Abstract 12465: Dabigatran in Real World of Atrial Fibrillation: Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Comparison Studies With Vitamin K Antagonists

Circulation ◽  
2015 ◽  
Vol 132 (suppl_3) ◽  
Author(s):  
João Carmo ◽  
Francisco M Costa ◽  
Jorge Ferreira ◽  
Miguel Mendes
Keyword(s):  
Myocardial Infarction ◽  
Atrial Fibrillation ◽  
Systematic Review ◽  
Intracranial Hemorrhage ◽  
Vitamin K ◽  
Major Bleeding ◽  
Real World ◽  
Observational Studies ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Vitamin K Antagonists

Background: In the clinical trial RE-LY, dabigatran showed a better efficacy/safety profile in comparison with warfarin, but clinical trials are few representative of the real world. We aim to access if dabigatran in real-world patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) showed a better profile in comparison with warfarin, through a systematic review and meta-analysis of observational studies comparing with vitamin K antagonists. Methods: PubMed, Embase and Scopus databases were searched through December 2014. We include observational studies comparing dabigatran to warfarin for non-valvular AF that reported clinical events during a follow-up for dabigatran 75mg, 110 mg or 150 mg, and warfarin. We proceeded to the extraction and analysis of data for clinical thromboembolic events, bleeding and mortality. Data were pooled by meta-analysis using a random-effects model. Results: We selected 9 studies involving a total of 291,703 patients, 85,399 treated with dabigatran and the remaining 206,304 with warfarin. The incidence of stroke was 1.71 / 100 patient-years for dabigatran and 2.44 / 100 patient years for warfarin (relative risk [RR] 0.91, 95% CI 0.66 to 1.27, p=0.58). The major bleeding rate was 3.90 / 100 patient-years for dabigatran and 3.92 / 100 patient years for warfarin (RR 0.90; 0.78 to 1.03, p=0.11). The all-cause mortality (RR 0.81, 0.75-0.88, p<0.001) and intracranial hemorrhage (RR 0.45, from 0.27 to 0.76, p=0.002) were significantly lower in patients treated with dabigatran in comparison to those treated with warfarin. There were no significant differences in risk of myocardial infarction (RR 0.55; 0.29 to 1.07, p=0.08), total hemorrhage (RR 1.00; 0.57 to 1.77, p=0.99), and gastro-intestinal bleeding (RR 1.14; 0.78 to 1.69, p=0.50). Conclusions: In this combined analysis of observational studies of real world, dabigatran compared to warfarin was associated with a similar risk of stroke, myocardial infarction, major bleeding, total bleeding and gastrointestinal bleeding, and a lower risk of intracranial hemorrhage and mortality.

scholarly journals Reappraisal of Non-vitamin K Antagonist Oral Anticoagulants in Atrial Fibrillation Patients: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

2021 ◽  
Vol 8 ◽  
Author(s):  
Fuwei Liu ◽  
Yunyao Yang ◽  
Winglam Cheng ◽  
Jianyong Ma ◽  
Wengen Zhu
Keyword(s):  
Atrial Fibrillation ◽  
Systematic Review ◽  
Propensity Score ◽  
Vitamin K ◽  
Major Bleeding ◽  
Observational Studies ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Oral Anticoagulants ◽  
Vitamin K Antagonist ◽  
Systemic Embolism

Background: Recent observational studies have compared effectiveness and safety profiles between non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants (NOACs) and warfarin in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF). Nevertheless, the confounders may exist due to the nature of clinical practice-based data, thus potentially influencing the reliability of results. This systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted to compare the effect of NOACs with warfarin based on the propensity score-based observational studies vs. randomized clinical trials (RCTs).Methods: Articles included were systematically searched from the PubMed and EMBASE databases until March 2021 to obtain relevant studies. The primary outcomes were stroke or systemic embolism (SSE) and major bleeding. Hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) of the outcomes were extracted and then pooled by the random-effects model.Results: A total of 20 propensity score-based observational studies and 4 RCTs were included. Compared with warfarin, dabigatran (HR, 0.82 [95% CI, 0.71–0.96]), rivaroxaban (HR, 0.80 [95% CI, 0.75–0.85]), apixaban (HR, 0.75 [95% CI, 0.65–0.86]), and edoxaban (HR, 0.71 [95% CI, 0.60–0.83]) were associated with a reduced risk of stroke or systemic embolism, whereas dabigatran (HR, 0.76 [95% CI, 0.65–0.87]), apixaban (HR, 0.61 [95% CI, 0.56–0.67]), and edoxaban (HR, 0.58 [95% CI, 0.45–0.74]) but not rivaroxaban (HR, 0.92 [95% CI, 0.84–1.00]) were significantly associated with a decreased risk of major bleeding based on the observational studies. Furthermore, the risk of major bleeding with dabigatran 150 mg was significantly lower in observational studies than that in the RE-LY trial, whereas the pooled results of observational studies were similar to the data from the corresponding RCTs in other comparisons.Conclusion: Data from propensity score-based observational studies and NOAC trials consistently suggest that the use of four individual NOACs is non-inferior to warfarin for stroke prevention in AF patients.

scholarly journals Efficacy and Safety of Non-Vitamin K Antagonist Oral Anticoagulants in Patients with Atrial Fibrillation and Cancer in Real World: Meta-Analysis of Retrospective Observational Studies

2021 ◽  
Vol 7 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Cao B ◽  
Hu X ◽  
Chen M ◽  
Shen M ◽  
Xu L
Keyword(s):  
Atrial Fibrillation ◽  
Vitamin K ◽  
Real World ◽  
Observational Studies ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Vitamin K Antagonists ◽  
Oral Anticoagulants ◽  
Vitamin K Antagonist ◽  
Efficacy And Safety ◽  
Patients With Cancer

Background: Evidence on the safety and effectiveness of Non-Vitamin K Antagonist Oral Anticoagulants (NOACs) in Atrial Fibrillation (AF) patients with cancer is rather limited, so we performed this meta-analysis to compare the efficacy and safety of NOACs with vitamin K antagonists (VKAs) in real-world patients with AF and cancer.

scholarly journals Real-world adherence to oral anticoagulants in atrial fibrillation patients: a study protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis

BMJ Open ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 8 (12) ◽  
pp. e025102 ◽  
Author(s):  
Clara L Rodríguez-Bernal ◽  
Aníbal García-Sempere ◽  
Isabel Hurtado ◽  
Yared Santa-Ana ◽  
Salvador Peiró ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Atrial Fibrillation ◽  
Systematic Review ◽  
Real World ◽  
Observational Studies ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Oral Anticoagulants ◽  
Medication Possession Ratio ◽  
Essential Element ◽  
Study Endpoint ◽  
Mortality And Morbidity

IntroductionAtrial fibrillation (AF) is one of the leading causes of cerebrovascular mortality and morbidity. Oral anticoagulants (OACs) have been shown to reduce the incidence of cardioembolic stroke in patients with AF, adherence to treatment being an essential element for their effectiveness. Since the release of the first non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulant, several observational studies have been carried out to estimate OAC adherence in the real world using pharmacy claim databases or AF registers. This systematic review aims to describe secondary adherence to OACs, to compare adherence between OACs and to analyse potential biases in OAC secondary adherence studies using databases.Methods and analysisWe searched on PubMed, SCOPUS and Web of Science databases (completed in 26 September 2018) to identify longitudinal observational studies reporting days’ supply adherence measures with OAC in patients with AF from refill databases or AF registers. The main study endpoint will be the percentage of patients exceeding the 80% threshold in proportion of days covered or the medication possession ratio. Two reviewers will independently screen potential studies and will extract data in a structured format. A random-effects meta-analysis will be carried out to pool study estimates. The risk of bias will be assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale for observational studies and we will also assess some study characteristics that could affect days’ supply adherence estimates.Ethics and disseminationThis systematic review using published aggregated data does not require ethics approval according to Spanish law and international regulations. The final results will be published in a peer-review journal and different social stakeholders, non-academic audiences and patients will be incorporated into the diffusion activities.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42018095646.

Abstract 15090: Direct Oral Anticoagulation vs Vitamin K Antagonist in Atrial Fibrillation With Liver Disease: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Circulation ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 142 (Suppl_3) ◽  
Author(s):  
Mahmoud El Iskandarani ◽  
Islam Shatla ◽  
Muhammad Khalid ◽  
Bara El Kurdi ◽  
Timir Paul ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Atrial Fibrillation ◽  
Systematic Review ◽  
Ischemic Stroke ◽  
Liver Disease ◽  
Vitamin K ◽  
Major Bleeding ◽  
Lower Risk ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Vitamin K Antagonist ◽  
All Cause Mortality

Background: Current guidelines recommend against the use of direct oral anticoagulation (DOAC) therapy in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) in the setting of significant liver disease (LD) due to lack of evidence in safety and efficacy studies. However, recently studies have investigated the role of DOAC in comparison to Vitamin K antagonist (VKA) in this category of patients. Therefore, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the efficacy and safety of this approach. Hypothesis: DOAC is safe and effective compared to VKA in AF with LD patients. Method: Unrestricted search of the PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane databases performed from inception until June 1, 2020 for studies comparing DOAC with VKA including more than 100 AF patients with LD. Relevant data were extracted and analyzed using Revman 5.3 software. Hazard ratio (HR) and 95% Confidence interval (CI) were calculated using the random-effects model. Result: A total of 5 studies (3 retrospective and 2 post hoc analysis) were included examining 39,064 patients with AF and LD (25,398 DOAC vs 13,669 VKA). DOAC is associated with lower risk of major bleeding compared to VKA with a HR of 0.68 (95% CI 0.47-0.98; I 2 =53%), all-cause mortality (HR 0.74;95% CI 0.59-0.94; I 2 =61%), and intracranial bleeding (HR 0.48; 95% CI 0.40-0.58; I 2 =0). There was no significant difference in ischemic stroke risk (HR 0.73; 95% CI 0.47-1.14; I 2 =72%) and gastrointestinal bleeding risk (0.96; 95% CI 0.61-1.51; I 2 =41%) between DOAC and VKA. Conclusion: DOAC is non-inferior to VKA regarding ischemic stroke prevention in AF patients with LD. Moreover, DOAC is associated with a lower risk of major bleeding, intracranial bleeding and all-cause mortality. Further randomized trials are needed to validate our findings.

scholarly journals Direct oral anticoagulants versus vitamin K antagonists in patients with atrial fibrillation and cancer a meta-analysis

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marco Valerio Mariani ◽  
Michele Magnocavallo ◽  
Martina Straito ◽  
Agostino Piro ◽  
Paolo Severino ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Atrial Fibrillation ◽  
Vitamin K ◽  
Major Bleeding ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Vitamin K Antagonists ◽  
Oral Anticoagulants ◽  
Direct Oral Anticoagulants ◽  
Significant Risk ◽  
Bleeding Complications ◽  
Efficacy And Safety

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.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document