin but there are no data directly comparing different NOA. We performed an adjusted indirect meta-analysis.. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were searched. Efficacy end points were the cumulative rate of thomboembolic stroke (TES) and systemic embolism (SE). Main safety end point was the rate of hemorrhagic stroke (HS).. Three RCTs (50578 patients) were included. Overall, NOA were comparable to warfarin according to the cumulative risk of TES and SE, as well as for TES alone. NOA were associated with a reduced rate of SE [OR 0.64 (0.44, 0.94], P=0.02]. Compared to warfarin, NOA were associated with a significantly reduced risk of HS [OR 0.43 (0.34, 0.55), P<0.001, NNT to avoid a HS 153] and all cause death [OR 0.90 [0.84, 0.96], P=0.03, NNT to save one fatality 43]. Head to head comparison showed that in terms of cumulative rate of TES/SE, as well as of TES, none of the NOA was significantly superior to the others (all Ps>0.05). Rivaroxaban showed superiority in the prevention of SE. Dabigatran 150 mg/twice daily was associated with the largest reduction in the risk of HS vs. warfarin and vs. other NOA. Overall mortality was quite comparable across NOA.. Overall superiority of NOA over warfarin is largely influenced by the reduction of HS. Dabigatran 150 mg/twice daily seems to have the best risk/benefit profile.

Topics: Aged; Aged, 80 and over; Anticoagulants; Atrial Fibrillation; Benzimidazoles; beta-Alanine; Biological Availability; Comparative Effectiveness Research; Dabigatran; Drug Monitoring; Embolism; Female; Humans; Male; Middle Aged; Morpholines; Outcome and Process Assessment, Health Care; Pharmacovigilance; Pyrazoles; Pyridones; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Risk Assessment; Rivaroxaban; Stroke; Thiophenes; Warfarin

A network meta-analysis of the three new oral anticoagulants was performed from the three trials comparing dabigatran, rivaroxaban and apixaban with warfarin in patients with atrial fibrillation.. Data were extracted of the RE-LY study of dabigatran 110 mg bid and dabigatran 150 mg bid, the ROCKET AF trial of rivaroxaban and the ARISTOTLE trial of apixaban for the composite outcome of ischemic stroke and systemic embolism, for major bleeding, intracerebral bleeding, mortality and myocardial infarction.. Dabigatran (150 mg bid) showed superior efficacy in preventing ischemic stroke plus systemic embolism to dabigatran (110 mg bid, P=0.0364) and rivaroxaban (P=0.0388). Apixaban had equivalent efficacy with rivaroxaban and dabigatran (either dose). Apixaban was safer (less major bleeding) than dabigatran (150 mg bid, P=0.036) or rivaroxaban (P=0.0002). Intracerebral hemorrhage occurred with equal frequency for all agents except for rivaroxaban (higher risk than dabigatran 110 mg bid, P=0.0070). Myocardial infarction occurred less frequently with rivaroxaban and apixaban compared to either dose of dabigatran (all P<0.05).. All-cause mortality was not different for any agent or regimen. In the absence of head-to-head comparisons, this network meta-analysis suggests that apixaban and dabigatran 110 mg bid may offer the best benefit-risk balance for stroke prevention in non-valvular atrial fibrillation. Dabigatran 150 mg bid may be preferred for patients with a high risk for embolism.

Topics: Administration, Oral; Aged; Anticoagulants; Atrial Fibrillation; Benzimidazoles; beta-Alanine; Cerebral Hemorrhage; Chi-Square Distribution; Dabigatran; Embolism; Female; Humans; Male; Middle Aged; Morpholines; Myocardial Infarction; Odds Ratio; Pyrazoles; Pyridones; Risk Assessment; Risk Factors; Rivaroxaban; Stroke; Thiophenes; Treatment Outcome

Although apixaban and rivaroxaban are commonly used in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) and valvular heart disease (VHD), there is limited evidence comparing the 2 drugs in these patients.. To emulate a target trial of effectiveness and safety of apixaban and rivaroxaban in patients with AF and VHD.. New-user, active comparator, cohort study design.. Commercial health insurance database from 1 January 2013 to 31 December 2020.. New users of apixaban or rivaroxaban who had a diagnosis of AF and VHD before initiation of anticoagulant therapy.. The primary effectiveness outcome was a composite of ischemic stroke or systemic embolism. The primary safety outcome was a composite of gastrointestinal or intracranial bleeding. Cox proportional hazards regression with a robust variance estimator was used to estimate hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% CIs.. When compared with rivaroxaban in a propensity score-matched cohort of 19 894 patients (9947 receiving each drug), apixaban was associated with a lower rate of ischemic stroke or systemic embolism (HR, 0.57 [95% CI, 0.40 to 0.80]) and bleeding (HR, 0.51 [CI, 0.41 to 0.62]). The absolute reduction in the probability of stroke or systemic embolism with apixaban compared with rivaroxaban was 0.0026 within 6 months and 0.011 within 1 year of treatment initiation. The absolute reduction in the probability of bleeding events with apixaban compared with rivaroxaban was 0.012 within 6 months and 0.019 within 1 year of treatment initiation.. Short follow-up time and inability to ascertain some types of VHD.. In this study of patients with AF and VHD, patients receiving apixaban had a lower risk for ischemic stroke or systemic embolism and for bleeding when compared with those receiving rivaroxaban.. National Institutes of Health.

Topics: Anticoagulants; Atrial Fibrillation; Cohort Studies; Embolism; Heart Valve Diseases; Hemorrhage; Humans; Ischemic Stroke; Rivaroxaban; Stroke

The efficacy and safety of rivaroxaban in patients with bioprosthetic mitral valves and atrial fibrillation or flutter remain uncertain. DESIGN: RIVER was an academic-led, multicenter, open-label, randomized, non-inferiority trial with blinded outcome adjudication that enrolled 1005 patients from 49 sites in Brazil. Patients with a bioprosthetic mitral valve and atrial fibrillation or flutter were randomly assigned (1:1) to rivaroxaban 20 mg once daily (15 mg in those with creatinine clearance <50 mL/min) or dose-adjusted warfarin (target international normalized ratio 2.0-30.); the follow-up period was 12 months. The primary outcome was a composite of all-cause mortality, stroke, transient ischemic attack, major bleeding, valve thrombosis, systemic embolism, or hospitalization for heart failure. Secondary outcomes included individual components of the primary composite outcome, bleeding events, and venous thromboembolism. SUMMARY: RIVER represents the largest trial specifically designed to assess the efficacy and safety of a direct oral anticoagulant in patients with bioprosthetic mitral valves and atrial fibrillation or flutter. The results of this trial can inform clinical practice and international guidelines.

Topics: Administration, Oral; Aspirin; Atrial Fibrillation; Atrial Flutter; Bioprosthesis; Brazil; Cause of Death; Creatinine; Embolism; Factor Xa Inhibitors; Heart Valve Prosthesis; Hemorrhage; Hospitalization; Humans; Ischemic Attack, Transient; Mitral Valve; Rivaroxaban; Sample Size; Stroke; Surgical Procedures, Operative; Thrombosis; Treatment Outcome; Warfarin

To date, vitamin K antagonists are the only available oral anticoagulants in patients with mechanical heart valves. In this way, we developed a pilot trial with rivaroxaban..  The RIWA study was a proof-of-concept, open-label, randomized clinical trial and was designed to assess the incidence of thromboembolic and bleeding events of the rivaroxaban-based strategy (15 mg twice daily) in comparison to dose-adjusted warfarin. Patients were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio and were followed prospectively for 90 days..  A total of 72 patients were enrolled in the present study. Of these, 44 patients were randomized: 23 patients were allocated to the rivaroxaban group and 21 to the warfarin group. After 90 days of follow-up, the primary outcome occurred in one patient (4.3%) in the rivaroxaban group and three patients (14.3%) in the warfarin group (risk ratio [RR] 0.27; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.02-2.85; P = 0.25). Minor bleeding (without discontinuation of medical therapy) occurred in six patients (26.1%) in the rivaroxaban group versus six patients (28.6%) in the warfarin group (RR 0.88; 95% CI 0.23-3.32; P = 0.85). One patient in the warfarin group died from myocardial infarction. No cases of hemorrhagic stroke, valve thrombosis, peripheral embolic events, or new intracardiac thrombus were related in both groups.. In this pilot study, rivaroxaban 15 mg twice daily had thromboembolic and bleeding events similar to warfarin in patients with mechanical heart valves. These data confirm the authors' proof-of-concept and suggest that a larger trial with a similar design is not unreasonable. CLINICALTRIAL.. NCT03566303.

Topics: Adult; Brain Infarction; Dose-Response Relationship, Drug; Embolism; Female; Heart Valve Prosthesis; Hemorrhage; Humans; Ischemic Attack, Transient; Male; Middle Aged; Pilot Projects; Rivaroxaban; Stroke; Thromboembolism; Warfarin

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).. 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.. 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).. 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.

Topics: Aged; Anticoagulants; Atrial Fibrillation; Double-Blind Method; Embolism; Factor Xa Inhibitors; Female; Hemorrhage; Humans; Latin America; Male; Mortality; Risk Assessment; Rivaroxaban; Stroke; Treatment Outcome; Warfarin

Rheumatic heart disease (RHD) is a neglected disease affecting 33 million people, mainly in low and middle income countries. Yet very few large trials or registries have been conducted in this population. The INVICTUS program of research in RHD consists of a randomized-controlled trial (RCT) of 4500 patients comparing rivaroxaban with vitamin K antagonists (VKA) in patients with RHD and atrial fibrillation (AF), a registry of 17,000 patients to document the contemporary clinical course of patients with RHD, including a focused sub-study on pregnant women with RHD within the registry. This paper describes the rationale, design, organization and baseline characteristics of the RCT and a summary of the design of the registry and its sub-study. Patients with RHD and AF are considered to be at high risk of embolic strokes, and oral anticoagulation with VKAs is recommended for stroke prevention. But the quality of anticoagulation with VKA is poor in developing countries. A drug which does not require monitoring, and which is safe and effective for preventing stroke in patients with valvular AF, would fulfill a major unmet need.. The INVestIgation of rheumatiC AF Treatment Using VKAs, rivaroxaban or aspirin Studies (INVICTUS-VKA) trial is an international, multicentre, randomized, open-label, parallel group trial, testing whether rivaroxaban 20 mg given once daily is non-inferior (or superior) to VKA in patients with RHD, AF, and an elevated risk of stroke (mitral stenosis with valve area ≤2 cm. INVICTUS is the largest program of clinical research focused on a neglected cardiovascular disease and will provide new information on the clinical course of patients with RHD, and approaches to anticoagulation in those with concomitant AF.

Topics: Adult; Aged; Atrial Fibrillation; Embolism; Factor Xa Inhibitors; Female; Hemorrhage; Humans; Male; Middle Aged; Pregnancy; Pregnancy Complications, Cardiovascular; Rheumatic Heart Disease; Rivaroxaban; Stroke; Vitamin K

Although randomized trials provide a high level of evidence regarding the efficacy of non-vitamin K oral anticoagulants (NOACs), the results of such trials may differ from those observed in day-to-day clinical practice.. To compare the risk of stroke/systemic embolism (S/SE) and major bleeding (MB) between NOAC and warfarin in clinical practice.. Patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF) who started warfarin/NOACs between January 2015 and November 2016 were retrospectively identified from Korea's nationwide health insurance claims database. Using inpatient diagnosis and imaging records, the Cox models with inverse probability of treatment weighting using propensity scores were used to estimate hazard ratios (HRs) for NOACs relative to warfarin.. Of the 48,389 patients, 10,548, 11,414, 17,779 and 8,648 were administered apixaban, dabigatran, rivaroxaban and warfarin, respectively. Many patients had suffered prior strokes (36.7%, 37.7%, 31.4%, and 32.2% in apixaban, dabigatran, rivaroxaban, and warfarin group, respectively), exhibited high CHA2DS2-VASc (4.8, 4.6, 4.6, and 4.1 in apixaban, dabigatran, rivaroxaban, and warfarin group, respectively) and HAS-BLED (3.7, 3.6, 3.6, and 3.3 in apixaban, dabigatran, rivaroxaban, and warfarin group, respectively) scores, had received antiplatelet therapy (75.4%, 75.7%, 76.8%, and 70.1% in apixaban, dabigatran, rivaroxaban, and warfarin group, respectively), or were administered reduced doses of NOACs (49.8%, 52.9%, and 42.8% in apixaban, dabigatran, and rivaroxaban group, respectively). Apixaban, dabigatran and rivaroxaban showed a significantly lower S/SE risk [HR, 95% confidence intervals (CI): 0.62, 0.54-0.71; 0.60, 0.53-0.69; and 0.71, 0.56-0.88, respectively] than warfarin. Apixaban and dabigatran (HR, 95% CI: 0.58, 0.51-0.66 and 0.75, 0.60-0.95, respectively), but not rivaroxaban (HR, 95% CI: 0.84, 0.69-1.04), showed a significantly lower MB risk than warfarin.. Among Asian patients who were associated with higher bleeding risk, low adherence, and receiving reduced NOAC dose than that provided in randomised controlled trials, all NOACs were associated with a significantly lower S/SE risk and apixaban and dabigatran with a significantly lower MB risk than warfarin.

Topics: Administration, Oral; Adult; Aged; Anticoagulants; Atrial Fibrillation; Dabigatran; Embolism; Female; Hemorrhage; Humans; Male; Middle Aged; Proportional Hazards Models; Pyrazoles; Pyridones; Rivaroxaban; Stroke; Vitamin K; Warfarin

Although a recent expert consensus statement has recommended periprocedural uninterrupted (UI) non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants (NOACs) during catheter ablation of atrial fibrillation (AF) as a Class I indication, there have been no clear randomized trials. We investigated the safety and efficacy of UI, procedure day single-dose skipped (SDS), and 24-hour skipped (24S) NOACs in patients undergoing AF ablation.. In this prospective, open-label, randomized multicentre trial, 326 patients (75% male, 58 ± 11 years old) scheduled for AF catheter ablation were randomly assigned in a 1:1:1 ratio to UI, SDS, and 24S at three tertiary hospitals. Bridging with low molecular weight heparin was carried out in the patients with persistent AF who were assigned to the 24S group. Dabigatran, rivaroxaban, and apixaban were assigned in order after randomization. The primary endpoint was the incidence of bleeding events within 1 month after ablation. The secondary endpoints included thrombo-embolic and other procedure-related complications. The intra-procedural heparin requirement was higher in the 24S group than others (P < 0.001), and the mean activated clotting time was comparable among the groups (P = 0.139). The incidence of major bleeding up to 1 month after ablation and a post-procedural reduction in the haemoglobin levels did not significantly differ among the treatment groups and different NOACs (P > 0.05). There were no fatal events or thrombo-embolic complications in all the three groups.. In patients undergoing AF ablation, UI NOACs and SDS or double dose skipped NOACs had a comparable efficacy and safety, regardless of the type of NOAC.

Topics: Aged; Anticoagulants; Antithrombins; Atrial Fibrillation; Catheter Ablation; Dabigatran; Drug Administration Schedule; Embolism; Factor Xa Inhibitors; Female; Hemorrhage; Heparin; Humans; Incidence; Intraoperative Care; Male; Middle Aged; Preoperative Care; Prospective Studies; Pyrazoles; Pyridones; Rivaroxaban; Stroke; Whole Blood Coagulation Time

Atrial fibrillation (AF) increases risk of stroke 5-fold. Carotid artery disease (CD) also augments the risk of stroke, yet there are limited data about the interplay of these 2 diseases and clinical outcomes in patients with comorbid AF and CD.. Among patients with both AF and CD, use of rivaroxaban when compared with warfarin is associated with a lower risk of stroke.. This post hoc analysis from ROCKET AF aimed to determine absolute rates of stroke/systemic embolism (SE) and bleeding, and the efficacy and safety of rivaroxaban compared with warfarin in patients with AF and CD (defined as history of carotid occlusive disease or carotid revascularization [endarterectomy and/or stenting]).. A total of 593 (4.2%) patients had CD at enrollment. Patients with and without CD had similar rates of stroke or SE (adjusted hazard ratio [HR]: 0.99, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.66-1.48, P = 0.96), and there was no difference in major or nonmajor clinically relevant bleeding (adjusted HR: 1.04, 95% CI: 0.88-1.24, P = 0.62). The efficacy of rivaroxaban compared with warfarin for the prevention of stroke/SE was not statistically significant in patients with vs those without CD (interaction P = 0.25). The safety of rivaroxaban vs warfarin for major or nonmajor clinically relevant bleeding was similar in patients with and without CD (interaction P = 0.64).. Patients with CD in ROCKET AF had similar risk of stroke/SE compared with patients without CD. Additionally, there was no interaction between CD and the treatment effect of rivaroxaban or warfarin for stroke prevention or safety endpoints.

Topics: Aged; Anticoagulants; Atrial Fibrillation; Carotid Artery Diseases; Dose-Response Relationship, Drug; Double-Blind Method; Embolism; Factor Xa Inhibitors; Female; Follow-Up Studies; Humans; Male; Risk Factors; Rivaroxaban; Stroke; Treatment Outcome; Warfarin

The safety of intravenous thrombolysis in patients taking rivaroxaban has not been well established. We retrospectively analyzed the outcomes of all patients who received thrombolytic therapy 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 review of medical and adverse event records for patients receiving thrombolytic therapy while enrolled in ROCKET AF was performed to determine their baseline characteristics, indications for thrombolysis, and type of agent used. Safety end points were 30-day post-thrombolytic rates of stroke, bleeding, and mortality. A total of 28 patients in ROCKET AF received thrombolytic therapy, with 19 patients on rivaroxaban and 9 patients on warfarin. Ischemic stroke was the most common indication for thrombolysis (n = 10), and alteplase was the most commonly used fibrinolytic agent (n = 14). Of the 19 patients in the rivaroxaban group, there were 2 nonfatal bleeding events and 2 deaths, mostly occurring when thrombolytic therapy was administered within 48 hours of the last rivaroxaban dose. Of the 9 patients in the warfarin group, there was 1 nonfatal bleeding event and 3 deaths, most occurring when thrombolytic therapy was administered outside of 48 hours from the last warfarin dose. In conclusion, these observations suggest that careful assessment of the time since the last dose may be of clinical significance in patients on novel oral anticoagulants who require emergent thrombolysis.

Topics: Administration, Oral; Aged; Atrial Fibrillation; Dose-Response Relationship, Drug; Double-Blind Method; Drug Administration Schedule; Embolism; Factor Xa Inhibitors; Female; Follow-Up Studies; Humans; Incidence; Male; Retrospective Studies; Rivaroxaban; Stroke; Survival Rate; Thrombolytic Therapy; Time Factors; Treatment Outcome; United States; Vitamin K; Warfarin

Optimal antithrombotic treatment after transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) is unknown and determined empirically. The direct factor Xa inhibitor rivaroxaban may potentially reduce TAVR-related thrombotic complications and premature valve failure.. GALILEO is an international, randomized, open-label, event-driven, phase III trial in more than 1,520 patients without an indication for oral anticoagulation who underwent a successful TAVR (ClinicalTrials.govNCT02556203). Patients are randomized (1:1 ratio), 1 to 7days after a successful TAVR, to either a rivaroxaban-based strategy or an antiplatelet-based strategy. In the experimental arm, subjects receive rivaroxaban (10mg once daily [OD]) plus acetylsalicylic acid (ASA, 75-100mg OD) for 90days followed by rivaroxaban alone. In the control arm, subjects receive clopidogrel (75mg OD) plus ASA (as above) for 90days followed by ASA alone. In case new-onset atrial fibrillation occurs after randomization, full oral anticoagulation will be implemented with maintenance of the original treatment assignment. The primary efficacy end point is the composite of all-cause death, stroke, myocardial infarction, symptomatic valve thrombosis, pulmonary embolism, deep venous thrombosis, and systemic embolism. The primary safety end point is the composite of life-threatening, disabling, and major bleeding, according to the Valve Academic Research Consortium definitions.. GALILEO will test the hypothesis that a rivaroxaban-based antithrombotic strategy reduces the risk of thromboembolic complications post-TAVR with an acceptable risk of bleeding compared with the currently recommended antiplatelet therapy-based strategy in subjects without need of chronic oral anticoagulation.

Topics: Aortic Valve Stenosis; Aspirin; Cardiovascular Diseases; Cause of Death; Clopidogrel; Drug Therapy, Combination; Embolism; Factor Xa Inhibitors; Heart Valve Diseases; Humans; Mortality; Myocardial Infarction; Platelet Aggregation Inhibitors; Postoperative Care; Pulmonary Embolism; Rivaroxaban; Stroke; Thrombosis; Ticlopidine; Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement; Venous Thrombosis

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.. 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.. 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.. 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.. URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT00403767.

Topics: Aged; Atrial Fibrillation; Creatinine; Double-Blind Method; Embolism; Factor Xa Inhibitors; Female; Hemorrhage; Humans; Kidney; Male; Middle Aged; Proportional Hazards Models; Rivaroxaban; Stroke; Thrombophilia; Warfarin

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.. 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.. 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.. 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.

Topics: Administration, Oral; Aged; Atrial Fibrillation; Diabetes Mellitus; Dose-Response Relationship, Drug; Double-Blind Method; Drug Administration Schedule; Embolism; Factor Xa Inhibitors; Female; Follow-Up Studies; Humans; Male; Middle Aged; Retrospective Studies; Rivaroxaban; Stroke; Treatment Outcome; Vitamin K

This study assessed the effects and safety of rivaroxaban versus warfarin in Chinese patients with atrial fibrillation. In this double-blind clinical trial, a total of 353 consecutive patients with atrial fibrillation who were at risk of stroke or systemic embolism were enrolled to receive either rivaroxaban or warfarin. The primary effect endpoint occurred in five patients in the rivaroxaban group (2.29% per year) and in seven patients in the warfarin group (2.91% per year) (hazard ratio with warfarin, 0.76, 95% CI, 0.64-0.91; p = 0.03). Major and non-major clinically relevant bleeding occurred in 38 patients (14.3% per year) in the rivaroxaban group and in 36 patients (13.7% per year) in the warfarin group (hazard ratio rivaroxaban versus warfarin, 1.07; 95% CI, 0.93-1.14; p = 0.39). Adverse events were similar between these two arms (p > 0.05). In conclusion, oral administration of rivaroxaban reduced the risk of stroke or systemic embolism without significantly increasing the safety concern.

Topics: Administration, Oral; Aged; Anticoagulants; Asian People; Atrial Fibrillation; China; Double-Blind Method; Embolism; Female; Hemorrhage; Humans; Male; Morpholines; Primary Prevention; Risk Factors; Rivaroxaban; Stroke; Thiophenes; Time Factors; Treatment Outcome; Warfarin

We investigated the prevalence of prior myocardial infarction (MI) and incidence of ischaemic cardiovascular (CV) events among atrial fibrillation (AF) patients.. 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).. 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.

Topics: Aged; Anticoagulants; Aspirin; Atrial Fibrillation; Clopidogrel; Double-Blind Method; Embolism; Female; Humans; Kaplan-Meier Estimate; Male; Morpholines; Myocardial Infarction; Platelet Aggregation Inhibitors; Pyridines; Rivaroxaban; Stroke; Thiophenes; Ticlopidine; Treatment Outcome; Warfarin

Vascular disease is included in a risk scoring system to predict stroke in patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation (AF). This post hoc analysis of ROCKET AF aimed to determine the absolute rates of stroke and bleeding, and the relative effectiveness and safety of rivaroxaban vs. warfarin in patients with and without peripheral artery disease (PAD). Peripheral artery disease was defined on the case-report form as the presences of intermittent claudication, amputation for arterial insufficiency, vascular reconstruction, bypass surgery, or percutaneous intervention to the extremities, or previously documented abdominal aortic aneurysm.. ROCKET AF was a double-blind, double-dummy, randomized-controlled trial comparing rivaroxaban and warfarin for the prevention of stroke or systemic embolism. A total of 839 (5.9%) patients in ROCKET AF had PAD. Patients with and without PAD had similar rates of stroke or systemic embolism [HR: 1.04, 95% CI (0.72, 1.50), P = 0.84] and major or non-major clinically relevant (NMCR) bleeding [HR: 1.11, 95% CI (0.96, 1.28), P = 0.17], respectively. The efficacy of rivaroxaban when compared with warfarin for the prevention of stroke or systemic embolism was similar in patients with PAD (HR: 1.19, 95% CI: 0.63-2.22) and without PAD (HR: 0.86, 95% CI: 0.73-1.02; interaction P = 0.34). There was a significant interaction for major or NMCR bleeding in patients with PAD treated with rivaroxaban compared with warfarin (HR: 1.40, 95% CI: 1.06-1.86) compared with those without PAD (HR: 1.03, 95% CI: 0.95-1.11; interaction P = 0.037).. Patients with PAD in ROCKET AF did not have a statistically significant higher risk of stroke or systemic embolism than patients without PAD, and there were similar efficacy outcomes in patients treated with rivaroxaban and warfarin. In PAD patients, there was a higher risk of major bleeding or NMCR bleeding with rivaroxaban when compared with warfarin (interaction P = 0.037). Further investigation is warranted to validate this subgroup analysis and determine the optimal treatment in this high-risk cohort of AF patients with PAD.

Topics: Aged; Anticoagulants; Atrial Fibrillation; Double-Blind Method; Embolism; Female; Humans; Male; Morpholines; Peripheral Arterial Disease; Platelet Aggregation Inhibitors; Risk Factors; Rivaroxaban; Stroke; Thiophenes; Treatment Outcome; Warfarin

This study sought to report additional safety results from 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).. The ROCKET AF trial demonstrated similar risks of stroke/systemic embolism and major/nonmajor clinically relevant bleeding (principal safety endpoint) with rivaroxaban and warfarin.. The risk of the principal safety and component bleeding endpoints with rivaroxaban versus warfarin were compared, and factors associated with major bleeding were examined in a multivariable model.. The principal safety endpoint was similar in the rivaroxaban and warfarin groups (14.9 vs. 14.5 events/100 patient-years; hazard ratio: 1.03; 95% confidence interval: 0.96 to 1.11). Major bleeding risk increased with age, but there were no differences between treatments in each age category (<65, 65 to 74, ≥75 years; pinteraction = 0.59). Compared with those without (n = 13,455), patients with a major bleed (n = 781) were more likely to be older, current/prior smokers, have prior gastrointestinal (GI) bleeding, mild anemia, and a lower calculated creatinine clearance and less likely to be female or have a prior stroke/transient ischemic attack. Increasing age, baseline diastolic blood pressure (DBP) ≥90 mm Hg, history of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease or GI bleeding, prior acetylsalicylic acid use, and anemia were independently associated with major bleeding risk; female sex and DBP <90 mm Hg were associated with a decreased risk.. Rivaroxaban and warfarin had similar risk for major/nonmajor clinically relevant bleeding. Age, sex, DBP, prior GI bleeding, prior acetylsalicylic acid use, and anemia were associated with the risk of major bleeding. (An Efficacy and Safety Study of Rivaroxaban With Warfarin for the Prevention of Stroke and Non-Central Nervous System Systemic Embolism in Patients With Non-Valvular Atrial Fibrillation: NCT00403767).

Topics: Aged; Anticoagulants; Atrial Fibrillation; Blood Pressure; Embolism; Factor Xa Inhibitors; Female; Hemorrhage; Humans; Male; Middle Aged; Morpholines; Patient Safety; Risk Factors; Rivaroxaban; Stroke; Thiophenes; Time Factors; Vitamin K; Warfarin

Intracranial hemorrhage (ICH) is a life-threatening complication of anticoagulation.. 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.. 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).. 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.

Topics: Aged; Anticoagulants; Asian People; Atrial Fibrillation; Black People; Double-Blind Method; Embolism; Factor Xa Inhibitors; Female; Humans; Intracranial Hemorrhages; Male; Morpholines; Prospective Studies; Rivaroxaban; Stroke; Thiophenes; Treatment Outcome; Vitamin K; Warfarin

Time in therapeutic range (TTR) is a standard quality measure of the use of warfarin. We assessed the relative effects of rivaroxaban versus warfarin at the level of trial center TTR (cTTR) since such analysis preserves randomized comparisons.. TTR was calculated using the Rosendaal method, without exclusion of international normalized ratio (INR) values performed during warfarin initiation. Measurements during warfarin interruptions >7 days were excluded. INRs were performed via standardized finger-stick point-of-care devices at least every 4 weeks. The primary efficacy endpoint (stroke or non-central nervous system embolism) was examined by quartiles of cTTR and by cTTR as a continuous function. Centers with the highest cTTRs by quartile had lower-risk patients as reflected by lower CHADS2 scores (P<0.0001) and a lower prevalence of prior stroke or transient ischemic attack (P<0.0001). Sites with higher cTTR were predominantly from North America and Western Europe. The treatment effect of rivaroxaban versus warfarin on the primary endpoint was consistent across a wide range of cTTRs (P value for interaction=0.71). The hazard of major and non-major clinically relevant bleeding increased with cTTR (P for interaction=0.001), however, the estimated reduction by rivaroxaban compared with warfarin in the hazard of intracranial hemorrhage was preserved across a wide range of threshold cTTR values.. The treatment effect of rivaroxaban compared with warfarin for the prevention of stroke and systemic embolism is consistent regardless of cTTR.

Topics: Aged; Aged, 80 and over; Anticoagulants; Atrial Fibrillation; Blood Coagulation; Double-Blind Method; Drug Monitoring; Embolism; Europe; Female; Hemorrhage; Humans; International Normalized Ratio; Male; Middle Aged; Morpholines; North America; Point-of-Care Systems; Predictive Value of Tests; Risk Factors; Rivaroxaban; Stroke; Thiophenes; Time Factors; Treatment Outcome; Warfarin

Anticoagulation before, during, and after cardioversion is effective in reducing stroke risk in patients with atrial fibrillation.. The objective of this study is to explore the efficacy and safety of rivaroxaban 20 mg once daily (15 mg if creatinine clearance is 30-49 mL/min) compared with dose-adjusted vitamin K antagonists (VKAs; international normalized ratio 2.0-3.0) in patients scheduled for elective cardioversion.. This is a prospective, randomized, open-label, parallel group comparison of approximately 1,500 patients from 17 countries with hemodynamically stable nonvalvular atrial fibrillation of >48 hours or unknown duration. Patients will be randomized 2:1 (rivaroxaban:VKA) using 2 cardioversion strategies: the first approach is early cardioversion with the precardioversion anticoagulation goal of 1 to 5 days using rivaroxaban or usual therapy (heparin + VKA). In these patients, transesophageal echocardiography will be encouraged to exclude atrial thrombi. The alternative approach is delayed cardioversion. Rivaroxaban or VKA will be administered for 21 to 56 days before cardioversion. All patients will receive study treatment for 6 weeks postcardioversion. The primary efficacy end point is a composite of all strokes, transient ischemic attacks, noncentral nervous system systemic emboli, myocardial infarctions, and cardiovascular deaths. Each primary end point component will be evaluated separately, and additional composites will be investigated. The principal safety end point is major bleeding.. This will be the first prospective study of a novel oral anticoagulant in the setting of cardioversion. It will provide important information regarding the use of rivaroxaban in the periods preceding and after cardioversion in a broad patient population.

Topics: Administration, Oral; Aged; Anticoagulants; Atrial Fibrillation; Dose-Response Relationship, Drug; Double-Blind Method; Echocardiography, Transesophageal; Electric Countershock; Embolism; Factor Xa Inhibitors; Female; Follow-Up Studies; Humans; Male; Morpholines; Prospective Studies; Rivaroxaban; Thiophenes; Time Factors; Treatment Outcome; Vitamin K

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.. 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.. 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.

Topics: Administration, Oral; Aged; Aged, 80 and over; Anticoagulants; Atrial Fibrillation; Double-Blind Method; Embolism; Factor Xa Inhibitors; Female; Hemorrhage; Humans; Male; Middle Aged; Morpholines; Rivaroxaban; Stroke; Thiophenes; Treatment Outcome; Vitamin K; Warfarin

To evaluate the previously reported excess of thromboembolic events during the 30 days after the end of study (EOS) visit when participants transitioned from blinded therapy to open-label vitamin K antagonist.. At the EOS visit, open-label vitamin K antagonist was recommended, and the international normalized ratio (INR) was not to be measured until 3 days later to preserve blinding. We analyzed transition strategies, clinical outcomes, and INR values. Event rates are per 100 patient-years. A total of 9248 (65%) participants were taking study drug at EOS, and, between days 3 and 30, an excess of stroke and systemic embolic events were observed in participants assigned to rivaroxaban (rivaroxaban 22 events, event rate 6.42; warfarin 6 events, event rate 1.73; hazard ratio, 3.72; 95% confidence interval, 1.51-9.16; P=0.0044). No INR values were reported for ≈5% of participants transitioned to warfarin. By 30 days after EOS, 83% of the warfarin group and 52% of the rivaroxaban group had ≥1 therapeutic INR value. Median time to first therapeutic INR was 3 days in the warfarin group and 13 days in the rivaroxaban group.. The excess of events at EOS was likely because of a period of inadequate anticoagulation in rivaroxaban participants switched to vitamin K antagonist therapy. If transition from rivaroxaban to vitamin K antagonist is needed, timely monitoring and careful dosing should be used to ensure consistent and adequate anticoagulation.

Topics: Aged; Aged, 80 and over; Anticoagulants; Atrial Fibrillation; Blood Coagulation; Clinical Protocols; Continuity of Patient Care; Double-Blind Method; Drug Administration Schedule; Drug Substitution; Embolism; Factor Xa; Factor Xa Inhibitors; Female; Humans; International Normalized Ratio; Male; Middle Aged; Morpholines; Proportional Hazards Models; Research Design; Risk Factors; Rivaroxaban; Stroke; Thiophenes; Time Factors; Treatment Outcome; Vitamin K; Warfarin

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.. To determine the efficacy and safety of rivaroxaban compared with warfarin among vitamin K antagonist (VKA)-naive and VKA-experienced patients.. Prespecified subgroup analysis. (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT00403767).. Global.. 14,264 persons with atrial fibrillation.. Interaction of the relative treatment effect of rivaroxaban and warfarin on stroke or systemic embolism among VKA-naive and VKA-experienced patients.. 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).. The trial was not designed to detect differences in these subgroups.. 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.. Johnson & Johnson and Bayer HealthCare.

Topics: Aged; Aged, 80 and over; Anticoagulants; Atrial Fibrillation; Comparative Effectiveness Research; Embolism; Factor Xa Inhibitors; Female; Hemorrhage; Humans; Kaplan-Meier Estimate; Male; Middle Aged; Morpholines; Rivaroxaban; Stroke; Thiophenes; Treatment Outcome; Vitamin K; Warfarin

We sought to define the factors associated with the occurrence of stroke and systemic embolism in a large, international atrial fibrillation (AF) trial.. 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).. 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.. URL: http://www.ClinicalTrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT00403767.

Topics: Administration, Oral; Aged; Anticoagulants; Atrial Fibrillation; Double-Blind Method; Embolism; Factor Xa; Female; Follow-Up Studies; Humans; Incidence; Male; Morpholines; Predictive Value of Tests; Reproducibility of Results; Risk Factors; Rivaroxaban; Stroke; Thiophenes; Treatment Outcome; Vitamin K; Warfarin

The global ROCKET AF study evaluated once-daily rivaroxaban vs. warfarin for stroke and systemic embolism prevention in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF). A separate trial, J-ROCKET AF, compared the safety of a Japan-specific rivaroxaban dose with warfarin administered according to Japanese guidelines in Japanese patients with AF.. J-ROCKET AF was a prospective, randomized, double-blind, phase III trial. Patients (n=1,280) with non-valvular AF at increased risk for stroke were randomized to receive 15 mg once-daily rivaroxaban or warfarin dose-adjusted according to Japanese guidelines. The primary objective was to determine non-inferiority of rivaroxaban against warfarin for the principal safety outcome of major and non-major clinically relevant bleeding, in the on-treatment safety population. The primary efficacy endpoint was the composite of stroke and systemic embolism. Non-inferiority of rivaroxaban to warfarin was confirmed; the rate of the principal safety outcome was 18.04% per year in rivaroxaban-treated patients and 16.42% per year in warfarin-treated patients (hazard ratio [HR] 1.11; 95% confidence interval 0.87-1.42; P<0.001 [non-inferiority]). Intracranial hemorrhage rates were 0.8% with rivaroxaban and 1.6% with warfarin. There was a strong trend for a reduction in the rate of stroke/systemic embolism with rivaroxaban vs. warfarin (HR, 0.49; P=0.050).. J-ROCKET AF demonstrated the safety of a Japan-specific rivaroxaban dose and supports bridging the global ROCKET AF results into Japanese clinical practice.

Topics: Adult; Aged; Aged, 80 and over; Anticoagulants; Atrial Fibrillation; Double-Blind Method; Embolism; Female; Humans; Intracranial Hemorrhages; Male; Middle Aged; Morpholines; Prospective Studies; Rivaroxaban; Stroke; Thiophenes; Warfarin

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.. 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.. 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.. 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.).

Topics: Administration, Oral; Aged; Aged, 80 and over; Anticoagulants; Atrial Fibrillation; Double-Blind Method; Embolism; Female; Hemorrhage; Humans; Intention to Treat Analysis; Male; Middle Aged; Morpholines; Rivaroxaban; Stroke; Thiophenes; Treatment Outcome; Warfarin

Patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation (AF) and renal insufficiency are at increased risk for ischaemic stroke and bleeding during anticoagulation. Rivaroxaban, an oral, direct factor Xa inhibitor metabolized predominantly by the liver, preserves the benefit of warfarin for stroke prevention while causing fewer intracranial and fatal haemorrhages.. We randomized 14 264 patients with AF in a double-blind trial to rivaroxaban 20 mg/day [15 mg/day if creatinine clearance (CrCl) 30-49 mL/min] or dose-adjusted warfarin (target international normalized ratio 2.0-3.0). Compared with patients with CrCl >50 mL/min (mean age 73 years), the 2950 (20.7%) patients with CrCl 30-49 mL/min were older (79 years) and had higher event rates irrespective of study treatment. Among those with CrCl 30-49 mL/min, the primary endpoint of stroke or systemic embolism occurred in 2.32 per 100 patient-years with rivaroxaban 15 mg/day vs. 2.77 per 100 patient-years with warfarin [hazard ratio (HR) 0.84; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.57-1.23] in the per-protocol population. Intention-to-treat analysis yielded similar results (HR 0.86; 95% CI 0.63-1.17) to the per-protocol results. Rates of the principal safety endpoint (major and clinically relevant non-major bleeding: 17.82 vs. 18.28 per 100 patient-years; P = 0.76) and intracranial bleeding (0.71 vs. 0.88 per 100 patient-years; P = 0.54) were similar with rivaroxaban or warfarin. Fatal bleeding (0.28 vs. 0.74% per 100 patient-years; P = 0.047) occurred less often with rivaroxaban.. Patients with AF and moderate renal insufficiency have higher rates of stroke and bleeding than those with normal renal function. There was no evidence of heterogeneity in treatment effect across dosing groups. Dose adjustment in ROCKET-AF yielded results consistent with the overall trial in comparison with dose-adjusted warfarin.

Topics: Aged; Aged, 80 and over; Anticoagulants; Atrial Fibrillation; Double-Blind Method; Embolism; Female; Hemorrhage; Humans; Male; Morpholines; Renal Insufficiency; Rivaroxaban; Stroke; Thiophenes; Treatment Outcome; Warfarin

Atrial fibrillation (AF), the most common significant cardiac arrhythmia, increases the risk of stroke, particularly in the elderly. Warfarin is effective in reducing stroke risk but is burdensome to patients and is difficult to control. Rivaroxaban is an oral direct factor Xa inhibitor in advanced development as an alternative to warfarin for the prevention and treatment of thromboembolic disorders.. ROCKET AF is a randomized, double-blind, double-dummy, event-driven trial, which aims to establish the noninferiority of rivaroxaban compared with warfarin in patients with nonvalvular AF who have a history of stroke or at least 2 additional independent risk factors for future stroke. Patients are randomly assigned to receive rivaroxaban, 20 mg once daily (od), or dose-adjusted warfarin titrated to a target international normalized ratio (INR) of 2.5 (range 2.0-3.0, inclusive) using point-of-care INR devices to receive true or sham INR values, depending on the study drug allocation. The primary efficacy end point is a composite of all-cause stroke and noncentral nervous system systemic embolism. The primary safety end point is the composite of major and clinically relevant nonmajor bleeding events. Over 14,000 patients have been randomized at 1,100 sites across 45 countries, and will be followed until 405 primary outcome events are observed.. The ROCKET AF study will determine the efficacy and safety of rivaroxaban as an alternative to warfarin for the prevention of thromboembolism in patients with AF.

Topics: Administration, Oral; Anticoagulants; Atrial Fibrillation; Double-Blind Method; Drug Administration Schedule; Embolism; Factor Xa Inhibitors; Fibrinolytic Agents; Follow-Up Studies; Hemorrhage; Humans; Medical Records; Morpholines; Research Design; Risk Factors; Rivaroxaban; Secondary Prevention; Stroke; Thiophenes; Vitamin K; Warfarin

Oral anticoagulants (OACs) mitigate stroke and systemic embolism (SE) risk in non-valvular atrial fibrillation (AF) patients but can increase the risk of major bleeding (MB). This study analyzed the gains in event-free time for these outcomes among OAC treatment options represented in the ARISTOPHANES study.. This sub-analysis consisted of NVAF patients who initiated warfarin, apixaban, dabigatran, or rivaroxaban from 01JAN2013-30SEP2015, with data pooled from Medicare and 4 US commercial claims databases. Propensity score matching was conducted between non-vitamin K antagonist OAC (NOAC) and warfarin cohorts in each database and results were pooled. Laplace regression was used to evaluate the delay in time to stroke/SE and MB events between NOACs and warfarin and between NOACs after the first 12-months of follow-up.. The population included 466,991 patients (167,413 warfarin; 108,852 apixaban; 37,724 dabigatran; and 153,002 rivaroxaban). Event-free time gain (95% confidence interval) for apixaban versus warfarin was 101 days (78- 124) for stroke/SE and 116 (103- 130) days for MB. The gain in event-free time for dabigatran versus warfarin was 45 days (3- 87) for stroke/SE and 92 (68- 116) days for MB. The gain in event-free time for rivaroxaban versus warfarin was 63 days (42- 84) for stroke/SE but event-free time decreased by 18 (-31-6) days for MB.. Over 12 months after initiation, apixaban and dabigatran conferred progressive increases in event free time for stroke/SE and MB vs warfarin, whereas rivaroxaban conferred an increase in stroke/SE-free time but a loss in MB-free time vs warfarin.

Topics: Administration, Oral; Aged; Anticoagulants; Atrial Fibrillation; Dabigatran; Embolism; Hemorrhage; Humans; Medicare; Pyridones; Retrospective Studies; Rivaroxaban; Stroke; United States; Warfarin

In the USA, there is a steady rise of atrial fibrillation due to the aging population with increased morbidity. This study evaluated the risk of stroke/systemic embolism (S/SE) and major bleeding (MB) among elderly patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF) and multimorbidity prescribed direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs).. Using the CMS Medicare database, a retrospective observational study of adult patients with NVAF and multimorbidity who initiated apixaban, dabigatran, or rivaroxaban from January 1, 2012 to December 31, 2017 was conducted. High multimorbidity was classified as having ≥ 6 comorbidities. Cox proportional hazard models were used to evaluate the hazard ratios of S/SE and MB among three 1:1 propensity score matched DOAC cohorts. All-cause healthcare costs were estimated using generalized linear models.. Overall 36% of the NVAF study population had high multimorbidity, forming three propensity score matched (PSM) cohorts: 12,511 apixaban-dabigatran, 60,287 apixaban-rivaroxaban, and 12,567 dabigatran-rivaroxaban patients. Apixaban was associated with a lower risk of stroke/SE and MB when compared with dabigatran and rivaroxaban. Dabigatran had a lower risk of stroke/SE and a similar risk of MB when compared with rivaroxaban. Compared to rivaroxaban, apixaban patients incurred lower all-cause healthcare costs, and dabigatran patients incurred similar all-cause healthcare costs. Compared to dabigatran, apixaban patients incurred similar all-cause healthcare costs.. Patients with NVAF and ≥ 6 comorbid conditions had significantly different risks for stroke/SE and MB when comparing DOACs to DOACs, and different healthcare expenses. This study's results may be useful for evaluating the risk-benefit ratio of DOAC use in patients with NVAF and multimorbidity.

Topics: Administration, Oral; Adult; Aged; Anticoagulants; Atrial Fibrillation; Dabigatran; Embolism; Hemorrhage; Humans; Medicare; Multimorbidity; Pyridones; Risk Assessment; Rivaroxaban; Stroke; United States; Warfarin

In clinical trials, event adjudication is a process to review and confirm the accuracy of outcomes reported by site investigators. Despite efforts to automate the communication between a clinical-data-and-coordination center and an event adjudication committee, the review and confirmation of outcomes, as the core function of the process, still fully rely on human labor. To address this issue, we present an automated event adjudication system and its application in two randomized controlled trials.. Centrally executed by a clinical-data-and-coordination center, the automated event adjudication system automatedly assessed and classified outcomes in a clinical data management system. By checking clinically predefined criteria, the automated event adjudication system either confirmed or unconfirmed an outcome and automatedly updated its status in the database. It also served as a management tool to assist staff to oversee the process of event adjudication. The system has been applied in: (1) the Cardiovascular Outcomes for People Using Anticoagulation Strategies (COMPASS) trial and (2) the New Approach riVaroxaban Inhibition of Factor Xa in a Global trial versus Aspirin to prevenT Embolism in Embolic Stroke of Undetermined Source (NAVIGATE ESUS) trial. The automated event adjudication system first screened outcomes reported on a case report form and confirmed those with data matched to preset definitions. For selected primary efficacy, secondary, and safety outcomes, the unconfirmed cases were referred to a human event adjudication committee for a final decision. In the New Approach riVaroxaban Inhibition of Factor Xa in a Global trial versus Aspirin to prevenT Embolism in Embolic Stroke of Undetermined Source (NAVIGATE ESUS) trial, human adjudicators were given priority to review cases, while the automated event adjudication system took the lead in the Cardiovascular Outcomes for People Using Anticoagulation Strategies (COMPASS) trial.. Outcomes that were adjudicated in a hybrid model are discussed here. The COMPASS automated event adjudication system adjudicated 3283 primary efficacy outcomes and confirmed 1652 (50.3%): 132 (21.1%) strokes, 522 (53%) myocardial infarctions, and 998 (59.7%) causes of deaths. The NAVIGATE ESUS one adjudicated 737 cases of selected outcomes and confirmed 383 (52%): 219 (51.5%) strokes, 34 (42.5%) myocardial infarctions, 73 (54.9%) causes of deaths, and 57 (57.6%) major bleedings. After one deducts the time needed for migrating the system to a new study, the automated event adjudication system helped to reduce the time required for human review from approximately 1303 to 716.5 h for the Cardiovascular Outcomes for People Using Anticoagulation Strategies trial and from 387 to 196 h for the New Approach riVaroxaban Inhibition of Factor Xa in a Global trial versus Aspirin to prevenT Embolism in Embolic Stroke of Undetermined Source trial.. The automated event adjudication system in combination with human adjudicators provides a streamlined and efficient approach to event adjudication in clinical trials. To immediately apply automated event adjudication, one can first consider the automated event adjudication system and involve human assistance for cases unconfirmed by the former.

Topics: Aspirin; Double-Blind Method; Embolic Stroke; Embolism; Factor Xa; Factor Xa Inhibitors; Humans; Myocardial Infarction; Rivaroxaban; Stroke

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.. 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.. 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]).. 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.

Topics: Administration, Oral; Anticoagulants; Atrial Fibrillation; Cohort Studies; Dabigatran; Embolism; Hemorrhage; Humans; Ischemic Stroke; Liver Diseases; Retrospective Studies; Rivaroxaban; Stroke; Warfarin

Oral anticoagulant therapy is the cornerstone of atrial fibrillation management to prevent stroke and systemic embolism. However, there is limited real-world information regarding stroke and systemic embolism prevention strategies in patients with atrial fibrillation. The aim of the ROTA study is to obtain the real-world data of anticoagulant treatment patterns in patients with atrial fibrillation.. The ROTA study is a prospective, multicenter, and observational study that included 2597 patients with atrial fibrillation. The study population was recruited from 41 cardiology outpatient clinics between January 2021 and May 2021.. The median age of the study population was 72 years (range: 22-98 years) and 57.4% were female. The median CHA2DS2-VASc and HAS-BLED scores were 4 (range: 0-9) and 1 (range: 0-6), respectively. Vitamin K antagonists and direct oral anticoagulants were used in 15.9% and 79.4% of patients, respectively. The mean time in therapeutic range was 52.9% for patients receiving vitamin K antagonists, and 76% of those patients had an inadequate time in therapeutic range with <70%. The most common prescribed direct oral anticoagulants were rivaroxaban (38.1%), apixaban (25.5%), and edoxaban (11.2%). The rate of overuse of vitamin K antagonists and direct oral anticoagulants was high (76.1%) in patients with low stroke risk, and more than one-fourth of patients on direct oral anticoagulant therapy were receiving a reduced dose of direct oral anticoagulants. Among patients who were on direct oral anticoagulant treatment, patients with apixaban treatment were older, had higher CHA2DS2-VASc and HAS-BLED scores, and had lower creatinine clearance than the patients receiving other direct oral anticoagulants.. The ROTA study provides important real-world information about anticoagulant treatment patterns in patients with atrial fibrillation.time in therapeutic range with <70%.

Topics: Administration, Oral; Adult; Aged; Aged, 80 and over; Anticoagulants; Atrial Fibrillation; Dabigatran; Embolism; Female; Humans; Male; Middle Aged; Prospective Studies; Pyridones; Rivaroxaban; Stroke; Vitamin K; Young Adult

Although widely used in clinical fields, real-world data on the role of warfarin and non-vitamin K oral anticoagulants (NOACs) for the secondary prevention of thromboembolic complications in ischemic stroke patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF) are scarce.. This retrospective cohort study compared the effectiveness and safety of secondary prevention of NOAC and warfarin in ischemic stroke patients with NVAF.. From the Korean National Health Insurance Service Database, we included 16,762 oral anticoagulants-naive acute ischemic stroke patients with NVAF between July 2016 and June 2019. The main outcomes included ischemic stroke, systemic embolism, major bleeding, and all-cause of death.. In total, 1717 warfarin and 15,025 NOAC users were included in the analysis. After 1:8 propensity score matching, during the observation period, all types of NOACs had a significantly lower risk of ischemic stroke and systemic embolism than warfarin (edoxaban: adjusted hazard ratio [aHR], 0.80; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.68-0.93, rivaroxaban: aHR, 0.82; 95% CI, 0.70-0.96, apixaban: aHR, 0.79; 95% CI, 0.69-0.91, and dabigatran: aHR, 0.82; 95% CI, 0.69-0.97). Edoxaban (aHR, 0.77; 95% CI, 0.62-0.96), apixaban (aHR, 0.73; 95% CI, 0.60-0.90), and dabigatran (aHR, 0.66; 95% CI, 0.51-0.86) had lower risks of major bleeding and all-cause of death.. All NOACs were more effective than warfarin in the secondary prevention of thromboembolic complications in ischemic stroke patients with NVAF. Except for rivaroxaban, most NOACs demonstrated a lower risk of major bleeding and all-cause of death than warfarin.

Topics: Administration, Oral; Anticoagulants; Atrial Fibrillation; Dabigatran; Embolism; Hemorrhage; Humans; Ischemic Stroke; Retrospective Studies; Rivaroxaban; Secondary Prevention; Stroke; Thromboembolism; Vitamin K; Warfarin

Amiodarone, the most effective antiarrhythmic drug in atrial fibrillation, inhibits apixaban and rivaroxaban elimination, thus possibly increasing anticoagulant-related risk for bleeding.. For patients receiving apixaban or rivaroxaban, to compare risk for bleeding-related hospitalizations during treatment with amiodarone versus flecainide or sotalol, antiarrhythmic drugs that do not inhibit these anticoagulants' elimination.. Retrospective cohort study.. U.S. Medicare beneficiaries aged 65 years or older.. Patients with atrial fibrillation began anticoagulant use between 1 January 2012 and 30 November 2018 and subsequently initiated treatment with study antiarrhythmic drugs.. Time to event for bleeding-related hospitalizations (primary outcome) and ischemic stroke, systemic embolism, and death with or without recent (past 30 days) evidence of bleeding (secondary outcomes), adjusted with propensity score overlap weighting.. There were 91 590 patients (mean age, 76.3 years; 52.5% female) initiating use of study anticoagulants and antiarrhythmic drugs, 54 977 with amiodarone and 36 613 with flecainide or sotalol. Risk for bleeding-related hospitalizations increased with amiodarone use (rate difference [RD], 17.5 events [95% CI, 12.0 to 23.0 events] per 1000 person-years; hazard ratio [HR], 1.44 [CI, 1.27 to 1.63]). Incidence of ischemic stroke or systemic embolism did not increase (RD, -2.1 events [CI, -4.7 to 0.4 events] per 1000 person-years; HR, 0.80 [CI, 0.62 to 1.03]). The risk for death with recent evidence of bleeding (RD, 9.1 events [CI, 5.8 to 12.3 events] per 1000 person-years; HR, 1.66 [CI, 1.35 to 2.03]) was greater than that for other deaths (RD, 5.6 events [CI, 0.5 to 10.6 events] per 1000 person-years; HR, 1.15 [CI, 1.00 to 1.31]) (HR comparison:. Possible residual confounding.. In this retrospective cohort study, patients aged 65 years or older with atrial fibrillation treated with amiodarone during apixaban or rivaroxaban use had greater risk for bleeding-related hospitalizations than those treated with flecainide or sotalol.. National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute.

Topics: Aged; Amiodarone; Anti-Arrhythmia Agents; Anticoagulants; Atrial Fibrillation; Dabigatran; Embolism; Female; Flecainide; Hemorrhage; Hospitalization; Humans; Ischemic Stroke; Male; Medicare; Retrospective Studies; Rivaroxaban; Sotalol; Stroke; United States

The effectiveness and tolerability of a reduced dose (110 mg) of dabigatran versus the standard dose (150 mg) were evaluated in subgroups of patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) at high bleeding risk.. Eligible patients were adults with AF and a creatinine clearance rate ≥30 mL/min who were initiated on treatment with dabigatran (index) between 2016 and 2018. High-bleeding-risk subgroups were identified: (1) age ≥80 years; (2) moderate renal impairment (creatinine clearance rate 30-<50 mL/min); and (3) recent bleeding or a HAS-BLED score of ≥3. Fine-Gray subdistribution hazard regression models with inverse probability of treatment weights were used to investigate associations between dabigatran dose and three outcomes: stroke or systemic embolism, major bleeding requiring hospitalization, and all-cause mortality.. Among 7858 patients with AF and a high bleeding risk (age ≥80 years, 3472; moderate renal impairment, 1574; recent bleeding or HAS-BLED score ≥3, 2812), 32.3% received reduced-dose dabigatran. Compared with the standard dose, use of the reduced dose of dabigatran was not associated with an increased risk for stroke or systemic embolism but was associated with a lower risk for major bleeding (HR = 0.65; 95% CI, 0.44-0.95) and all-cause mortality (HR = 0.78; 95% CI, 0.65-0.92) in patients aged ≥80 years. The use of reduced-dose dabigatran was associated with a lower risk for major bleeding (HR = 0.54; 95% CI, 0.30-0.95) and all-cause mortality among patients with moderate renal impairment (HR = 0.53; 95% CI, 0.40-0.71).. Lower risks for bleed and mortality associated with reduced- versus standard-dose dabigatran in patients with AF and a high bleeding risk suggest a better dosing strategy.

Topics: Administration, Oral; Adult; Anticoagulants; Atrial Fibrillation; Creatinine; Dabigatran; Embolism; Hemorrhage; Humans; Pyridones; Rivaroxaban; Stroke; Treatment Outcome

Current evidence suggests that rivaroxaban may be well tolerated and effective in patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF) and obesity; however, there is limited evidence on the impact of polypharmacy in this population. This study evaluated real-world clinical outcomes with rivaroxaban versus warfarin in patients with NVAF and obesity according to the number of concurrent medications.. This retrospective cohort study identified patients with one or more pharmacy claim for rivaroxaban or warfarin from two large claims databases. Patients were required to have an atrial fibrillation diagnosis, body mass index ≥ 30 kg/m. A total of 95,875 patients were identified with one or more claim for either rivaroxaban or warfarin. After PSM, patient characteristics were balanced between cohorts (n = 21,547 in each cohort). The overall composite risk of stroke and systemic embolism was significantly lower in the rivaroxaban cohort compared with the warfarin cohort (hazard ratio [HR] 0.77, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.70-0.84; p < 0.001). The risks of ischemic stroke, hemorrhagic stroke, and systemic embolism separately were also significantly reduced with rivaroxaban. Major bleeding risk was similar between cohorts (HR 0.93, 95% CI 0.81-1.06; p = 0.2842), and results were consistent across the three polypharmacy groups.. In this real-world study of NVAF patients with obesity, rivaroxaban was associated with lower risks of stroke and systemic embolism and similar risk of major bleeding versus warfarin across polypharmacy categories.

Topics: Anticoagulants; Atrial Fibrillation; Embolism; Hemorrhage; Humans; Obesity; Polypharmacy; Retrospective Studies; Rivaroxaban; Stroke; Treatment Outcome; Warfarin

There are a paucity of real-world data examining effectiveness and safety of non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants (NOACs) and warfarin in nonvalvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF) patients with prior bleeding.. This retrospective analysis included data from 5 insurance claims databases and included NVAF patients prescribed OACs with prior bleeding. One-to-one propensity score matching was conducted between NOACs and warfarin and between NOACs in each database. Cox proportional hazards models were used to evaluate the risk of stroke/systemic embolism (SE) and MB.. A total of 244,563 patients (mean age 77; 50% female) with prior bleeding included 55,094 (22.5%) treated with apixaban, 12,500 (5.1%) with dabigatran, 38,246 (15.6%) with rivaroxaban, and 138,723 (56.7%) with warfarin. Apixaban (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.76 [95% CI: 0.70, 0.83]) and rivaroxaban (HR: 0.79 [95% CI: 0.71, 0.87]) had a lower risk of stroke/SE vs. warfarin. Apixaban (HR: 0.67 [95% CI: 0.64, 0.70]) and dabigatran (HR: 0.88 [95% CI: 0.81, 0.96]) had a lower risk of MB vs. warfarin. Apixaban patients had a lower risk of stroke/SE vs. dabigatran (HR: 0.70 [95% CI: 0.57, 0.86]) and rivaroxaban (HR: 0.85 [95% CI: 0.76, 0.96]) and a lower risk of MB than dabigatran (HR: 0.73 [95% CI: 0.67, 0.81]) and rivaroxaban (HR: 0.64 [95% CI: 0.61, 0.68]).. In this real-world analysis of a large sample of NVAF patients with prior bleeding, NOACs were associated with similar or lower risk of stroke/SE and MB vs. warfarin and variable risk of stroke/SE and MB against each other.

Topics: Administration, Oral; Aged; Anticoagulants; Atrial Fibrillation; Dabigatran; Embolism; Female; Hemorrhage; Humans; Male; Retrospective Studies; Rivaroxaban; Stroke; Warfarin

The efficacy and safety of rivaroxaban for the prevention of stroke and systemic embolism have been demonstrated in Asian and non-Asian patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF) in multiple studies. However, limited published data exist on its use specifically in treatment-naïve patients from the Asia region. Patients in South Korea and Taiwan can now receive rivaroxaban as first-line therapy, allowing for data generation in this patient group.. XaMINA was a prospective, real-world, multicenter, single-arm, observational cohort study of patients with NVAF in South Korea and Taiwan naïve to anticoagulation and initiating rivaroxaban. The primary outcome was major bleeding; secondary outcomes included all-cause mortality, symptomatic thromboembolic events, and treatment persistence.. In total, 1094 patients were included and the follow-up was 1 year. The baseline mean CHADS. XaMINA demonstrated low incidence rates of major bleeding events and thromboembolic events in patients with NVAF newly initiating rivaroxaban in South Korea and Taiwan, consistent with previous real-world studies reconfirming the results of the ROCKET AF study.. The trial was registered on ClinicalTrials.gov (identifier NCT03284762) on 15 September 2017.

Topics: Anticoagulants; Atrial Fibrillation; Embolism; Factor Xa Inhibitors; Hemorrhage; Humans; Prospective Studies; Rivaroxaban; Stroke; Thromboembolism; Treatment Outcome

To investigate effects of appropriately and inappropriately dosed apixaban/rivaroxaban versus warfarin on effectiveness and safety outcomes in patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF).. Cohort study with nested case-control analyses using primary care electronic health records (IQVIA Medical Research Data UK database).. UK primary care.. Patients aged ≥18 years with NVAF newly prescribed apixaban (N=14 701), rivaroxaban (N=14 288) or warfarin (N=16 175) between 1 January 2012 and 30 June 2018, and followed up to 31 December 2018.. Incident cases of ischaemic stroke/systemic embolism (IS/SE) and intracranial bleeding (ICB). Cases were matched to controls on age, sex and OAC naïve status. Using logistic regression, adjusted ORs with 95% CIs were calculated for the outcomes comparing apixaban/rivaroxaban use (appropriate or inappropriate dosing based on the product label criteria) and warfarin.. For IS/SE, ORs (95% CIs) for apixaban versus warfarin were 1.19 (0.92-1.52) for appropriate dose and 1.01 (0.67-1.51) for inappropriate dose; for rivaroxaban versus warfarin, estimates were 1.07 (0.83-1.37) for appropriate dose and 1.21 (0.78-1.88) for inappropriate dose. For ICB, ORs (95% CIs) for apixaban versus warfarin were 0.67 (0.44-1.00) for appropriate dose and 0.45 (0.21-0.95) for inappropriate dose; for rivaroxaban versus warfarin, estimates were 0.81 (0.55-1.20) for appropriate dose and 1.14 (0.56-2.31) for inappropriate dose.. Dosing appropriateness in NVAF was not associated with a significant difference in IS/SE risk or increase in ICB risk versus warfarin. These findings may reflect residual confounding and biases that were difficult to control, as also seen in other observational studies. They should, therefore, be interpreted with caution, and prescribers should adhere to the dosing instructions in the respective Summary of Product Characteristics. Further studies on this topic from real-world populations are needed.

Topics: Adolescent; Adult; Anticoagulants; Atrial Fibrillation; Case-Control Studies; Cohort Studies; Embolism; Humans; Intracranial Hemorrhages; Ischemic Stroke; Primary Health Care; Pyrazoles; Pyridones; Rivaroxaban; United Kingdom; Warfarin

Topics: Administration, Oral; Anticoagulants; Embolism; Factor Xa Inhibitors; Humans; Obesity; Pyrazoles; Pyridones; Rivaroxaban; Venous Thromboembolism; Venous Thrombosis

To observe the safety and efficacy of warfarin and rivaroxaban in anticoagulation therapy in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF).. A total of 96 patients with AF treated in our hospital from June 2019 to February 2021 were enrolled in this study. According to the different modes of drug administration, the patients were divided into the warfarin group and rivaroxaban group. Demographic and clinical data such as age, body weight, and previous drug use were collected. The blood routine, liver and kidney function, blood coagulation routine, and cardiac color ultrasound were accessed. The valvular atrial fibrillation and anticoagulant taboos were excluded, and the risk of embolism and bleeding was evaluated. Among them, 48 patients in the warfarin group were given warfarin once a day, and the international ratio (INR) was used to adjust the dose, and the INR was controlled between 2.0 and 3.0. In contrast, 48 patients in the rivaroxaban group received a fixed dose of rivaroxaban 20 mg or 15 mg once a day. After administration, regular telephone or outpatient follow-up was given once a month, to monitor patients' drug compliance and ask if there was bleeding, and to detect blood routine, urine routine, fecal routine+occult blood, and liver and kidney function. In addition, at the beginning of 3, 6, and 12 months of follow-up, each patient was given cardiac color Doppler ultrasound, peripheral vascular color ultrasound, and brain CT to determine whether there were mural thrombosis, stroke, and peripheral arterial thromboembolism. The INR attainment rate, coagulation index, thromboembolism, bleeding, and adverse reactions were compared between the two groups.. There was no significant difference in serum Dmurd and NT-proBNP levels between the two groups before treatment and 3, 6, and 9 months after treatment. There was no significant difference in the number of venous embolism, pulmonary embolism, cerebral embolism, and total embolism between the two groups (. Compared with warfarin, rivaroxaban anticoagulant therapy has the same advantage in tolerance and prevention of thromboembolism in patients with AF, but rivaroxaban can effectively reduce the risk of bleeding in patients with AF.

Topics: Anticoagulants; Atrial Fibrillation; Cohort Studies; Embolism; Factor Xa Inhibitors; Hemorrhage; Humans; Rivaroxaban; Stroke; Thromboembolism; Treatment Outcome; Warfarin

To provide an updated comparison of the risk and cost of stroke/systemic embolism (SE) and major bleeding between direct oral anticoagulants (DOAC: apixaban, rivaroxaban, dabigatran) and warfarin among non-valvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF) patients.. Of the 264,479 eligible patients, 38,740 apixaban-warfarin pairs, 76,677 rivaroxaban-warfarin pairs, and 20,955 dabigatran-warfarin pairs were matched. Apixaban (Hazard Ratio [HR] = 0.46; 95% Confidence Interval [CI] 0.38-0.56) and rivaroxaban (HR = 0.71; 95% CI 0.63-0.80) were associated with a significantly lower risk of stroke/SE compared to warfarin. Apixaban (HR = 0.57; 95% CI 0.51-0.63) and dabigatran (HR = 0.80; 95% CI 0.70-0.90) were associated with a significantly lower risk of major bleeding; rivaroxaban (HR = 1.14; 95% CI 1.07-1.21) was associated with a significantly higher risk of major bleeding compared to warfarin. Compared to warfarin, apixaban and rivaroxaban had significantly lower stroke/SE-related medical costs; and apixaban and dabigatran had significantly lower major bleeding-related medical costs.. This real-world analysis showed DOACs to be associated with a lower risk of stroke/SE and major bleeding, and lower medical costs compared to warfarin. Among them, only apixaban appears to be associated with a significantly lower risk of all three outcomes collectively: stroke/SE, major bleeding, and lower related medical costs compared to warfarin.

Topics: Aged; Anticoagulants; Atrial Fibrillation; Dabigatran; Embolism; Hemorrhage; Humans; Medicare; Pyridones; Rivaroxaban; Stroke; United States; Warfarin

Current guidelines recommend using direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) over warfarin in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF), but head-to-head trial data do not exist to guide the choice of DOAC.. To do a large-scale comparison between all DOACs (apixaban, dabigatran, edoxaban, and rivaroxaban) in routine clinical practice.. Multinational population-based cohort study.. Five standardized electronic health care databases, which covered 221 million people in France, Germany, the United Kingdom, and the United States.. Patients who were newly diagnosed with AF from 2010 through 2019 and received a new DOAC prescription.. Database-specific hazard ratios (HRs) of ischemic stroke or systemic embolism, intracranial hemorrhage (ICH), gastrointestinal bleeding (GIB), and all-cause mortality between DOACs were estimated using a Cox regression model stratified by propensity score and pooled using a random-effects model.. A total of 527 226 new DOAC users met the inclusion criteria (apixaban,. Residual confounding is possible.. Among patients with AF, apixaban use was associated with lower risk for GIB and similar rates of ischemic stroke or systemic embolism, ICH, and all-cause mortality compared with dabigatran, edoxaban, and rivaroxaban. This finding was consistent for patients aged 80 years or older and those with chronic kidney disease, who are often underrepresented in clinical trials.. None.

Topics: Administration, Oral; Anticoagulants; Atrial Fibrillation; Clinical Trials as Topic; Cohort Studies; Dabigatran; Embolism; Humans; Ischemic Stroke; Renal Insufficiency, Chronic; Rivaroxaban; United States

To assess the risk of stroke/systemic embolism (SE) and major bleeding associated with the use of oral anticoagulants in elderly patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) in a real-world population.. We identified all anticoagulant-naive initiators of warfarin, dabigatran, rivaroxaban and apixaban for the indication AF in Norway between January 2013 and December 2017. Multivariate competing risk regression was used to calculate subhazard ratios (SHRs) describing associations between non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants (NOACs) compared with warfarin for risk of stroke/SE and major bleeding.. Among 30 401 patients ≥75 years identified (median age 82 years, 53% women, mean CHA. In this nationwide cohort study of patients ≥75 years initiating oral anticoagulation for AF, standard and reduced dose NOACs were associated with similar risks of stroke/SE as warfarin and lower or similar risks of bleeding. The NOACs seem to be a safe option also in elderly patients.

Topics: Administration, Oral; Aged; Aged, 80 and over; Anticoagulants; Atrial Fibrillation; Cohort Studies; Dabigatran; Embolism; Female; Hemorrhage; Humans; Male; Rivaroxaban; Stroke; Warfarin

Using Scandinavian population-based registries, we assessed risk of stroke/systemic embolism (SE) and bleeding with non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants compared with warfarin in anticoagulation-naïve patients with atrial fibrillation (AF).. This historical cohort study included 219 545 AF patients [median age 74 years; 43% women; mean CHA2DS2-VASc (congestive heart failure, hypertension, age ≥75 years, diabetes mellitus, stroke or transient ischaemic attack, vascular disease, age 65-74 years, sex category) score 3.3] initiating apixaban, dabigatran, rivaroxaban, or warfarin in Denmark, Norway, and Sweden (1 January 2013 to 31 December 2016). The primary endpoints were stroke/SE and major bleeding. The median follow-up times were 9.7 (3.9-21.5) months for stroke/SE and 9.6 (3.8-21.3) months for bleeding. Apixaban and warfarin initiators were older and had higher CHA2DS2-VASc scores compared with dabigatran and rivaroxaban initiators. After 1:1 propensity score matching, three cohorts were created: apixaban-warfarin (n = 111 162), dabigatran-warfarin (n = 56 856), and rivaroxaban-warfarin (n = 61 198). Adjusted hazard ratios (HRs) were estimated using a Cox regression. For stroke/SE, adjusted HRs against warfarin were 0.96 [95% confidence interval (CI): 0.87-1.06] for apixaban, 0.89 (95% CI: 0.80-1.00) for dabigatran, and 1.03 (95% CI: 0.92-1.14) for rivaroxaban. For major bleeding, the HRs against warfarin were 0.73 (95% CI: 0.67-0.78) for apixaban, 0.89 (95% CI: 0.82-0.97) for dabigatran, and 1.15 (95% CI: 1.07-1.25) for rivaroxaban. The results in the dabigatran cohort did not hold in all dose-defined subgroups.. In this large Scandinavian study among AF patients initiating oral anticoagulation, those initiating dabigatran, apixaban, and rivaroxaban had similar rates of stroke/SE to patients initiating warfarin. Rates of major bleeding were lower with apixaban and dabigatran and higher with rivaroxaban, each compared with warfarin.

Topics: Aged; Anticoagulants; Atrial Fibrillation; Cohort Studies; Dabigatran; Embolism; Female; Hemorrhage; Humans; Male; Rivaroxaban; Stroke; Warfarin

To compare clinical outcomes of rivaroxaban and warfarin in patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF) and concurrent obesity and diabetes.. Patients aged ≥18 years were identified from a healthcare claims database with the following criteria: newly initiating rivaroxaban or warfarin, ≥1 medical claim with a diagnosis of AF, obesity determined by validated machine learning algorithm, and ≥1 claim with a diagnosis of diabetes or for antidiabetic medication. Treatment cohorts were matched using propensity scores and were compared for stroke/systemic embolism (SE) and major bleeding using Cox proportional hazards models.. A total of 9999 matched pairs of NVAF patients with obesity and diabetes who initiated treatment with rivaroxaban or warfarin were included. The composite risk of stroke/SE was significantly lower in the rivaroxaban cohort compared with the warfarin cohort (HR 0.82; 95% CI 0.74-0.90). Risks of ischemic and hemorrhagic strokes were also significantly reduced with rivaroxaban versus warfarin, but not SE. Major bleeding risk was similar between treatment cohorts (HR 0.92; 95% CI 0.78-1.09).. In NVAF patients with comorbidities of obesity and diabetes, rivaroxaban was associated with lower risks of stroke/SE and similar risk of major bleeding versus warfarin.

Topics: Anticoagulants; Atrial Fibrillation; Diabetes Mellitus; Embolism; Hemorrhage; Humans; Obesity; Retrospective Studies; Rivaroxaban; Stroke; Treatment Outcome; Warfarin

The populations included in the randomized controlled clinical trials and observational studies were different. The effectiveness and safety of rivaroxaban for stroke prevention in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) varied among studies. This study aimed to estimate the real-world outcomes of rivaroxaban in patients with AF accurately. A discrete event simulation (DES) was used to predict the counterfactual results of the ROCKET AF study. The hypothetical cohorts of patients were generated using Monte Carlo simulation according to the baseline covariate distributions that matched the marginal distribution of covariates reported in the ROCKET AF and three observational studies. The DES model structure was constructed based on a priori knowledge about disease progression and possible outcomes of patients with AF. The DES model accurately replicated the overall results of the ROCKET AF study. Both predicted stroke/systematic embolism (SE) and major bleeding rates were lower in the three observational studies than in the simulated ROCKET AF study. The risk difference of stroke/SE and major bleeding was not significant among the predicted outcomes of the three observational studies. Although some differences existed in the absolute rates of stroke/SE and major bleeding between observed and simulated studies, the results confirmed that rivaroxaban was noninferior to warfarin for the prevention of stroke/systematic embolism with no significance in the risk of major bleeding in large AF populations, which was similar to the results of ROCKET AF.

Topics: Anticoagulants; Atrial Fibrillation; Computer Simulation; Embolism; Factor Xa Inhibitors; Humans; Monte Carlo Method; Observational Studies as Topic; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Rivaroxaban; Stroke; Treatment Outcome; Warfarin

Background In event-driven clinical trials, study termination is based on accrual of a target number of primary efficacy events. For noninferiority trials in which superiority is conditionally examined, the ideal cohort in which to track event accrual is unclear. We used data from 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) trial to determine the effect of primary efficacy-event tracking in the per-protocol cohort during the on-treatment period versus the intention-to-treat (ITT) cohort during the ITT period. Methods and Results ROCKET AF was terminated after accruing 429 primary efficacy events (stroke or systemic embolism) in the per-protocol cohort during the on-treatment period for noninferiority. We identified the date on which 429 events occurred in the ITT cohort during the ITT period. We performed noninferiority and superiority analyses based on hypothetical study termination on this date. ROCKET AF would have terminated 226 days earlier if events were tracked during the ITT period. Similar to the main trial findings, rivaroxaban would have met noninferiority versus warfarin for the primary efficacy end point (hazard ratio [HR], 0.77; 95% CI, 0.62-0.96;

Topics: Administration, Oral; Anticoagulants; Atrial Fibrillation; Embolism; Factor Xa Inhibitors; Humans; Intention to Treat Analysis; Morpholines; Rivaroxaban; Stroke; Thiophenes; Treatment Outcome

The comparative effectiveness of rivaroxaban and apixaban, the most frequently prescribed oral anticoagulants for ischemic stroke prevention in patients with atrial fibrillation, is uncertain.. To compare major ischemic and hemorrhagic outcomes in patients with atrial fibrillation treated with rivaroxaban or apixaban.. Retrospective cohort study using computerized enrollment and claims files for US Medicare beneficiaries 65 years or older. Between January 1, 2013, and November 30, 2018, a total of 581 451 patients with atrial fibrillation began rivaroxaban or apixaban treatment and were followed up for 4 years, through November 30, 2018.. Rivaroxaban (n = 227 572) and apixaban (n = 353 879), either standard or reduced dose.. The primary outcome was a composite of major ischemic (stroke/systemic embolism) and hemorrhagic (intracerebral hemorrhage/other intracranial bleeding/fatal extracranial bleeding) events. Secondary outcomes were nonfatal extracranial bleeding and total mortality (fatal ischemic/hemorrhagic event or other death during follow-up). Rates, hazard ratios (HRs), and rate differences (RDs) were adjusted for baseline differences in comorbidity with inverse probability of treatment weighting.. Study patients (mean age, 77.0 years; 291 966 [50.2%] women; 134 393 [23.1%] receiving reduced dose) had 474 605 person-years of follow-up (median [IQR] of 174 [62-397] days). The adjusted primary outcome rate for rivaroxaban was 16.1 per 1000 person-years vs 13.4 per 1000 person-years for apixaban (RD, 2.7 [95% CI, 1.9-3.5]; HR, 1.18 [95% CI, 1.12-1.24]). The rivaroxaban group had increased risk for both major ischemic events (8.6 vs 7.6 per 1000 person-years; RD, 1.1 [95% CI, 0.5-1.7]; HR, 1.12 [95% CI, 1.04-1.20]) and hemorrhagic events (7.5 vs 5.9 per 1000 person-years; RD, 1.6 [95% CI, 1.1-2.1]; HR, 1.26 [95% CI, 1.16-1.36]), including fatal extracranial bleeding (1.4 vs 1.0 per 1000 person-years; RD, 0.4 [95% CI, 0.2-0.7]; HR, 1.41 [95% CI, 1.18-1.70]). Patients receiving rivaroxaban had increased risk of nonfatal extracranial bleeding (39.7 vs 18.5 per 1000 person-years; RD, 21.1 [95% CI, 20.0-22.3]; HR, 2.07 [95% CI, 1.99-2.15]), fatal ischemic/hemorrhagic events (4.5 vs 3.3 per 1000 person-years; RD, 1.2 [95% CI, 0.8-1.6]; HR, 1.34 [95% CI, 1.21-1.48]), and total mortality (44.2 vs 41.0 per 1000 person-years; RD, 3.1 [95% CI, 1.8-4.5]; HR, 1.06 [95% CI, 1.02-1.09]). The risk of the primary outcome was increased for rivaroxaban in both those receiving the reduced dose (27.4 vs 21.0 per 1000 person-years; RD, 6.4 [95% CI, 4.1-8.7]; HR, 1.28 [95% CI, 1.16-1.40]) and the standard dose (13.2 vs 11.4 per 1000 person-years; RD, 1.8 [95% CI, 1.0-2.6]; HR, 1.13 [95% CI, 1.06-1.21]) groups.. Among Medicare beneficiaries 65 years or older with atrial fibrillation, treatment with rivaroxaban compared with apixaban was associated with a significantly increased risk of major ischemic or hemorrhagic events.

Topics: Aged; Anticoagulants; Atrial Fibrillation; Embolism; Factor Xa Inhibitors; Female; Hemorrhage; Humans; Intracranial Hemorrhages; Male; Pyrazoles; Pyridones; Retrospective Studies; Rivaroxaban; Stroke

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

Topics: Aged; Aged, 80 and over; Anticoagulants; Atrial Fibrillation; Cause of Death; Coronary Artery Disease; Dabigatran; Embolism; Female; Health Care Costs; Hemorrhage; Humans; Male; Mortality; Myocardial Infarction; Peripheral Arterial Disease; Propensity Score; Proportional Hazards Models; Pyrazoles; Pyridones; Rivaroxaban; Stroke; United States; Warfarin

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

Topics: Administration, Oral; Aged; Aged, 80 and over; Anticoagulants; Atrial Fibrillation; Cerebral Hemorrhage; Comparative Effectiveness Research; Dabigatran; Embolism; Female; Follow-Up Studies; Gastrointestinal Hemorrhage; Humans; Ischemic Stroke; Male; Propensity Score; Pyrazoles; Pyridones; Retrospective Studies; Risk Factors; Rivaroxaban; Treatment Outcome; Warfarin

Direct oral anticoagulants have become a standard therapy for non-valvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF). However, little is known about their effectiveness/safety when prescribed by general practitioners to treat high-risk populations such as the elderly, those who are frail or have cognitive dysfunction.Methods and Results:In this multicenter, prospective study, a total of 5,717 NVAF patients (mean age 73.9 years) receiving rivaroxaban were registered by general practitioners, with a maximum 3-year follow up (mean 2.0±0.5 years). The primary endpoint was a composite of stroke and systemic embolism (SE). The annual incidence (per 100 person-years) of stroke/SE was 1.23% and for major bleeding, it was 0.63%. Multivariate analyses identified age ≥75 years (hazard ratio [HR]; 2.67, P<0.001) and history of ischemic stroke (HR; 1.89, P=0.005) as significant risk factors of stroke/SE, with history of major bleeding (HR; 14.9, P<0.001) and warfarin use (HR; 2.15, P=0.002) as risk factors for major bleeding events. Neither cognitive dysfunction, defined by the receipt of anti-dementia medications, nor frailty, evaluated by the classification of the Japanese Long-term Care Insurance system, correlated with stroke/SE or major bleeding events.. The low incidence of adverse events, including stroke/SE and bleeding, in patients prescribed rivaroxaban by general practitioners supports its use as a safe and efficacious treatment in the standard clinical care of high-risk patient populations.

Topics: Aged; Anticoagulants; Atrial Fibrillation; Embolism; General Practitioners; Hemorrhage; Humans; Japan; Prospective Studies; Retrospective Studies; Rivaroxaban; Stroke; Treatment Outcome

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

Topics: Age Factors; Aged, 80 and over; Anticoagulants; Atrial Fibrillation; Dabigatran; Embolism; Factor Xa Inhibitors; Female; Hemorrhage; Humans; Intracranial Hemorrhages; Male; Multivariate Analysis; Platelet Aggregation Inhibitors; Pyrazoles; Pyridones; Retrospective Studies; Rivaroxaban; Stroke; Warfarin

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

Topics: Administration, Oral; Age Factors; Aged; Aged, 80 and over; Atrial Fibrillation; Embolism; Factor Xa Inhibitors; Female; Hemorrhage; Humans; Japan; Male; Middle Aged; Product Surveillance, Postmarketing; Prospective Studies; Risk Assessment; Risk Factors; Rivaroxaban; Stroke; Time Factors; Treatment Outcome

Topics: Anticoagulants; Atrial Fibrillation; Cost-Benefit Analysis; Embolism; Health Expenditures; Humans; Ischemic Stroke; Japan; Models, Econometric; Myocardial Infarction; Quality-Adjusted Life Years; Rivaroxaban; Warfarin

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

Topics: Aged; Anticoagulants; Atrial Fibrillation; China; Cost-Benefit Analysis; Dabigatran; Embolism; Female; Humans; Male; Markov Chains; Models, Economic; Quality-Adjusted Life Years; Rivaroxaban; Stroke; Treatment Outcome

The aim of this study was to compare the risk of stroke or systemic embolism (SE) and major bleeding in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) using dabigatran, rivaroxaban, and apixaban in routine clinical practice.. Using nationwide registries in Norway from January 2013 to December 2017, we established a cohort of 52 476 new users of non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants (NOACs) with AF. Users of individual NOACs were matched 1:1 on the propensity score to create three pairwise-matched cohorts: dabigatran vs. rivaroxaban (20 504 patients), dabigatran vs. apixaban (20 826 patients), and rivaroxaban vs. apixaban (27 398 patients). Hazard ratios (HRs) for the risk of stroke or SE and major bleeding were estimated. In the propensity-matched comparisons of the risk of stroke or SE, the HRs were 0.88 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.76-1.02] for dabigatran vs. rivaroxaban, 0.88 (95% CI 0.75-1.02) for dabigatran vs. apixaban, and 1.00 (95% CI 0.89-1.14) for apixaban vs. rivaroxaban. For the risk of major bleeding, the HRs were 0.75 (95% CI 0.64-0.88) for dabigatran vs. rivaroxaban, 1.03 (95% CI 0.85-1.24) for dabigatran vs. apixaban, and 0.79 (95% CI 0.68-0.91) for apixaban vs. rivaroxaban.. In this nationwide study of patients with AF in Norway, we found no statistically significant differences in risk of stroke or SE in propensity-matched comparisons between dabigatran, rivaroxaban, and apixaban. However, dabigatran and apixaban were both associated with significantly lower risk of major bleeding compared with rivaroxaban.

Topics: Aged; Aged, 80 and over; Antithrombins; Atrial Fibrillation; Dabigatran; Databases, Factual; Embolism; Factor Xa Inhibitors; Female; Hemorrhage; Humans; Incidence; Male; Middle Aged; Norway; Patient Safety; Pyrazoles; Pyridones; Registries; Risk Assessment; Risk Factors; Rivaroxaban; Stroke; Time Factors; Treatment Outcome

Topics: Administration, Oral; Atrial Fibrillation; Embolism; Factor Xa Inhibitors; Humans; Pyrazoles; Pyridones; Rivaroxaban; Stroke

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

Topics: Administration, Oral; Aged; Atrial Fibrillation; Embolism; Factor Xa Inhibitors; Female; Humans; Incidence; Male; Propensity Score; Pyrazoles; Pyridones; Retrospective Studies; Rivaroxaban; Stroke

Black patients are under-represented in randomized trials evaluating oral anticoagulants in non-valvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF). We sought to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of rivaroxaban versus warfarin in African Americans with NVAF.. We performed an analysis using Optum® De-Identified Electronic Health Record (EHR) data from 1/1/2012-9/30/2018. We included adult African American patients with a diagnosis of NVAF who were anticoagulant-naïve during the 12-months prior to initiation of rivaroxaban or warfarin. Patients receiving rivaroxaban were 1:1 propensity score matched to warfarin patients. Our primary effectiveness and safety outcomes were the 2-year incidence rates (%/year) of stroke or systemic embolism (SSE) and major bleeding using an intention-to-treat approach. Cohorts were compared using doubly-robust Cox regression and reported as hazard ratios (HRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs).. We matched 4102 rivaroxaban and 4102 warfarin users with a median (interquartile range) available follow-up of 2.0 (0.9, 2.0) years. Median CHA2DS2-VASc and HASBLED scores were 3 (2, 4) and 2 (1, 3). Rivaroxaban use was associated with a lower risk of SSE (1.99 versus 2.48, HR = 0.77, 95%CI = 0.60-0.99), ischemic stroke (1.84 versus 2.37, HR = 0.76, 95%CI = 0.59-0.98) and major bleeding (4.22 versus 4.98, HR = 0.84, 95%CI = 0.70-0.99). No differences in intracranial hemorrhage or gastrointestinal bleeding were observed. Neither sensitivity analyses utilizing an on-treatment methodology nor inverse probability-of-treatment weighting showed significant differences in SSE or major bleeding between rivaroxaban and warfarin users.. Rivaroxaban appeared at least as effective and safe as warfarin when used to manage African American patients with NVAF in routine practice.

Topics: Adolescent; Adult; Aged; Aged, 80 and over; Anticoagulants; Atrial Fibrillation; Black or African American; Embolism; Female; Gastrointestinal Hemorrhage; Hemorrhage; Humans; Incidence; Intracranial Hemorrhages; Kaplan-Meier Estimate; Male; Middle Aged; Retrospective Studies; Rivaroxaban; Stroke; Warfarin

To compare the effectiveness and safety of a drug in daily practice with the outcomes of a target non-inferiority trial by rigorously mimickingin an observational study the trial's design features.. This cohort study was conducted using the British Clinical Practice Research Datalink (CPRD) to emulate 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) trial. Patients with atrial fibrillation who were newly prescribed (>=12 months of no use) either rivaroxaban or warfarinfrom October 2008 to December 2017 were included. Non-inferiority of rivaroxaban to warfarin in the prevention of stroke or systemic embolism was assessed in different analysis populations (intention-to-treat [ITT], per-protocol [PP], and as-treated populations) using a hazardratio (HR) of 1.46 as the non-inferiority margin. Major bleeding (safety outcome) was also assessed and compared to that of the target trial. All outcomes were analyzed using Cox-proportional hazard analyses.. We included 25,473 incident users of rivaroxaban (n=4,008) or warfarin(n=21,465). Similar to the trial, non-inferiority in the primary out come was demonstrated in all three analysis populations: HR=1.04 (95%CI 0.84 to 1.30) (ITT), HR=0.98 (95%CI 0.70 to 1.38) (PP), and HR=1.11 (95%CI 0.86 to 1.42) (as-treated). Risk of major bleeding was also similar to the target trial.. The results of this study provide supportive evidence to the effectiveness of rivaroxaban and adds knowledge on the usefulness of emulating a non-inferiority trial to assess drug effectiveness.

Topics: Aged; Aged, 80 and over; Anticoagulants; Atrial Fibrillation; Cohort Studies; Embolism; Factor Xa Inhibitors; Female; Follow-Up Studies; Hemorrhage; Humans; Male; Middle Aged; Retrospective Studies; Rivaroxaban; Stroke; Treatment Outcome; Warfarin

The effects of direct oral anticoagulants in nonvalvular atrial fibrillation should be assessed in actual conditions of use. France has near-universal healthcare coverage with a unified healthcare information system, allowing large population-based analyses. NAXOS (Evaluation of Apixaban in Stroke and Systemic Embolism Prevention in Patients With Nonvalvular Atrial Fibrillation) aimed to compare the safety, effectiveness, and mortality of apixaban with vitamin K antagonists (VKAs), rivaroxaban, and dabigatran, in oral anticoagulant-naive patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation.. This was an observational study using French National Health System claims data and including all adults with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation who initiated oral anticoagulant between 2014 and 2016. Outcomes of interest were major bleeding events leading to hospitalization (safety), stroke and systemic thromboembolic events (effectiveness), and all-cause mortality. Four approaches were used for comparative analyses: matching on propensity score (PS; 1:n); as a sensitivity analysis, matching on high-dimensional PS; adjustment on PS; and adjustment on known confounders. For each outcome, cumulative incidence rates accounting for competing risks of death were estimated.. Overall, 321 501 patients were analyzed, of whom 35.0%, 27.2%, 31.1%, and 6.6% initiated VKAs, apixaban, rivaroxaban, and dabigatran, respectively. Apixaban was associated with a lower PS-matched risk of major bleeding compared with VKAs (hazard ratio [HR], 0.43 [95% CI, 0.40-0.46]) and rivaroxaban (HR, 0.67 [95% CI, 0.63-0.72]), but not dabigatran (HR, 0.93 [95% CI, 0.81-1.08]). Apixaban was associated with a lower risk of stroke and systemic thromboembolic event compared with VKAs (HR, 0.60 [95% CI, 0.56-0.65]), but not rivaroxaban (HR, 1.05 [95% CI, 0.97-1.15]) or dabigatran (HR, 0.93 [95% CI, 0.78-1.11]). All-cause mortality was lower with apixaban than with VKAs, but not lower than with rivaroxaban or dabigatran.. Apixaban was associated with superior safety, effectiveness, and lower mortality than VKAs; with superior safety than rivaroxaban and similar safety to dabigatran; and with similar effectiveness when compared with rivaroxaban or dabigatran. These observational data suggest potentially important differences in outcomes between direct oral anticoagulants, which should be explored in randomized trials.

Topics: Adult; Aged; Anticoagulants; Atrial Fibrillation; Dabigatran; Embolism; Factor Xa Inhibitors; Female; Humans; Male; Middle Aged; Rivaroxaban; Stroke; Warfarin

The results of randomised clinical trials (RCTs) on direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) for stroke prevention in patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF) can mostly be applied to primary prevention in relatively young patients, since only a minority of patients included in these trials were receiving DOACs for secondary prevention. The real-life secondary prevention subgroup, comprising mostly elderly and high-risk patients, remains a point of interest where further exploration is needed. Our objective was to explore the effectiveness and safety of DOACs for secondary prevention in the real-life conditions.. In a six-year (2012-2018) period all consecutive patients with a history of transient ischaemic attack (TIA) or stroke, recorded NVAF and prescription of DOAC, were included in this single-centre registry. Choice of the DOAC and dose was based on the discretion of the attending clinician. Data regarding recurrent stroke/TIA or other embolic events, intracranial haemorrhage, other major bleeding, adherence and potential changes of therapy were collected and analysed.. During the study period, 566 patients were prescribed a DOAC for secondary stroke prevention, and follow-up data were available for 510 patients, with an average observational time of 2.6 years. The mean age of patients was 77.9 ± 8.7 years. The mean CHA. Our real-life data study suggests that secondary stroke prevention with DOACs is as effective and safe as primary prevention, both in standard and reduced doses, in a typical group of patients who are older than patients included in RCTs.

Topics: Administration, Oral; Aged; Aged, 80 and over; Anticoagulants; Atrial Fibrillation; Dabigatran; Embolism; Female; Hemorrhage; Humans; Incidence; Ischemic Attack, Transient; Male; Middle Aged; Pyrazoles; Pyridones; Registries; Rivaroxaban; Secondary Prevention; Stroke

There is little data on management and outcomes of atrial fibrillation (AF) patients on direct oral anticoagulants (DOAC) undergoing general surgery.We retrospectively assessed 98 surgeries in 85 nonvalvular AF patients aged 73 ± 8 (59 men) receiving DOACs. Cardiac, emergency, and minimally invasive surgeries were excluded.The CHA

Topics: Aged; Aged, 80 and over; Antithrombins; Atrial Fibrillation; Blood Loss, Surgical; Carotid Artery Diseases; Cerebral Infarction; Dabigatran; Digestive System Surgical Procedures; Elective Surgical Procedures; Embolism; Endoscopy; Factor Xa Inhibitors; Female; Humans; Male; Myocardial Infarction; Orthopedic Procedures; Perioperative Care; Postoperative Complications; Postoperative Hemorrhage; Pyrazoles; Pyridines; Pyridones; Retrospective Studies; Rivaroxaban; Thiazoles; Thromboembolism; Urologic Surgical Procedures; Vascular Surgical Procedures

Direct oral anticoagulants, such as apixaban and rivaroxaban, are important for the treatment and prophylaxis of venous thromboembolism and to reduce the risk of stroke and systemic embolism in patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation. Because apixaban and rivaroxaban are predominantly eliminated by cytochrome P450 (CYP) 3A and P-glycoprotein (P-gp), concomitant use of combined P-gp and strong CYP3A4 inhibitors and inducers should be avoided. Physiologically-based pharmacokinetic models for apixaban and rivaroxaban were developed to estimate the net effect of CYP3A induction, P-gp inhibition, and P-gp induction by rifampicin. The disposition of rivaroxaban is more complex compared with apixaban because both hepatic and renal P-gp is considered to contribute to rivaroxaban elimination. Furthermore, organic anion transporter-3, a renal uptake transporter, may also contribute the elimination of rivaroxaban from systemic circulation. The models were verified with observed clinical drug-drug interactions with CYP3A and P-gp inhibitors. With the developed models, the predicted area under the concentration time curve and maximum concentration ratios were 0.43 and 0.48, respectively, for apixaban, and 0.50-0.52 and 0.72-0.73, respectively, for rivaroxaban when coadministered with 600 mg multiple doses of rifampicin and that were very close to observed data. The impact of each of the elimination pathways was assessed for rivaroxaban, and inhibition of CYP3A led to a larger impact over intestinal and hepatic P-gp. Inhibition of renal organic anion transporter-3 or P-gp led to an overall modest interaction. The developed apixaban and rivaroxaban models can be further applied to the investigation of interactions with other P-gp and/or CYP3A4 inhibitors and inducers.

Topics: ATP Binding Cassette Transporter, Subfamily B, Member 1; Atrial Fibrillation; Biological Transport; Cytochrome P-450 CYP3A; Cytochrome P-450 CYP3A Inducers; Cytochrome P-450 CYP3A Inhibitors; Drug Interactions; Embolism; Factor Xa Inhibitors; Humans; Pyrazoles; Pyridones; Rifampin; Rivaroxaban; Stroke; Venous Thromboembolism

Topics: Administration, Oral; Aged; Aged, 80 and over; Anticoagulants; Atrial Fibrillation; Cohort Studies; Embolism; Factor Xa Inhibitors; Female; Fibrinolytic Agents; Hemorrhage; Humans; Male; Rivaroxaban; Stroke; Vitamin K; Warfarin

Topics: Aspirin; Carotid Artery Diseases; Embolism; Humans; Rivaroxaban; Stroke

The EXPAND Study examined the real-world efficacy and safety of rivaroxaban for the prevention of stroke and systemic embolism (SE) in Japanese patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF). In this sub-analysis, we compared the differences in efficacy and safety between patients with and those without history of stroke or transient ischemic attack (TIA). This multicenter, prospective, non-interventional, observational, cohort study was conducted at 684 medical centers in Japan. A total of 7141 NVAF patients aged ≥ 20 years [mean age 71.6 ± 9.4 (SD) years] who were being or planned to be treated with rivaroxaban (10 mg/day, 43.5%; 15 mg/day, 56.5%) were followed for a mean period of 897.1 ± 206.8 days with a high follow-up rate (99.7%). The primary prevention group comprised patients without history of ischemic stroke or TIA (n = 5546, 77.7%), and the secondary prevention group comprised those with history of ischemic stroke or TIA (n = 1595, 22.3%). In the primary and secondary prevention groups, the incidence rate of stroke or SE (primary efficacy endpoint) was 0.7 and 2.2%/year, respectively (P < 0.001), and the incidence rate of major bleeding (primary safety endpoint) was 1.2 and 1.5%/year, respectively (P = 0.132). For major bleeding events, the incidence rate of intracranial bleeding was 0.4 and 0.8%/year (P = 0.002) in the primary and secondary prevention groups, respectively. This sub-analysis of the EXPAND Study showed that the Japan-specific dosages of rivaroxaban were effective and safe in Japanese NVAF patients with and those without ischemic stroke or TIA in routine clinical practice.

Topics: Aged; Atrial Fibrillation; Dose-Response Relationship, Drug; Embolism; Factor Xa Inhibitors; Female; Follow-Up Studies; Humans; Male; Primary Prevention; Prospective Studies; Retrospective Studies; Rivaroxaban; Secondary Prevention; Stroke; Time Factors; Treatment Outcome

To compare the effectiveness and safety of standard-dose rivaroxaban (20 mg o.d.) and warfarin in non-valvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF) patients with a non-sex-related CHA2DS2-VASc score of 1.. Analysis of United States Truven MarketScan claims from November 2011 to December 2016 for anticoagulant-naïve NVAF patients with a single non-sex-related stroke risk factor assigned 1-point in the CHA2DS2-VASc score and ≥12-months of continuous medical/prescription insurance coverage prior to the qualifying oral anticoagulant dispensing. Standard-dose rivaroxaban users were 1:1 propensity score-matched to warfarin users. Patients were followed until outcome occurrence, insurance disenrollment, or end of data availability. Primary outcomes included stroke or systemic embolism and major bleeding and were compared using Cox regression and reported as hazard ratios (HRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). In all, 3319 rivaroxaban users were 1:1 propensity score-matched to 3319 warfarin users. Median (interquartile range) duration of follow-up was 1.6 (0.7, 2) years and the most common qualifying stroke risk factor was hypertension (n = 4532, 68.3%). Rivaroxaban was associated with a significant reduction in the 1-year stroke or systemic embolism vs. warfarin (HR 0.41, 95% CI 0.17-0.98), with no significant difference in overall major bleeding (HR 0.74, 95% CI 0.44-1.26) or major bleeding subtypes (HR ranging from 0.33 to 0.78, P > 0.05 for all). Similar results were seen after extending follow-up to 2 years.. Rivaroxaban may lower the rate of stroke or systemic embolism vs. warfarin in NVAF patients with a non-sex-related CHA2DS2-VASc score of 1 without impacting major bleeding.

Topics: Administrative Claims, Healthcare; Anticoagulants; Atrial Fibrillation; Databases, Factual; Decision Support Techniques; Embolism; Factor Xa Inhibitors; Female; Hemorrhage; Humans; Male; Middle Aged; Predictive Value of Tests; Retrospective Studies; Risk Assessment; Risk Factors; Rivaroxaban; Stroke; Time Factors; Treatment Outcome; United States; Warfarin

In Europe, the approved rivaroxaban dose for stroke prevention in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) is 20 mg once daily (o.d.), with 15 mg o.d. recommended in patients with creatinine clearance (CrCl) 15-49 mL/min. Non-recommended doses are prescribed in real-world practice. This analysis of the XANTUS study assessed outcomes associated with non-recommended dosing and patient characteristics that may have impacted dose choice.. Baseline characteristics and 1 year outcomes were compared in 4464/6784 patients with known CrCl, receiving recommended or non-recommended rivaroxaban doses; 3608 (80.8%) patients received recommended doses (mean CHADS2 score 1.9) and 856 (19.2%) non-recommended doses (mean CHADS2 score 2.5). Incidence rate (events/100 patient-years) for the composite of treatment-emergent adjudicated major bleeding, stroke/systemic embolism, and death was 7.5 [95% confidence interval (CI) 5.7-9.8] and 4.8 (95% CI 4.1-5.7) with non-recommended and recommended doses, respectively [hazard ratio (HR) 1.55, 95% CI 1.2-2.1; P = 0.004]. Incidence rates for the components of the composite were 3.7 and 2.6, 1.4 and 0.9, and 3.5 and 1.9, respectively. Adjustment for baseline characteristics showed similar rates of the composite outcome (HR 1.06, 95% CI 0.77-1.45; P = 0.719). Multivariable analysis identified age, anaemia, congestive heart failure, diabetes mellitus, CrCl, lower body weight, AF type, and vascular disease as predictors of non-recommended dosing.. Non-recommended rivaroxaban dosing was associated with less favourable outcomes, possibly due to baseline characteristics, in addition to renal function, that may also affect physicians' dosing decisions.. Clinicaltrials.gov: NCT01606995.

Topics: Aged; Atrial Fibrillation; Canada; Clinical Decision-Making; Drug Dosage Calculations; Embolism; Europe; Factor Xa Inhibitors; Female; Hemorrhage; Humans; Incidence; Israel; Male; Middle Aged; Practice Guidelines as Topic; Prospective Studies; Risk Factors; Rivaroxaban; Stroke; Time Factors; Treatment Outcome

Previous reports have suggested that direct oral anticoagulants exert a prothrombolytic effect against intracardiac thrombi. We hypothesized that these anticoagulants may also help recanalize occluded intracranial arteries via prothrombolytic effects. In this study, we evaluated the effects of rivaroxaban, a direct oral anticoagulant, on fibrin emboli within the cerebrocortical microvessels in a mouse model of embolic stroke. Fibrin emboli prepared ex vivo were injected into the common carotid artery of male C57BL/6 mice, and embolization in the microvessels on the brain surface was observed through a cranial window. Oral administration of rivaroxaban was initiated a week before injection of the emboli. The number and sizes of the emboli were measured at two time points: immediately after and 3 h after the embolus injection in the rivaroxaban-treated mice (n =6) and untreated mice (n =7). The rates of recanalization and change in the embolus size were analyzed between the two groups. Complete recanalization was observed only in the rivaroxaban group (three mice in the rivaroxaban group compared with none in the control group). A significantly higher rate of reduction of the embolus size was observed in the rivaroxaban group than in the control group (P=0.0216). No significant differences between the two groups were observed in the serum levels of the following coagulation markers: thrombin-antithrombin III complexes, D-dimers, or plasmin-α2-plasmin inhibitor complex. Our findings indicate that rivaroxaban may promote reduction in the size of stagnated fibrin emboli in cerebrocortical microvessels in cases of embolic stroke.

Topics: Administration, Oral; alpha-2-Antiplasmin; Animals; Anticoagulants; Antithrombin III; Biomarkers; Blood Coagulation; Carotid Arteries; Cerebral Cortex; Cerebrovascular Circulation; Disease Models, Animal; Embolism; Fibrin; Fibrin Fibrinogen Degradation Products; Fibrinolysin; Male; Mice; Mice, Inbred C57BL; Microvessels; Peptide Hydrolases; Rivaroxaban; Stroke

Topics: Administration, Oral; Anticoagulants; Atrial Fibrillation; Dabigatran; Dose-Response Relationship, Drug; Embolism; Humans; Pyrazoles; Pyridines; Pyridones; Research Design; Rivaroxaban; Stroke; Thiazoles

Although the efficacy and safety of the factor Xa inhibitor rivaroxaban for the prevention of stroke and systemic embolism in patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF) were shown in global and Japanese phase III clinical trials, safety and effectiveness data from unselected patients in everyday clinical practice are limited. The objective of the XAPASS (Xarelto Post-Authorization Safety & Effectiveness Study in Japanese Patients with Atrial Fibrillation) is to investigate the safety and effectiveness of rivaroxaban in Japanese real-world clinical practice.. The XAPASS is a prospective, single-arm, real-world observational study mandated by the Japanese authority as post-marketing surveillance. In total, 11,308 patients with NVAF who began treatment with rivaroxaban were enrolled from April 2012 to June 2014, and 9578 patients were analyzed to examine the one-year outcomes.. Real-world outcomes of the XAPASS showed incidence rates of major bleeding and thromboembolic events, suggesting that rivaroxaban is safe and effective in Japanese daily clinical practice (Clinicaltrials.gov: NCT01582737).

Topics: Aged; Atrial Fibrillation; Embolism; Factor Xa Inhibitors; Female; Hemorrhage; Humans; Japan; Male; Middle Aged; Product Surveillance, Postmarketing; Prospective Studies; Rivaroxaban; Stroke; Thromboembolism; Treatment Outcome

Patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation with stage 4 or 5 chronic kidney disease or undergoing hemodialysis were excluded from phase III randomized trials of nonvitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants (NOACs). We sought to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of rivaroxaban compared with warfarin in patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation and stage 4 or 5 chronic kidney disease or undergoing hemodialysis in routine practice.. Using MarketScan data from January 2012 to December 2017, we identified patients on oral anticoagulant (OAC) with naïve nonvalvular atrial fibrillation and stage 4 or 5 chronic kidney disease or undergoing hemodialysis and with ≥12 months of insurance coverage before OAC initiation. Differences in baseline covariates between the rivaroxaban and warfarin cohorts were adjusted using inverse probability-of-treatment weights based on propensity scores calculated using generalized boosted models and 10,000 regression trees (absolute standardized differences <0.1 achieved for all covariates after adjustment). Patients were followed until a stroke/systemic embolism or major bleeding event, OAC discontinuation/switch, insurance disenrollment, or end of data availability. Hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) comparing the OAC cohorts were calculated using Cox regression.. We identified 1896 rivaroxaban (38.7% received a dose <20 mg/d) and 4848 warfarin users. Eighty-eight percent of included patients had stage 5 chronic kidney disease or were undergoing hemodialysis. Rivaroxaban did not significantly reduce stroke or systemic embolism (HR = 0.55, 95% CI = 0.27-1.10) or ischemic stroke (HR = 0.67, 95% CI = 0.30-1.50) alone, but it was associated with a significant 32% (95% CI = 1-53%) reduction in major bleeding risk compared with warfarin.. Among patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation and stage 4 or 5 chronic kidney disease or undergoing hemodialysis, rivaroxaban appears associated with significantly less major bleeding compared to warfarin.

Topics: Administration, Oral; Adolescent; Adult; Aged; Aged, 80 and over; Anticoagulants; Atrial Fibrillation; Databases, Factual; Embolism; Factor Xa Inhibitors; Female; Hemorrhage; Humans; Male; Middle Aged; Renal Dialysis; Renal Insufficiency, Chronic; Retrospective Studies; Rivaroxaban; Stroke; United States; Warfarin; Young Adult

Older adult patients are underrepresented in clinical trials comparing non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants (NOACs) and warfarin. This subgroup analysis of the ARISTOPHANES study used multiple data sources to compare the risk of stroke/systemic embolism (SE) and major bleeding (MB) among very old patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF) prescribed NOACs or warfarin.. Retrospective observational study.. The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services and three US commercial claims databases.. A total of 88 582 very old (aged ≥80 y) NVAF patients newly initiating apixaban, dabigatran, rivaroxaban, or warfarin from January 1, 2013, to September 30, 2015.. In each database, six 1:1 propensity score matched (PSM) cohorts were created for each drug comparison. Patient cohorts were pooled from all four databases after PSM. Cox proportional hazards models were used to estimate hazard ratios (HRs) of stroke/SE and MB.. The patients in the six matched cohorts had a mean follow-up time of 7 to 9 months. Compared with warfarin, apixaban (HR = .58; 95% confidence interval [CI] = .49-.69), dabigatran (HR = .77; 95% CI = .60-.99), and rivaroxaban (HR = .74; 95% CI = .65-.85) were associated with lower risks of stroke/SE. For MB, apixaban (HR = .60; 95% CI = .54-.67) was associated with a lower risk; dabigatran (HR = .92; 95% CI = .78-1.07) was associated with a similar risk, and rivaroxaban (HR = 1.16; 95% CI = 1.07-1.24) was associated with a higher risk compared with warfarin. Apixaban was associated with a lower risk of stroke/SE and MB compared with dabigatran (stroke/SE: HR = .65; 95% CI = .47-.89; MB: HR = .60; 95% CI = .49-.73) and rivaroxaban (stroke/SE: HR = .72; 95% CI = .59-.86; MB: HR = .50; 95% CI = .45-.55). Dabigatran was associated with a lower risk of MB (HR = .77; 95% CI = .67-.90) compared with rivaroxaban.. Among very old NVAF patients, NOACs were associated with lower rates of stroke/SE and varying rates of MB compared with warfarin. J Am Geriatr Soc 67:1662-1671, 2019.

Topics: Administration, Oral; Aged; Aged, 80 and over; Anticoagulants; Atrial Fibrillation; Dabigatran; Embolism; Female; Hemorrhage; Humans; Male; Medicare; Proportional Hazards Models; Pyrazoles; Pyridones; Retrospective Studies; Risk Factors; Rivaroxaban; Stroke; Treatment Outcome; United States; Warfarin

Rivaroxaban is a direct oral anticoagulant administered to reduce the risk of stroke and systemic embolism in patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF). The Xarelto Post-Authorization Safety and Effectiveness Study in Japanese Patients with Atrial Fibrillation (XAPASS) was a prospective, observational, post-marketing surveillance study that examined the safety and effectiveness of rivaroxaban in routine clinical practice. This sub-analysis of the XAPASS investigated the outcomes of patients with worsening renal function (WRF).. The XAPASS included 11,308 patients with NVAF who began treatment with rivaroxaban. Of 9578 patients who completed 1-year follow-up, the 7509 patients, for whom the change in creatinine clearance could be assessed, were included in the present analysis. Patients with WRF were those with a decrease in creatinine clearance of ≥20% from enrollment to any time point; patients with stable renal function (SRF) were those without such a decrease. Outcomes in patients with WRF versus SRF were compared at 1 year.. No association between WRF and occurrence of any bleeding, major bleeding, and stroke/systemic embolism/myocardial infarction was observed in patients with AF on rivaroxaban treatment during 1-year follow-up in real-world clinical practice. Clinicaltrials.gov: NCT01582737.

Topics: Aged; Atrial Fibrillation; Embolism; Factor Xa Inhibitors; Female; Hemorrhage; Humans; Incidence; Japan; Male; Middle Aged; Myocardial Infarction; Product Surveillance, Postmarketing; Proportional Hazards Models; Prospective Studies; Renal Insufficiency; Rivaroxaban; Stroke; Treatment Outcome

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

Topics: Administration, Oral; Aged; Aged, 80 and over; Anticoagulants; Atrial Fibrillation; Dabigatran; Embolism; Female; Hospitalization; Humans; Inpatients; Male; Middle Aged; Outpatients; Patient Discharge; Pyrazoles; Pyridones; Retrospective Studies; Rivaroxaban; Stroke; Warfarin

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

Topics: Administration, Oral; Age Factors; Anticoagulants; Antithrombins; Atrial Fibrillation; Dabigatran; Embolism; Humans; Pyrazoles; Pyridines; Pyridones; Rivaroxaban; Stroke; Thiazoles; Warfarin

Direct oral anticoagulants (DOAC) are at least non-inferior to warfarin in efficacy and safety among patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation. Limited evidence is available regarding outcomes for nonvalvular atrial fibrillation patients with coronary/peripheral artery disease.. Non-valvular atrial fibrillation patients aged ≥65 years diagnosed with coronary/peripheral artery disease in the US Medicare population, newly initiating DOACs (apixaban, rivaroxaban, dabigatran) or warfarin were selected from January 1, 2013 to September 30, 2015. Propensity score matching was used to compare DOACs vs warfarin. Cox proportional hazards models were used to estimate the risk of stroke/systemic embolism, major bleeding, and composite of stroke/myocardial infarction/all-cause mortality.. There were 15,527 apixaban-warfarin, 6,962 dabigatran-warfarin, and 25,903 rivaroxaban-warfarin-matched pairs, with a mean follow-up of 5-6 months. Compared with warfarin, apixaban was associated with lower rates of stroke/systemic embolism (hazard ratio [HR] 0.48; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.37-0.62), major bleeding (HR 0.66; 95% CI, 0.58-0.75), and stroke/myocardial infarction/all-cause mortality (HR 0.63; 95% CI, 0.58-0.69); dabigatran and rivaroxaban were associated with lower rates of stroke/myocardial infarction/all-cause mortality (HR 0.79; 95% CI, 0.70-0.90 and HR 0.87; 95% CI, 0.81-0.92, respectively). Rivaroxaban was associated with a lower rate of stroke/systemic embolism (HR 0.72; 95% CI, 0.60-0.89) and a higher rate of major bleeding (HR 1.14; 95% CI, 1.05-1.23) vs warfarin.. All DOACs were associated with lower stroke/myocardial infarction/all-cause mortality rates compared with warfarin; differences were observed in rates of stroke/systemic embolism and major bleeding. Findings from this observational analysis provide important insights about oral anticoagulation therapy among non-valvular atrial fibrillation patients with coronary/peripheral artery disease and may help physicians in the decision-making process when treating this high-risk group of patients.

Topics: Administration, Oral; Aged; Anticoagulants; Atrial Fibrillation; Coronary Artery Disease; Dabigatran; Embolism; Female; Hemorrhage; Humans; Male; Medicare; Myocardial Infarction; Peripheral Arterial Disease; Proportional Hazards Models; Pyrazoles; Pyridones; Retrospective Studies; Rivaroxaban; Stroke; United States; Warfarin

The comparative effectiveness and safety of individual direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) in clinical practice is largely unknown. The study objectives were to compare effectiveness and safety of DOACs in patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF).. Based on nationwide registers we established a population-based historical cohort study of 12,638 new users of standard dose DOACs (apixaban 5 mg twice daily, dabigatran 150 mg twice daily and rivaroxaban 20 mg once daily) with NVAF in Denmark, July 2013 to March 2016. Patients were matched on propensity scores in a 1:1 ratio comparing apixaban vs. dabigatran (for a total of 6470 patients), apixaban vs. rivaroxaban (7352 patients), and rivaroxaban vs. dabigatran (5440 patients). Hazard ratios (HRs) for stroke or systemic embolism (effectiveness outcome) and major bleeding (safety outcome) were estimated.. In propensity-matched comparisons of the risk of stroke or systemic embolism, the HRs were 1.27 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.82-1.96) for apixaban vs. dabigatran, 1.25 (95% CI, 0.87-1.79) for apixaban vs. rivaroxaban, and 1.17 (95% CI, 0.69-1.96) for rivaroxaban vs. dabigatran. For the risk of major bleeding, the HRs were 0.94 (95% CI, 0.62-1.41) for apixaban vs. dabigatran, 0.88 (95% CI, 0.64-1.22) for apixaban vs. rivaroxaban, and 1.35 (95% CI, 0.91-2.00) for rivaroxaban vs. dabigatran.. Among patients with NVAF in routine clinical practice, there were no statistically significant differences in risk of stroke or systemic embolism or major bleeding in propensity-matched comparisons between apixaban, dabigatran, and rivaroxaban used in standard doses. While analyses indicate that more than moderate differences can be excluded, smaller differences cannot be ruled out.

Topics: Aged; Aged, 80 and over; Antithrombins; Atrial Fibrillation; Cohort Studies; Dabigatran; Embolism; Factor Xa Inhibitors; Female; Hemorrhage; Humans; Male; Middle Aged; Pyrazoles; Pyridones; Registries; Rivaroxaban; Stroke; Treatment Outcome

Topics: Anticoagulants; Embolism; Humans; Pyrazoles; Pyridones; Rivaroxaban; Venous Thromboembolism

Background There is concern that selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors ( SSRI s) substantially increase bleeding risk in patients taking anticoagulants. Methods and Results We studied 737 patients taking SSRI s in the ROCKET AF (Rivaroxaban Once Daily Oral Direct Factor Xa Inhibition Compared With Vitamin K Antagonism for Prevention of Embolism and Stroke Trial in Atrial Fibrillation) trial of rivaroxaban compared with warfarin for the prevention of stroke/systemic embolism in patients with atrial fibrillation. These patients were propensity score matched 1:1 to 737 patients not taking SSRI s. The primary outcome measure was major and nonmajor clinically relevant bleeding events, the principal safety outcome in ROCKET AF . Over a mean 1.6 years of follow-up, the rate of major/ nonmajor clinically relevant bleeding was 18.57 events/100 patient-years for SSRI users versus 16.84 events/100 patient-years for matched comparators, adjusted hazard ratio ( aHR ) of 1.16 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.95-1.43). The aHR s were similar in patients taking rivaroxaban ( aHR 1.11 [95% CI, 0.82-1.51]) and those taking warfarin ( aHR 1.21 [95% CI, 0.91-1.60]). For the rarer outcome of major bleeding, the aHR for SSRI users versus those not taking SSRI s was 1.13 (95% CI, 0.62-2.06) for rivaroxaban; for warfarin, the aHR was higher, at 1.58 (95% CI , 0.96-2.60) but not statistically significantly elevated. Conclusions We found no significant increase in bleeding risk when SSRI s were combined with anticoagulant therapy, although there was a suggestion of increased bleeding risk with SSRI s added to warfarin. While physicians should be vigilant regarding bleeding risk, our results provide reassurance that SSRI s can be safely added to anticoagulants in patients with atrial fibrillation . Clinical Trial Registration URL : https://www.clinicaltrials.gov . Unique identifier: NCT 00403767.

Topics: Aged; Anticoagulants; Anxiety Disorders; Atrial Fibrillation; Depressive Disorder; Embolism; Female; Hemorrhage; Humans; Male; Proportional Hazards Models; Risk Factors; Rivaroxaban; Selective Serotonin Reuptake Inhibitors; Stroke; Warfarin

To compare the level of adherence of public health nurses to BP measurement guidelines based on their knowledge if the guidelines and skills in BP measurement before and after Blood Pressure Measurement Training Program (BPMTP).. An experimental pre- and post-test design using two-staged cluster randomization was conducted. 118 PHNs (mean age ± 38.45 years, mean years of experience ± 13.45 years; 84.1% women) from six districts in Manila were equally assigned to either the BPMTP group or control group. Structured instruments were used.. This study showed that Blood Pressure Measurement Training Package is feasible in improving adherence of nurses based on their increased knowledge of the BP measurement guidelines and skills in BP measurement. A larger-scale study is warranted to show that BPMTP can potentially improve clinical management of hypertension in public health clinics globally.. The fixed dose of 15 mg rivaroxaban might carry a risk of under exposure, which would lead to an increase of thromboembolic complications in patients with high BMI. Therefore, rivaroxaban dose increase was suggested for obese patients. Use of DOACs appears to have considerable safety in obese patients.

Topics: Administration, Oral; Aged; Aged, 80 and over; Alzheimer Disease; Angiotensin II; Animals; Antithrombins; Atrial Fibrillation; Body Mass Index; Catheter Ablation; Cohort Studies; Dabigatran; Dogs; Embolism; Factor Xa Inhibitors; Female; Genotype; Hemorrhage; Humans; Hypertension; Hypertrophy, Left Ventricular; Incidence; Male; Matrix Metalloproteinase 2; Matrix Metalloproteinase 3; Middle Aged; Norepinephrine; Obesity; Polymorphism, Single Nucleotide; Retrospective Studies; Rivaroxaban; Stroke; Sympathectomy

We aimed to examine the comparative effectiveness and safety between dabigatran and rivaroxaban in atrial fibrillation patients.. We conducted a population-based, retrospective, new-user cohort study based on the National Health Insurance claims database in Taiwan. Adult atrial fibrillation patients who initiated dabigatran (N=10 625) or rivaroxaban (N=4609) between June 1, 2012 and May 31, 2014 were identified as the overall population. A propensity score was derived using logistic regression to model the probability of receipt of rivaroxaban as a function of potential confounders. Altogether, 4600 dabigatran users were matched with 4600 rivaroxaban users to create a propensity score-matched population. The marginal proportional hazards model was applied among the propensity score-matched population as the primary analysis, and the proportional hazards model with adjustment of the quintiles of the propensity score among the overall population was used as the secondary analysis. Rivaroxaban users had a higher risk of all-cause death than dabigatran users (hazard ratio 1.44, 95%CI 1.17-1.78 in the primary analysis and hazard ratio 1.47, 95%CI 1.23-1.75 in the secondary analysis). Rivaroxaban users also possessed a higher risk of gastrointestinal hemorrhage needing transfusion than dabigatran users in the primary analysis (hazard ratio 1.41, 95%CI 1.02-1.95), but the difference diminished in the secondary analysis (hazard ratio 1.20, 95%CI 0.92-1.56). The risks of ischemic stroke, acute myocardial infarction, arterial embolism/thrombosis, and intracranial hemorrhage were similar between the 2 groups.. Rivaroxaban therapy was associated with a statistically significant increase in all-cause death compared with dabigatran therapy in atrial fibrillation patients.

Topics: Aged; Aged, 80 and over; Antithrombins; Atrial Fibrillation; Blood Transfusion; Cause of Death; Comparative Effectiveness Research; Dabigatran; Embolism; Factor Xa Inhibitors; Female; Gastrointestinal Hemorrhage; Humans; Intracranial Hemorrhages; Logistic Models; Male; Mortality; Myocardial Infarction; Propensity Score; Proportional Hazards Models; Retrospective Studies; Rivaroxaban; Stroke

To compare the risk and cost of stroke/systemic embolism (SE) and major bleeding between each direct oral anticoagulant (DOAC) and warfarin among non-valvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF) patients.. Patients (≥65 years) initiating warfarin or DOACs (apixaban, rivaroxaban, and dabigatran) were selected from the Medicare database from 1 January 2013 to 31 December 2014. Patients initiating each DOAC were matched 1:1 to warfarin patients using propensity score matching to balance demographics and clinical characteristics. Cox proportional hazards models were used to estimate the risks of stroke/SE and major bleeding of each DOAC vs. warfarin. Two-part models were used to compare the stroke/SE- and major-bleeding-related medical costs between matched cohorts.. Of the 186,132 eligible patients, 20,803 apixaban-warfarin pairs, 52,476 rivaroxaban-warfarin pairs, and 16,731 dabigatran-warfarin pairs were matched. Apixaban (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.40; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.31, 0.53) and rivaroxaban (HR = 0.72; 95% CI 0.63, 0.83) were significantly associated with lower risk of stroke/SE compared to warfarin. Apixaban (HR = 0.51; 95% CI 0.44, 0.58) and dabigatran (HR = 0.79; 95% CI 0.69, 0.91) were significantly associated with lower risk of major bleeding; rivaroxaban (HR = 1.17; 95% CI 1.10, 1.26) was significantly associated with higher risk of major bleeding compared to warfarin. Compared to warfarin, apixaban ($63 vs. $131) and rivaroxaban ($93 vs. $139) had significantly lower stroke/SE-related medical costs; apixaban ($292 vs. $529) and dabigatran ($369 vs. $450) had significantly lower major bleeding-related medical costs.. Among the DOACs in the study, only apixaban is associated with a significantly lower risk of stroke/SE and major bleeding and lower related medical costs compared to warfarin.

Topics: Aged; Aged, 80 and over; Anticoagulants; Atrial Fibrillation; Costs and Cost Analysis; Dabigatran; Embolism; Female; Hemorrhage; Humans; Male; Medicare; Proportional Hazards Models; Pyrazoles; Pyridones; Risk; Rivaroxaban; Stroke; United States; Warfarin

No studies have performed direct pairwise comparisons of the effectiveness and safety of warfarin and the new oral anticoagulants (NOACs) apixaban, dabigatran, and rivaroxaban. Using 2013 to 2014 claims from a 5% random sample of Medicare beneficiaries, we identified patients newly diagnosed with atrial fibrillation who initiated apixaban, dabigatran, rivaroxaban, warfarin, or no oral anticoagulation therapy in 2013 to 2014. Outcomes included the composite of ischemic stroke, systemic embolism (SE) and death, any bleeding event, gastrointestinal bleeding, intracranial bleeding, and treatment persistence. We constructed Cox proportional hazard models to compare outcomes between each pair of treatment groups. The composite risk of ischemic stroke, SE, and death was lower for NOACs than for warfarin: hazard ratio (HR) 0.86, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.76 to 0.98 for apixaban; 0.73, 95% CI 0.63 to 0.86 for dabigatran; and 0.82, 95% CI 0.75 to 0.89 for rivaroxaban, all compared with warfarin. There were no differences in effectiveness across NOACs. The risk of any bleeding was lower with apixaban than with warfarin, but higher with rivaroxaban than with warfarin. Apixaban (HR 0.69, 95% CI 0.60 to 0.79) and dabigatran (HR 0.79, 95% CI 0.69 to 0.92) were associated with lower bleeding risk than rivaroxaban. Treatment persistence was highest for apixaban (82%), and lowest for dabigatran and warfarin (64%) (p value <0.001). Compared with warfarin, NOACs are more effective in preventing stroke but their risk of bleeding varies, with rivaroxaban having higher risk than warfarin. Altogether, apixaban had the most favorable effectiveness, safety, and persistence profile.

Topics: Administration, Oral; Aged; Anticoagulants; Antithrombins; Atrial Fibrillation; Dabigatran; Dose-Response Relationship, Drug; Embolism; Factor Xa Inhibitors; Female; Follow-Up Studies; Humans; Incidence; Male; Pennsylvania; Pyrazoles; Pyridones; Retrospective Studies; Rivaroxaban; Stroke; Treatment Outcome; Warfarin

Few data exist to evaluate the safety and efficacy of direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) undergoing cryoballoon ablation (CB-A). This study is aimed to clarify the usefulness of DOACs in patients undergoing CB-A.. The patients (average age; 65.8±11.9 years old, male 69%) were stratified into one of five subsets based on the type of anticoagulation (warfarin, apixaban, dabigatran, rivaroxaban, or edoxaban), and underwent CB-A. A brain MRI was performed in all patients the day after the CB-A for AF. A total of 257 (19 on warfarin, 30 on apixaban, 66 on dabigatran, 81 on rivaroxaban, and 61 on edoxaban) patients met the inclusion criteria.. The incidence of silent cerebral ischemic lesion was 1 (11.1%) patients on warfarin, 5 (33.3%) on apixaban, 8 (27.6%) on dabigatran, 10 (21.3%) on rivaroxaban, and 10 (29.4%) on edoxaban (p=0.17). Major ischemic events occurred in one patient (1.6%) on edoxaban and one (5.3%) on warfarin. Minor bleeding complications occurred in 1 patient (5.3%) on warfarin, 2 (6.7%) on apixaban, 1 (1.2%) on rivaroxaban, 5 (7.6%) on dabigatran, and 2 (3.3%) on edoxaban (p=0.24). Of note, major bleeding complications occurred in 2 patients (3.3%) on apixaban, 1 (1.2%) on rivaroxaban, 1 (1.5%) on dabigatran, 1 (1.6%) on edoxaban, and 2 (10.5%) on warfarin (p<0.05).. Warfarin use significantly increased the risk of serious bleeding, in contrast, CB-A did not place the patients at an increased risk of complications under a DOAC treatment. There were no significant differences regarding preventing embolic events among the DOAC drugs.

Topics: Aged; Anticoagulants; Atrial Fibrillation; Brain; Brain Ischemia; Cryosurgery; Dabigatran; Embolism; Female; Hemorrhage; Humans; Incidence; Magnetic Resonance Imaging; Male; Middle Aged; Postoperative Complications; Pyrazoles; Pyridines; Pyridones; Rivaroxaban; Thiazoles; Warfarin

Topics: Anticoagulants; Atrial Fibrillation; Creatinine; Embolism; Factor Xa Inhibitors; Humans; Kidney; Kidney Function Tests; Rivaroxaban; Stroke; Vitamin K; Warfarin

The effectiveness and safety of rivaroxaban for stroke prevention in atrial fibrillation (SPAF) demonstrated in ROCKET AF needs to be confirmed in daily care. To evaluate effectiveness and safety of rivaroxaban therapy in SPAF patients in daily care, we used data from an ongoing, prospective, non-interventional registry of more than 2700 patients on novel oral anticoagulants in daily care. Between October 1, 2011 and February 28, 2013, a total of 1204 SPAF patients receiving rivaroxaban were enrolled. During a mean follow-up of 796.2 ± 207.3 days, the combined endpoint of stroke/transient ischaemic attack/systemic embolism occurred at a rate of 2.03/100 patient-years in the intention-to-treat analysis (95 % confidence interval [CI] 1.5-2.7) and at 1.7/100 patient-years in the on-treatment analysis (events within 3 days after last intake). On-treatment rates were higher in patients selected for 15 mg rivaroxaban (n=384) once daily [OD] compared with the 820 patients selected for 20 mg OD (2.7 [95 % CI 1.6-4.2] vs 1.25/100 patient-years [95 % CI 0.8-1.9]). On treatment, major bleeding occurred at a rate of 3.0/100 patient-years and significantly more often in patients receiving the 15 mg OD dose compared with the 20 mg OD dose (4.5 vs 2.4/100 patient-years). Rivaroxaban treatment discontinuation occurred in a total of 277 patients during follow-up (12.0/100 patient-years in Kaplan-Meier analysis). Our data contribute to the confirmation of effectiveness and relative safety of rivaroxaban in daily-care patients. Furthermore, rivaroxaban discontinuation rates were considerably lower than those reported for vitamin K antagonists.

Topics: Aged; Aged, 80 and over; Anticoagulants; Atrial Fibrillation; Cohort Studies; Embolism; Female; Germany; Hemorrhage; Humans; Ischemic Attack, Transient; Kaplan-Meier Estimate; Male; Prospective Studies; Registries; Rivaroxaban; Safety; Stroke; Treatment Outcome

Topics: Anticoagulants; Atrial Fibrillation; Brain Ischemia; Drug Approval; Embolism; Europe; Evidence-Based Medicine; Factor Xa Inhibitors; Humans; International Normalized Ratio; Rivaroxaban; Stroke; United States; United States Food and Drug Administration; Warfarin

Whereas insurance status has been previously associated with care patterns, little is currently known about the association between Medicaid insurance and the clinical characteristics, treatment, or outcomes of patients with atrial fibrillation (AF).. We used data from adults with AF enrolled in the Outcomes Registry for Better Informed Treatment of AF (ORBIT-AF), a national outpatient registry conducted at 176 community, multispecialty sites. The primary outcome of interest was the proportion of patients prescribed any oral anticoagulation (OAC; warfarin or novel oral anticoagulants [NOAC]). Secondary outcomes of interest included the proportion of patients prescribed NOACs (dabigatran or rivaroxaban); time in therapeutic range (TTR) for warfarin users, all-cause mortality, stroke/systemic embolism, and major bleed. Of 10 133 patients, N=470 (4.6%) had Medicaid insurance. Medicaid patients were similarly likely to receive OAC at baseline (72.8% vs 76.3%; unadjusted P=0.079), but less likely to receive NOAC at baseline or follow-up (12.1% vs 16.3%; unadjusted P=0.019). After risk adjustment, Medicaid status was associated with lower use of OAC at baseline among patients with high stroke risk (odds ratio [OR]=0.68; 95% CI=0.49, 0.94), but was not associated with OAC use overall (OR=0.82; 95% CI=0.61, 1.09). Among warfarin users, median TTR was lower among Medicaid patients (60% vs 68%; P<0.0001; adjusted TTR difference, -2.9; 95% CI=-5.7, -0.2; P=0.04). Use of an NOAC over 2 years of follow-up was not statistically different by insurance. Compared with non-Medicaid patients, Medicaid patients had higher unadjusted rates of mortality, stroke/systemic embolism, and major bleeding; however, these differences were attenuated following adjustment for clinical characteristics.. In a contemporary AF cohort, use of OAC overall and use of NOACs were not significantly lower among Medicaid patients relative to others. However, among warfarin users, Medicaid patients spent less time in therapeutic range compared with those with other forms of insurance.

Topics: Administration, Oral; Aged; Aged, 80 and over; Anticoagulants; Atrial Fibrillation; Cause of Death; Dabigatran; DNA-Binding Proteins; Drosophila Proteins; Embolism; Female; Hemorrhage; Humans; Male; Medicaid; Middle Aged; Mortality; Registries; Rivaroxaban; Stroke; Transcription Factors; Treatment Outcome; United States; Warfarin

 To study the effectiveness and safety of the non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants (novel oral anticoagulants, NOACs) dabigatran, rivaroxaban, and apixaban compared with warfarin in anticoagulant naïve patients with atrial fibrillation..  Observational nationwide cohort study..  Three Danish nationwide databases, August 2011 to October 2015..  61 678 patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation who were naïve to oral anticoagulants and had no previous indication for valvular atrial fibrillation or venous thromboembolism. The study population was distributed according to treatment type: warfarin (n=35 436, 57%), dabigatran 150 mg (n=12 701, 21%), rivaroxaban 20 mg (n=7192, 12%), and apixaban 5 mg (n=6349, 10%)..  Effectiveness outcomes defined a priori were ischaemic stroke; a composite of ischaemic stroke or systemic embolism; death; and a composite of ischaemic stroke, systemic embolism, or death. Safety outcomes were any bleeding, intracranial bleeding, and major bleeding..  When the analysis was restricted to ischaemic stroke, NOACs were not significantly different from warfarin. During one year follow-up, rivaroxaban was associated with lower annual rates of ischaemic stroke or systemic embolism (3.0% v 3.3%, respectively) compared with warfarin: hazard ratio 0.83 (95% confidence interval 0.69 to 0.99). The hazard ratios for dabigatran and apixaban (2.8% and 4.9% annually, respectively) were non-significant compared with warfarin. The annual risk of death was significantly lower with apixaban (5.2%) and dabigatran (2.7%) (0.65, 0.56 to 0.75 and 0.63, 0.48 to 0.82, respectively) compared with warfarin (8.5%), but not with rivaroxaban (7.7%). For the combined endpoint of any bleeding, annual rates for apixaban (3.3%) and dabigatran (2.4%) were significantly lower than for warfarin (5.0%) (0.62, 0.51 to 0.74). Warfarin and rivaroxaban had comparable annual bleeding rates (5.3%)..  All NOACs seem to be safe and effective alternatives to warfarin in a routine care setting. No significant difference was found between NOACs and warfarin for ischaemic stroke. The risks of death, any bleeding, or major bleeding were significantly lower for apixaban and dabigatran compared with warfarin.

Topics: Administration, Oral; Aged; Aged, 80 and over; Anticoagulants; Atrial Fibrillation; Cohort Studies; Dabigatran; Denmark; Drug Administration Schedule; Embolism; Female; Hemorrhage; Humans; Male; Propensity Score; Pyrazoles; Pyridones; Registries; Rivaroxaban; Stroke; Treatment Outcome; Warfarin

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).. 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.. 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).. 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.

Topics: Aged; Anticoagulants; Atrial Fibrillation; Blood Pressure; Embolism; Female; Hemorrhage; Humans; Hypertension; Male; Middle Aged; Proportional Hazards Models; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Retrospective Studies; Risk; Rivaroxaban; Stroke; Warfarin

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).. 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.. 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).. 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.

Topics: Aged; Anticoagulants; Aspirin; Atrial Fibrillation; Comorbidity; Drug Therapy, Combination; Embolism; Factor Xa Inhibitors; Female; Heart Failure; Hemorrhage; Humans; Male; Middle Aged; Mortality; Myocardial Infarction; Platelet Aggregation Inhibitors; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Risk Factors; Rivaroxaban; Stroke; Warfarin

The use of rivaroxaban, a factor Xa inhibitor, has been increasing for prevention of ischemic stroke and systemic embolism in patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation (AF) in Japan. We conducted the nationwide multicenter study, termed as the EXPAND Study, to address its effectiveness and safety in the real-world practice of patients with non-valvular AF in Japan. The EXPAND Study is a prospective, non-interventional, observational cohort study to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of rivaroxaban in non-valvular AF patients in a real-world clinical practice. A total of 7,178 patients with non-valvular AF were enrolled in 684 medical institutes between November 20, 2012 and June 30, 2014. As for the baseline demographic and clinical characteristics of 7,164 patients, the proportion of female patients was 32.2%, and those of patients with creatinine clearance < 50 mL/min and non-paroxysmal (persistent or permanent) AF were 21.8% and 55.1%, respectively. The proportions of patients complicated with hypertension, congestive heart failure, diabetes mellitus, and a history of ischemic stroke were 70.9%, 25.9%, 24.3%, and 20.2%, respectively. The proportions of patients with a CHADS

Topics: Aged; Atrial Fibrillation; Clinical Trials as Topic; Cohort Studies; Demography; Embolism; Factor Xa; Factor Xa Inhibitors; Female; Humans; Japan; Male; Prevalence; Reproducibility of Results; Research Design; Rivaroxaban; Stroke; Treatment Outcome

In nonvalvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF), rivaroxaban is used to prevent stroke and systemic embolism.. To evaluate major bleeding (MB) in NVAF patients treated with rivaroxaban in a real-world clinical setting.. From January 1, 2013, to March 31, 2014, US Department of Defense electronic health care records were queried to describe MB rates and demographics. Major bleeding was identified using a validated algorithm.. Of 27 467 patients receiving rivaroxaban, 496 MB events occurred in 478 patients, an incidence of 2.86 per 100 person-years (95% confidence interval: 2.61-3.13). The MB patients were older, mean (SD) age of 78.4 (7.7) vs 75.7 (9.7) years, compared with non-MB patients. Patients with MB had higher rates of hypertension (95.6% vs 75.8%), coronary artery disease (64.2% vs 36.7%), heart failure (48.5% vs 23.7%), and renal disease (38.7% vs 16.7%). Of MB patients, 63.2% were taking 20 mg, 32.2% 15 mg, and 4.6% 10 mg of rivaroxaban. Four percent of MB patients took warfarin within the prior 30 days. Major bleeding was most commonly gastrointestinal (88.5%) or intracranial (7.5%). Although 46.7% of MB patients received a transfusion, none had sufficient evidence of receiving any type of clotting factor. Fourteen died during their MB hospitalization, yielding a fatal bleeding incidence rate of 0.08 per 100 person-years (95% confidence interval: 0.05-0.14). Mean age at death was 82.4 years.. In this large observational study, the MB rate was generally consistent with the registration trial results, and fatal bleeds were rare.

Topics: Aged; Aged, 80 and over; Anticoagulants; Atrial Fibrillation; Electronic Health Records; Embolism; Female; Hemorrhage; Hospital Mortality; Hospitalization; Humans; Incidence; Male; Military Medicine; Pharmacovigilance; Retrospective Studies; Risk Assessment; Risk Factors; Rivaroxaban; Stroke; Time Factors; Treatment Outcome; United States

This study quantitatively evaluated the comparative efficacy and safety of new oral anticoagulants (dabigatran, rivaroxaban, and apizaban) and warfarin for treatment of nonvalvular atrial fibrillation. We also compared these agents under different scenarios, including population with high risk of stroke and for primary vs. secondary stroke prevention.. We used multiple criteria decision analysis (MCDA) to assess the benefit-risk of these medications. Our MCDA models contained criteria for benefits (prevention of ischemic stroke and systemic embolism) and risks (intracranial and extracranial bleeding). We calculated a performance score for each drug accounting for benefits and risks in comparison to treatment alternatives.. Overall, new agents had higher performance scores than warfarin; in order of performance scores: dabigatran 150 mg (0.529), rivaroxaban (0.462), apixaban (0.426), and warfarin (0.191). For patients at a higher risk of stroke (CHADS2 score≥3), apixaban had the highest performance score (0.686); performance scores for other drugs were 0.462 for dabigatran 150 mg, 0.392 for dabigatran 110 mg, 0.271 for rivaroxaban, and 0.116 for warfarin. Dabigatran 150 mg had the highest performance score for primary stroke prevention, while dabigatran 110 mg had the highest performance score for secondary prevention.. Our results suggest that new oral anticoagulants might be preferred over warfarin. Selecting appropriate medicines according to the patient's condition based on information from an integrated benefit-risk assessment of treatment options is crucial to achieve optimal clinical outcomes.

Topics: Aged; Aged, 80 and over; Anticoagulants; Atrial Fibrillation; Dabigatran; Decision Support Techniques; Embolism; Evidence-Based Medicine; Female; Humans; Intracranial Hemorrhages; Male; Middle Aged; Pyrazoles; Pyridones; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Research Design; Risk Assessment; Rivaroxaban; Stroke; Warfarin

For over 50 years, warfarin was the only oral anticoagulant approved in the United States. In 2011, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved rivaroxaban. Since its introduction, rivaroxaban has served as an alternative to warfarin to minimize drug interactions and avoid drug monitoring. The objective of this study was to evaluate the appropriateness of rivaroxaban dosing, indication and safety in a community hospital and to identify areas for improvement in its use.. This single-centre, retrospective review evaluated patients who received at least one dose of rivaroxaban between November 2011 and July 2013. The primary outcome included appropriateness of the first day of therapy based on indication and renal function per FDA-approved dosing recommendations for the prevention of stroke and systemic embolism in non-valvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF) and for the treatment or prevention of venous thromboembolism (VTE). The secondary outcome included incidence of major bleeding or non-major clinically relevant bleeding.. Of the 445 patients evaluated, 36·9% of patients treated for NVAF and 12·4% treated for VTE were on an inappropriate regimen. Major bleeding within 12 months occurred in 3·5% of patients treated for NVAF, 1·2% for VTE and 0% for off-label indications with a similar trend for non-major clinically relevant bleeding (3·8%, 1·8% and 0%, respectively).. Though offering potential advantages over warfarin, the use of rivaroxaban should be monitored to increase appropriateness of therapy and improve patient safety. Therapeutic interchanges, pharmacist-directed interventions and other initiatives can be implemented to ensure appropriate use.

Topics: Aged; Aged, 80 and over; Atrial Fibrillation; Dose-Response Relationship, Drug; Embolism; Factor Xa Inhibitors; Female; Hemorrhage; Hospitals, Community; Humans; Male; Middle Aged; Retrospective Studies; Rivaroxaban; Stroke; Venous Thromboembolism

Rivaroxaban is a once-daily oral anticoagulant currently indicated for the prevention of stroke and systemic embolism in patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation. It is also indicated for the prevention and treatment of venous or pulmonary thromboembolism. Despite the known advantages of rivaroxaban over standard therapy, this treatment is not exempt from bleeding. We present the case of a 51-year-old woman with arterial hypertension and paroxysmal atrial fibrillation anticoagulated with rivaroxaban 20 mg o.d. Patient was admitted to the emergency department because of intense abdominal pain, high temperature, hypotension, tachycardia and a big tumor in the right abdominal area. The ultrasonic exam showed a big collection in the thoracic and abdominal area, compatible with hematoma. Due to clinical instability, urgent surgery was required. Based on the results of coagulation parameters (PT: 17.5 s), the time from the last rivaroxaban dose was taken, and the patient weight, nonactivated prothrombin complex concentrate at a single dose of 1000 IU was administrated intravenously 1 h before the surgery. PT value decreased to normal value (13.5 s), and surgery was performed without any bleeding complication. The management of patients treated with rivaroxaban who require urgent surgery is discussed in this report.

Topics: Abdomen; Administration, Oral; Atrial Fibrillation; Blood Coagulation; Blood Coagulation Factors; Drug Administration Schedule; Embolism; Emergencies; Factor Xa Inhibitors; Female; Hematoma; Humans; Injections, Intravenous; Middle Aged; Rivaroxaban; Tachycardia, Paroxysmal; Tomography, X-Ray Computed; Ultrasonography

Topics: Adult; Aged; Anticoagulants; Atrial Fibrillation; Electric Countershock; Embolism; Factor Xa Inhibitors; Heart Diseases; Hemorrhage; Humans; International Normalized Ratio; Middle Aged; Morpholines; Multicenter Studies as Topic; Myocardial Infarction; Prospective Studies; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Research Design; Risk; Rivaroxaban; Stroke; Thiophenes; Thrombophilia; Time Factors; Treatment Outcome; Vitamin K; Warfarin

Direct oral anticoagulants (DOAC) represent an innovative and relevant treatment for the prevention of cardiac embolism in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF). Their introduction has been followed by an ample debate on their appropriate use, considering that they can offer an effective treatment for the many patients with AF, which are not taking any effective anticoagulant treatment, even though they have a substantial thromboembolic risk (1). On the other hand, DOAC are much less tested in everyday clinical practice and much more expensive than anti-vitamin k anticoagulants (AVKs). Starting from the quite favorable results of the available randomized controlled trials (RCTs)--showing that DOAC are at least non-inferior to AVK and that may be even better for some outcomes--this article discusses their transferability to the majority of AF patients. In summary, the body of evidence supports the efficacy and safety of DOAC in patients carrying demographic and clinical characteristics similar to subjects included in RCT, but their use in less well-characterized subpopulations requires particular caution, while waiting for more reliable data from the real world.

Topics: Administration, Oral; Anticoagulants; Atrial Fibrillation; Dabigatran; Embolism; Female; Humans; Male; Pyrazoles; Pyridones; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Rivaroxaban; Stroke; Treatment Outcome; Warfarin

In this study, we evaluated the microembolic signals (MES) frequency with transcranial Doppler ultrasound (TCD) in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) under anticoagulant therapy, and we compared the treatment groups.. Ninety-nine patients with nonvalvular AF with a history of stroke using warfarin (46%), 67 patients using rivaroxaban (31%), and 49 patients using dabigatran (23%), that is, a total of 215 patients, who have been referred to the stroke outpatient section of our department from May 2013 to November 2014, were included in the study. CHA(2)DS(2)VASc scoring was made for all patients, and International Normalized Ratio (INR) value was evaluated in patients using warfarin. All patients were monitored with TCD on the middle cerebral arteries bilaterally for 30 minutes. Embolic signals were evaluated according to their density and the mean number of signals in 2 consecutive recordings.. The incidence of emboli in the treatment group was 32 (32%) for warfarin, 24 (36%) for rivaroxaban, and 17 (35%) for dabigatran. The analysis of variance revealed that there was no statistically significant differences between the treatment groups in terms of patients' age (P = .145), CHA(2)DS(2)VASc scores (P = .968), and the number of emboli (P = .783). As CHA(2)DS(2)VASc score increases, number of emboli increase. A statistically significant negative correlation between the number of emboli and INR scores was found in the warfarin group. The number of emboli decreases as INR decreases.. As we aim to reduce the risk of emboli to a minimum with anticoagulant therapy, this screening for MES can give us an idea for the risk of stroke.

Topics: Adult; Aged; Aged, 80 and over; Anticoagulants; Atrial Fibrillation; Dabigatran; Embolism; Female; Humans; Male; Middle Aged; Middle Cerebral Artery; Rivaroxaban; Severity of Illness Index; Treatment Outcome; Ultrasonography, Doppler, Transcranial; Warfarin

Three new oral anticoagulants (NOACs) are currently approved for stroke prevention and systemic embolism in patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF). The objective of this analysis was to assess the cost effectiveness of apixaban against other NOACs for the prevention of stroke in patients with NVAF in Greece.. A Markov model that evaluated clinical events, quality-adjusted life expectancy, and costs for patients treated with apixaban or other NOACs formed the basis of the analysis. Clinical events were modeled for a lifetime horizon, based on clinical efficacy data from an indirect comparison, using the ARISTOTLE, ROCKET-AF, and RE-LY clinical trials. Resource use associated with patient monitoring was elicited via a panel of experts (cardiologists and internists). Cost calculations reflect the local clinical setting and followed a third-party payer perspective (Euros, discounted at 3 %).. Apixaban was projected to reduce the occurrence of clinical events and increase quality-adjusted life expectancy and incremental costs of treatment compared with other NOACs. Taking into account costs of medications, patient monitoring, and management of events, the incremental cost-effectiveness ratios for apixaban 5 mg twice daily vs. dabigatran 110 mg twice daily, dabigatran 150 mg twice daily, and rivaroxaban 20 mg once daily were estimated at €9907/quality-adjusted life-year (QALY), €13,727/QALY, and €6936/QALY gained, respectively. Extensive sensitivity analyses indicated that results were robust over a wide range of inputs.. Based on the results of this analysis, apixaban can be a cost-effective alternative to other NOACs for the prevention of stroke in patients with NVAF in Greece.

Topics: Administration, Oral; Aged; Anticoagulants; Atrial Fibrillation; Cost-Benefit Analysis; Dabigatran; Embolism; Greece; Health Care Costs; Humans; Middle Aged; Pyrazoles; Pyridones; Quality-Adjusted Life Years; Rivaroxaban; Stroke; Warfarin

Rivaroxaban was shown to be effective in reducing the risk of stroke and systemic embolism in patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation (AF) in a randomized controlled trial setting.. To assess real-world safety, effectiveness, and persistence associated with rivaroxaban and warfarin in nonvalvular AF patients.. Healthcare claims from Symphony Health Solutions' Patient Transactional Datasets from May 2011 to July 2012 were analyzed. Adult patients newly initiated on rivaroxaban or warfarin, with ≥2 AF diagnoses (ICD-9-CM: 427.31) and a CHADS2 score ≥1 during the 180 day baseline period were included. Cohorts were matched 1:4 using propensity score methods. Study outcomes were major bleeding, intracranial hemorrhage (ICH), gastrointestinal (GI) bleeding, composite stroke and systemic embolism, and venous thromboembolism (VTE) events. Cox proportional hazard models were used to compare event and persistence rates.. The matched sample included 3654 rivaroxaban and 14,616 warfarin patients. Matching was adequate, with all standardized differences in patient characteristics <10%. No significant differences were observed for bleeding and composite stroke and systemic embolism outcomes, although rivaroxaban users were associated with significantly fewer VTE events (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.36, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.24-0.54, p < 0.0001) compared to warfarin users. Rivaroxaban was also associated with a significantly lower risk of treatment non-persistence (HR = 0.66; 95% CI: 0.60-0.72, p < 0.0001).. Claims data may have contained inaccuracies, and mortality and laboratory data were not available. Confounding may still have been possible even after propensity score matching. Early use pattern of medications may have changed over time.. This analysis suggests that rivaroxaban and warfarin do not differ significantly in real-world rates of composite stroke and systemic embolism and major, intracranial, or GI bleeding. Rivaroxaban, however, was associated with significantly fewer VTE events and significantly better treatment persistence compared with warfarin.

Topics: Adolescent; Adult; Aged; Aged, 80 and over; Anticoagulants; Atrial Fibrillation; Comparative Effectiveness Research; Embolism; Factor Xa Inhibitors; Female; Hemorrhage; Humans; Male; Middle Aged; Morpholines; Propensity Score; Proportional Hazards Models; Retrospective Studies; Rivaroxaban; Stroke; Thiophenes; Treatment Outcome; Warfarin; Young Adult

We report a case of a nonvalvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF) patient with acute cardioembolic stroke in whom rivaroxaban, an oral direct factor Xa inhibitor, reduced a smoke-like echo in the left atrium and resolved a thrombus in the left atrial appendage. A 71-year-old man was admitted because of the sudden onset of right hemiplegia and aphasia and was diagnosed with acute cardioembolic stroke associated with NVAF. The patient had not been treated with warfarin before admission, and rivaroxaban therapy (15 mg once daily) was initiated. Transesophageal echocardiography was performed on day 8 and a mobile thrombus was found in the left atrial appendage, accompanied by a remarkable smoke-like echo in the left atrium. Notably, the thrombus was resolved and the smoke-like echo was reduced on day 40. No recurrent ischemic stroke occurred. We describe favorable effects of rivaroxaban on the reduction of a smoke-like echo and on the resolution of a thrombus in the left atrium in an NVAF patient with acute cardioembolic stroke.

Topics: Aged; Echocardiography, Transesophageal; Embolism; Factor Xa Inhibitors; Heart Atria; Humans; Male; Morpholines; Rivaroxaban; Stroke; Thiophenes; Thrombosis; Treatment Outcome

Atrial fibrillation (AF), the most frequent sustained arrhythmia, is associated with an increased risk of thromboembolic events. The risk of stroke depends on risk factors such as age, hypertension, heart failure, and vascular disease. Thus, antithrombotic therapy is a cornerstone in the management of AF. Warfarin is successfully used to reduce thromboembolic events. More recently, direct thrombin (dabigatran) and factor Xa (apixaban, edoxaban, rivaroxaban) inhibitors have been compared to warfarin in large randomized trials. All new substances have been shown to be non-inferior to warfarin concerning thromboembolic events. Severe bleeding, such as fatal and intracranial bleeding, was less frequent with direct oral anticoagulants. Results of the studies and subgroup analyses are discussed. Further trials using direct oral anticoagulants in special populations such as very old and patients with kidney disease are needed.

Topics: Administration, Oral; Anticoagulants; Atrial Fibrillation; Benzimidazoles; beta-Alanine; Dabigatran; Embolism; Hemorrhage; Humans; Morpholines; Pyrazoles; Pyridines; Pyridones; Risk Factors; Rivaroxaban; Stroke; Thiazoles; Thiophenes; Warfarin

Topics: Atrial Fibrillation; Embolism; Factor Xa Inhibitors; Female; Humans; Male; Morpholines; Rivaroxaban; Stroke; Thiophenes; Vitamin K; Warfarin

Three new oral anticoagulants (NOACs) have recently become available in the United Kingdom as an alternative to warfarin in the prevention of stroke and systemic embolism in atrial fibrillation. This study examines the relative cost-effectiveness of dabigatran (BID dosing of 150 mg or 110 mg based on patient age), rivaroxaban, and apixaban from a UK payer perspective.. A previously published model that follows up patients through treatment of atrial fibrillation during a lifetime was adapted to allow comparison of the 3 NOACs and warfarin. Acute thromboembolic and bleeding events, as well as long-term consequences of stroke, intracranial hemorrhage, and acute myocardial infarction, were tracked. Relative efficacy was calculated from a formal indirect treatment comparison using data from the 3 key trials (Randomized Evaluation of Long-Term Anticoagulation Therapy, Rivaroxaban Once-daily oral direct factor Xa inhibition Compared with vitamin K antagonism for prevention of stroke and Embolism Trial in Atrial Fibrillation, and Apixaban for the Prevention of Stroke in Subjects With Atrial Fibrillation) of the NOACs. Data from the rivaroxaban trial were adjusted for the difference in international normalized ratio control among warfarin patients versus the other 2 trials. Model outputs included total costs, event rates, and quality-adjusted life-years.. Among the patients taking NOACs, those taking dabigatran had the highest total QALYs (7.68 QALYs), followed by apixaban (7.63 QALYs) and rivaroxaban (7.47 QALYs). Patients taking dabigatran had the lowest total lifetime costs (£23,342), followed by apixaban (£24,014) and rivaroxaban (£25,220). The differences between dabigatran and apixaban were modest but consistent in sensitivity analyses, with the directionality only changing at the limits of the CIs for the relative risks of ischemic stroke or intracranial hemorrhage or when assuming that both treatment discontinuation and post-event disability rates differ by drug.. Dabigatran was found to be economically dominant over rivaroxaban and apixaban in the UK setting. These economic findings are based on relative clinical efficacy from an indirect treatment comparison and would benefit from any data of direct comparisons of the NOACs in the future.

Topics: Anticoagulants; Atrial Fibrillation; Cost-Benefit Analysis; Dabigatran; Embolism; Hemorrhage; Humans; Models, Theoretical; Pyrazoles; Pyridones; Quality-Adjusted Life Years; Rivaroxaban; Stroke; United Kingdom; Warfarin

Topics: Aged; Aged, 80 and over; Anticoagulants; Atrial Fibrillation; Embolism; Factor Xa Inhibitors; Female; Hemorrhage; Humans; Male; Middle Aged; Morpholines; Rivaroxaban; Stroke; Thiophenes; Treatment Outcome; Vitamin K; Warfarin

Topics: Atrial Fibrillation; Embolism; Factor Xa; Female; Humans; Male; Morpholines; Rivaroxaban; Stroke; Thiophenes; Vitamin K

Dabigatran, an oral thrombin inhibitor, and rivaroxaban and apixaban, oral factor Xa inhibitors, have been found to be safe and effective in reducing stroke risk in patients with atrial fibrillation. We sought to compare the efficacy and safety of the 3 new agents based on data from their published warfarin-controlled randomized trials, using the method of adjusted indirect comparisons.. We included findings from 44 535 patients enrolled in 3 trials of the efficacy of dabigatran (Randomized Evaluation of Long-Term Anticoagulation Therapy [RELY]), apixaban (Apixaban for Reduction in Stroke and Other Thromboembolic Events in Atrial Fibrillation [ARISTOTLE]), and rivaroxaban (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]), each compared with warfarin. The primary efficacy end point was stroke or systemic embolism; the safety end point we studied was major hemorrhage. To address a lack of comparability between trial populations caused by the restriction of ROCKET-AF to high-risk patients, we conducted a subgroup analysis in patients with a CHADS(2) score ≥3. We found no statistically significant efficacy differences among the 3 drugs, although apixaban and dabigatran were numerically superior to rivaroxaban. Apixaban produced significantly fewer major hemorrhages than dabigatran and rivaroxaban.. An indirect comparison of new anticoagulants based on existing trial data indicates that in patients with a CHADS(2) score ≥3 dabigatran 150 mg, apixaban 5 mg, and rivaroxaban 20 mg resulted in statistically similar rates of stroke and systemic embolism, but apixaban had a lower risk of major hemorrhage compared with dabigatran and rivaroxaban. Until head-to-head trials or large-scale observational studies that reflect routine use of these agents are available, such adjusted indirect comparisons based on trial data are one tool to guide initial therapeutic choices.

Topics: Administration, Oral; Aged; Anticoagulants; Atrial Fibrillation; Benzimidazoles; beta-Alanine; Clinical Trials, Phase III as Topic; Dabigatran; Embolism; Evidence-Based Medicine; Female; Hemorrhage; Humans; Male; Middle Aged; Morpholines; Pyrazoles; Pyridones; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Risk Assessment; Risk Factors; Rivaroxaban; Stroke; Thiophenes; Time Factors; Treatment Outcome; Warfarin

Topics: Anticoagulants; Atrial Fibrillation; Benzimidazoles; beta-Alanine; Dabigatran; Embolism; Female; Humans; Male; Morpholines; Pyrazoles; Pyridones; Rivaroxaban; Stroke; Thiophenes

Topics: Anticoagulants; Atrial Fibrillation; Embolism; Female; Humans; Male; Morpholines; Rivaroxaban; Stroke; Thiophenes; Warfarin

Canadian patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) in whom anticoagulation is appropriate have two new choices for anticoagulation for prevention of stroke and systemic embolism--dabigatran etexilate (dabigatran) and rivaroxaban. Based on the RE-LY and ROCKET AF trial results, we investigated the cost-effectiveness of dabigatran (twice daily dosing of 150 mg or 110 mg based on patient age) versus rivaroxaban from a Canadian payer perspective. A formal indirect treatment comparison (ITC) of dabigatran versus rivaroxaban was performed, using dabigatran clinical event rates from RE-LY for the safety-on-treatment population, adjusted to the ROCKET AF population. A previously described Markov model was modified to simulate anticoagulation treatment using ITC results as inputs. Model outputs included total costs, event rates, and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs). The ITC found when compared to rivaroxaban, dabigatran had a lower risk of intracranial haemorrhage (ICH) (relative risk [RR] = 0.38; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.21 - 0.67) and stroke (RR = 0.62; 95%CI 0.45-0.87). Over a lifetime horizon, the model found dabigatran-treated patients experienced fewer ICHs (0.33 dabigatran vs. 0.71 rivaroxaban) and ischaemic strokes (3.40 vs. 3.96) per 100 patient-years, and accrued more QALYs (6.17 vs. 6.01). Dabigatran-treated patients had lower acute care and long-term follow-up costs per patient ($52,314 vs. $53,638) which more than offset differences in drug costs ($7,299 vs. $6,128). In probabilistic analysis, dabigatran had high probability of being the most cost-effective therapy at common thresholds of willingness-to-pay (93% at a $20,000/QALY threshold). This study found dabigatran is economically dominant versus rivaroxaban for prevention of stroke and systemic embolism among Canadian AF patients.

Topics: Anticoagulants; Atrial Fibrillation; Benzimidazoles; beta-Alanine; Canada; Clinical Trials as Topic; Cost-Benefit Analysis; Dabigatran; Embolism; Humans; Markov Chains; Models, Economic; Morpholines; Quality-Adjusted Life Years; Rivaroxaban; Stroke; Thiophenes; Treatment Outcome; Warfarin

Topics: Anticoagulants; Arthroplasty, Replacement, Hip; Arthroplasty, Replacement, Knee; Embolism; Humans; Morpholines; Postoperative Complications; Rivaroxaban; Thiophenes; Thrombosis