Comparison of major bleeding risk in patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation receiving direct oral anticoagulants in the real-world setting: a network meta-analysis

2017 ◽  
Vol 34 (3) ◽  
pp. 487-498 ◽  
Author(s):  
S. Deitelzweig ◽  
C. Farmer ◽  
X. Luo ◽  
X. Li ◽  
L. Vo ◽  
...  
Blood ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 134 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. 3672-3672 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yimin Pearl Wang ◽  
Rohan Kehar ◽  
Alla Iansavitchene ◽  
Alejandro Lazo-Langner

Introduction: The standard oral anticoagulant therapy administered to non-valvular AF patients has typically been Vitamin K Antagonists (VKA) particularly warfarin. In recent years, Direct Oral Anticoagulants (DOACs) including Direct Thrombin Inhibitors (DTI) and Direct Factor Xa inhibitors (FXa inhibitors) have become an alternative to warfarin. Randomized trials comparing warfarin and DOACs showed comparable effectiveness without significant additional major bleeding risk. However, bleeding events in RCTs may differ from those in daily use due to the routine exclusion of patients with a higher risk of bleeding from many studies. We aimed to assess bleeding risk between DOACs and warfarin in AF patients in observational studies and we also sought to determine differences between patients that were experienced or naïve to oral anticoagulants. Methods: A systematic literature search was conducted in the OVID MEDLINE® and EMBASE® electronic databases. Observational studies and randomized control trials (RCT) from 1990 to January 2019 were retrieved and examined by two independent reviewers. A pooled effect hazard ratio (HR) was calculated using a random effects model using the generic inverse variance method. Subgroup analyses according to previous exposure to anticoagulants, study type, funding type and DOAC type were conducted. The primary outcome was major bleeding risk. The secondary outcome was clinically relevant non-major bleeding. All studies must have used an established or validated definition of major bleeding. Results: The initial literature search identified 3359 potentially eligible citations. After primary screening, 150 articles were eligible for full text review and there were 35 studies including 2,356,201 patients that met the inclusion criteria. Overall, patients on DOACs were less likely to experience a bleeding event compared to warfarin (HR 0.78, 95%CI 0.71, 0.85, P<0.001). The results were consistent when analyzing patients receiving DTIs or FXa inhibitors (DTI: HR 0.76, 95% CI 0.67,0.87; FXa inhibitors: HR 0.79, 95% CI 0.69,0.89). However, among patients receiving factor Xa inhibitors, there was a significant difference in the risk of bleeding according to individual drug. Among patients receiving rivaroxaban the risk of bleeding was similar to warfarin (HR 0.98, 95%CI 0.91,1.06, p=0.60) whereas in those receiving apixaban there was a 40% reduction in the risk of bleeding compared to warfarin (HR 0.60, 95%CI 0.50,0.71, p<0.001) (Figure 1). Three studies reported information according to previous anticoagulant exposure. The overall pooled hazard ratio was 0.68 (95% CI 0.55, 0.82 p<0.001) in favor of patients on DOACs. In the subgroup analysis of previous anticoagulant use, the risk of bleeding was lower for DOACs compared to warfarin in both the experienced population (HR 0.70, 95%CI 0.51, 0.96) and the naïve population (HR 0.64, 95% CI 0.47,0.87). However, heterogeneity was moderate to high among both subgroups. Conclusion: This review and meta-analysis of observational studies including over 2.3 million patients showed that overall DOACs have a lower risk of major bleeding and clinically relevant non-major bleeding compared to warfarin. Most importantly, although the pooled effect estimate did not differ between DTIs and FXa inhibitors, among patients receiving FXa inhibitors there was a significant difference between individual agents. Patients on apixaban had a significantly lower risk of bleeding compared to warfarin in contrast to patients on rivaroxaban who had a similar risk. Disclosures No relevant conflicts of interest to declare.


Author(s):  
Marco Valerio Mariani ◽  
Michele Magnocavallo ◽  
Martina Straito ◽  
Agostino Piro ◽  
Paolo Severino ◽  
...  

Abstract Background Direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) are recommended as first-line anticoagulants in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF). However, in patients with cancer and AF the efficacy and safety of DOACs are not well established. Objective We performed a meta-analysis comparing available data regarding the efficacy and safety of DOACs vs vitamin K antagonists (VKAs) in cancer patients with non-valvular AF. Methods An online search of Pubmed and EMBASE libraries (from inception to May, 1 2020) was performed, in addition to manual screening. Nine studies were considered eligible for the meta-analysis involving 46,424 DOACs users and 182,797 VKA users. Results The use of DOACs was associated with reduced risks of systemic embolism or any stroke (RR 0.65; 95% CI 0.52–0.81; p 0.001), ischemic stroke (RR 0.84; 95% CI 0.74–0.95; p 0.007) and hemorrhagic stroke (RR 0.61; 95% CI 0.52–0.71; p 0.00001) as compared to VKA group. DOAC use was associated with significantly reduced risks of major bleeding (RR 0.68; 95% CI 0.50–0.92; p 0.01) and intracranial or gastrointestinal bleeding (RR 0.64; 95% CI 0.47–0.88; p 0.006). Compared to VKA, DOACs provided a non-statistically significant risk reduction of the outcomes major bleeding or non-major clinically relevant bleeding (RR 0.94; 95% CI 0.78–1.13; p 0.50) and any bleeding (RR 0.91; 95% CI 0.78–1.06; p 0.24). Conclusions In comparison to VKA, DOACs were associated with a significant reduction of the rates of thromboembolic events and major bleeding complications in patients with AF and cancer. Further studies are needed to confirm our results.


Circulation ◽  
2015 ◽  
Vol 132 (suppl_3) ◽  
Author(s):  
Shital Kamble ◽  
Xianying Pan ◽  
Hemant Phatak ◽  
Hugh Kawabata ◽  
Cristina Masseria ◽  
...  

Aim: Limited data are available on the real-world safety of non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants (NOACs). The study purpose was to compare the first major bleeding event risk among non valvular atrial fibrillation patients (NVAF) patients newly initiated on dose-adjusted warfarin versus apixaban 5mg BID, dabigatran 150mg BID, or rivaroxaban 20 mg QD. Methods: Retrospective cohort study was conducted using MarketScan® commercial & Medicare supplemental database from 01/2012 to 12/2013. NVAF patients 18+ years with ≥1 year baseline and newly prescribed oral anticoagulant from 01/01/2013 to 12/31/2013 were included. Major bleeding was defined as bleeding requiring hospitalization on the index drug during the supply duration or within 30 days after the last supply day of the last prescription. A Cox proportional hazards model was used to estimate the hazard ratios (HR) of major bleeding adjusted for age, sex, baseline comorbidities and comedications. Results: Among 26,604 patients, 2,057 (7.73%) were newly initiated on apixaban 5mg, 3,768 (14.16%) on dabigatran 150mg, 8,066 (30.32%) on rivaroxaban 20mg and 12,713 (47.79%) on warfarin. Patients initiating warfarin (72.5±11.9 yrs) and apixaban 5mg (67.0±11.4 yrs) were older as compared to rivaroxaban 20mg (65.2±11.4 yrs) and dabigatran 150mg (65.4±11.5 yrs). Patients initiating warfarin had higher CHA 2 DS 2- VASc score (3.22±1.65) and Charlson comorbidity index score (2.37±2.33) (P <0.0001 across all treatments) as compared to those initiating NOACs. After adjusting for baseline characteristics, patients newly initiated on apixaban 5mg BID had significantly lower risk of major bleeding (HR: 0.53, 95% CI: 0.29-0.97, P=0.0399) as compared to those initiated on warfarin (Table). Conclusion: Among newly anticoagulated NVAF patients in the real world setting, as compared to dose adjusted warfarin, only patients initiating on apixaban 5mg BID were associated with significantly lower risk of major bleeding.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document