scholarly journals Systematic errors in the choice of dose level of direct oral anticoagulants: urgency of an issue and approaches to its solution

2021 ◽  
pp. 68-76
Author(s):  
S. R. Gilyarevskiy ◽  
N. G. Bendeliani ◽  
M. V. Golshmid ◽  
I. M. Kuzmina

The article presents updated information on the frequency of use of non-recommended low dosing of direct oral anticoagulants (dabigatran, rivaroxaban, apixaban and edoxaban). It gives substantiation of the urgency of the issue of providing the maximum efficiency of the use of anticoagulants in clinical practice, taking into account the high prevalence of atrial fibrillation and the pharmacological characteristics of the most commonly used drugs. The effects of such an unreasonable reduction in anticoagulant doses in elderly and senile patients are discussed. The results of recent observational studies that assessed the relationship between the use of direct oral anticoagulants and the risk of adverse clinical outcomes are presented. The data on the relationship between the use of unreasonably low dosing of anticoagulants in patients with atrial fibrillation, which were recently obtained during the implementation of the GARFIELD-AF registry, are discussed. The data on a rather high variability of concentrations of direct oral anticoagulants are presented. The frequency of using apixaban in an unreasonably reduced dose, as well as the effects of using non-recommended doses of apixaban hold a specific place in the article. The unreasonableness of attempts to further reduce the risk of bleeding due to unreasonable reduction of apixaban dosing is emphasized, taking into account the stable data on the high safety of recommended dosing of apixaban, as well as the possible decrease in the effect if the dose reduction is not recommended. The data on the criteria for dose reduction, which are adopted in different countries, are presented. The proposed terms to designate different doses of direct oral anticoagulants, depending on their study in the course of large, randomized trials are discussed.

2021 ◽  
Vol 2021 ◽  
pp. 1-14
Author(s):  
Bo Cao ◽  
Xingcan Yao ◽  
Lifang Zhang ◽  
Xiaobo Hu ◽  
Min Chen ◽  
...  

Background. This meta-analysis was performed to compare the efficacy and safety of direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) with vitamin K antagonists (VKAs) for stroke prevention in real-world patients with diabetes and nonvalvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF) through observational studies. Methods. PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science databases were searched up to August 2020 for eligible studies. Outputs were presented as risk ratios (RRs) and corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CIs) by using a random-effect model. Results. Seven observational studies involving 249,794 diabetic NVAF patients were selected. Compared with VKAs, the use of DOACs was associated with significantly reduced risks of stroke ( RR = 0.56 , 95% CI 0.45-0.70; p < 0.00001 ), ischemic stroke ( RR = 0.61 , 95% CI 0.48-0.78; p < 0.0001 ), stroke or systemic embolism (SSE) ( RR = 0.81 , 95% CI 0.68-0.95; p = 0.01 ), myocardial infarction ( RR = 0.69 , 95% CI 0.55-0.88; p = 0.002 ), major bleeding ( RR = 0.75 , 95% CI 0.63-0.90; p = 0.002 ), intracranial hemorrhage ( RR = 0.50 , 95% CI 0.44-0.56; p < 0.00001 ), and major gastrointestinal bleeding ( RR = 0.77 , 95% CI 0.62-0.95; p = 0.02 ), and a borderline significant decrease in major adverse cardiac events ( RR = 0.87 , 95% CI 0.75-1.00; p = 0.05 ) in NVAF patients with diabetes. Conclusion. For patients with NVAF and diabetes in real-world clinical settings, DOACs showed superior efficacy and safety profile over VKAs and significantly reduced risks of stroke, ischemic stroke, SSE, myocardial infarction, major bleeding, intracranial hemorrhage, and major gastrointestinal bleeding.


2020 ◽  
pp. 28-43
Author(s):  
O. O. Shakhmatova

Edoxaban is a selective direct factor Xa inhibitor. Edoxaban in a dose of 60 mg per day is an effective and safe option in the prevention of thromboembolic complications in patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation, including in combination therapy in patients after percutaneous coronary interventions. ENGAGE AF-TIMI 48 is currently the most extensive study comparing direct oral anticoagulants and warfarin in patients with atrial fibrillation, both in terms of number of participants and duration of observation. For edoxaban, an adequate approach to dose reduction has been developed in patients with alikely increase in plasma concentration due to renal impairment, low body weight or inter-drug interactions. Such dose reduction does notlead to an increase in the frequency of ischemic complications.Edoxaban is characterized by an optimal safety profile in patients with chronic moderate kidney disease, a small number of drug interactions and a convenient mode of administration. In patients with atrial fibrillation and concomitant ischemic heart disease, the use of Edoxaban is associated with a decrease in the frequency of myocardial infarctions, as well as strokes and episodes of systemic thromboembolism in comparison with warfarin. The drug can be successfully used as anticoagulant support for cardioversion and catheter ablation for atrial fibrillation.Edoxaban intake does not require routinelaboratory control. In case of unexpected situations (life-threatening bleeding, urgent surgical intervention) in patients receiving edoxaban, to assess the degree of anticoagulation should use the determination of anti-Xa activity. Clinical studies of a specific antidote of edoxaban - andexanet alfa are ongoing. Before approval of the specific antidote in severe andlife-threatening bleedings against the background of edoxaban administration, the use of prothrombin complex concentrate should be considered. Data on the effective and safe use of edoxaban in routine clinical practice have been accumulated.


Circulation ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 142 (Suppl_3) ◽  
Author(s):  
Ali H Jafry ◽  
Khawaja H Akhtar ◽  
Amna M Chaudhary ◽  
Safi U Khan ◽  
Mohammad S Khan ◽  
...  

Background: In patients with atrial fibrillation taking direct oral anticoagulants (DOACS) and undergoing catheter ablation, it is unclear if interruption of a single dose of DOAC before the procedure is necessary. We assessed the peri-procedural adverse events between uninterrupted vs single-dose interrupted DOACS. Methods: A systematic review of Medline and EMBASE was conducted and all randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies that compared uninterrupted versus interrupted DOACS were included. Random effects model was used and risk ratios (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) were reported using Mantel Haenszel method. All studies defined dose interruption as holding a single dose of DOAC before ablation. Separate analyses were conducted for RCTs and observational studies. Results: Eight RCTs with 2656 patients and 4 observational studies with 834 patients were included. In RCT restricted analysis, no significant difference was seen in major bleeding [RR 0.65 (CI 0.30-1.42)], minor bleeding [RR 0.98 (0.68-1.40)], stroke/transient ischemic attack/thromboembolism [RR 0.90 (CI 0.27-2.98)] and silent cerebral infarction [RR 0.51 (CI 0.14-1.89)]. In observational study restricted analysis, no significant difference was seen in major bleeding [RR 3.04 (CI 0.13-74.07)], minor bleeding [RR 0.88 (0.46-1.69)], stroke/transient ischemic attack/thromboembolism [RR 0.98 (CI 0.12-7.91)] and a statistically significant lower silent cerebral infarction [RR 0.45 (CI 0.31-0.67)]. Conclusion: Uninterrupted DOACS are safe for patients undergoing AF ablation and logistically easier for patients. Figure 1: Forest plot showing outcomes with uninterrupted vs interrupted direct oral anticoagulants in patients undergoing ablation for atrial fibrillation in randomized controlled trials.


Author(s):  
Aya F. Ozaki ◽  
Austin S. Choi ◽  
Quan T. Le ◽  
Dennis T. Ko ◽  
Janet K. Han ◽  
...  

Background: Stroke reduction with direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) in atrial fibrillation (AF) is dependent on adherence and persistence in the real-world setting. Individual study estimates of DOAC adherence/persistence rates have been discordant. Our aims were to characterize real-world observational evidence for DOAC adherence/persistence and evaluate associated clinical outcomes in patients with AF. Methods and Results: PubMed, EMBASE, and CINAHL were searched from inception to June 2018. Observational studies that reported real-world DOAC adherence/persistence in patients with AF were included. Study quality was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. Meta-analyses for pooled estimates were performed using DerSimonian and Laird random-effects models. Outcomes included DOAC mean proportion of days covered or medication possession ratio, proportion of good adherence (proportion of days covered/medication possession ratio ≥80%), persistence, DOAC versus vitamin K antagonists persistence, and clinical outcomes associated with nonadherence/nonpersistence. Forty-eight observational studies with 594 784 unique patients with AF (59% male; mean age 71 years) were included. The overall pooled mean proportion of days covered/medication possession ratio was 77% (95% CI, 75%–80%), proportion of patients with good adherence was 66% (95% CI, 63%–70%), and proportion persistent was 69% (95% CI, 65%–72%). The pooled proportion of patients with good adherence was 71% (95% CI, 64%–78%) for apixaban, 60% (95% CI, 52%–68%) for dabigatran, and 70% (95% CI, 64%–75%) for rivaroxaban. Similar patterns were found for pooled persistence by agent. The pooled persistence was higher with DOACs than vitamin K antagonists (odds ratio, 1.44 [95% CI, 1.12–.86]). DOAC nonadherence was associated with an increased risk of stroke (hazard ratio, 1.39 [95% CI, 1.06–1.81]). Conclusions: Suboptimal adherence and persistence to DOACs was common in patients with AF, with 1 in 3 patients adhering to their DOAC <80% of the time, which was associated with poor clinical outcomes in nonadherent patients. Although it is convenient that DOACs do not require laboratory monitoring, greater effort in monitoring for and interventions to prevent nonadherence may be necessary to optimize stroke prevention. Increased clinician awareness of DOAC nonadherence may help identify at-risk patients.


Blood ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 134 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. 1166-1166
Author(s):  
Talha Aijaz ◽  
Okechukwu Nwabueze Obi ◽  
Nida Khokhar ◽  
Prasanth Lingamaneni ◽  
Muhammad Zain Farooq

Background: Direct oral anticoagulants (DOACS) were recently approved for anticoagulation in patients with atrial fibrillation for prevention of stroke and patient with venous thromboembolism (VTE) for the prevention of recurrent VTE. They have shown comparable efficacy and safety compared to vitamin K antagonist (VKA). DOACS have uniform pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics; hence, regular monitoring is not required. The morbidly obese patients may have increased volume of distribution and altered clearance which may alter the pharmacokinetics and consequently efficacy and safety of DOACS in these patients. 2016 International Society of Thrombosis and Hemostasis guideline recommends avoiding DOACS in a patient with body mass index (BMI) >40 kg/m2 or with body weight >120 kg due to lack of clinical trials. There is no sizeable randomized control trial to study the outcome of DOACS in morbidly obese patients, but subgroup analysis of a major randomized control trials and observational studies may provide the data on the efficacy and safety of DOACS. We intend to utilize this data in this meta-analysis to study the effectiveness and safety of DOACS in morbidly obese patients. Methods: Eligibility Criteria- Randomized control trial, observational studies including patients above 18 years with BMI>40kg/m2, body weight>120 kg and history of atrial fibrillation or VTE who are taking DOACS or warfarin for therapeutic purpose were included in the analysis. Study Selection- We searched Medline and Cochrane database. 52 studies were identified and 43 remained after removing duplicates. After assessing full text for eligibility 5 studies were included in the meta-analysis. Statistical analysis- Statistical analysis was performed with Review manager 5.3 by the Cochrane Collaboration. Forest plot was used to analyze publication bias. Heterogeneity in the studies were analyzed with Cochran Q analysis and I2 statistics. Results: Population characteristics were available in four studies. The mean age of the population ranged from 61.7 to 66.8 years, and mean BMI ranged from 44.8 to 46.7 kg/m2 . I2 analysis showed that the studies included were homogeneous, so fixed-effect model was applied. The incidence of recurrent VTE, stroke, or death ranged from 1.5% to 7.3% in DOACS compared to 1.2% to 7.9% in warfarin except in one study by Kalani et al. where it was 26% in DOACS vs. 20% in warfarin. Relative risk was 0.96 (confidence interval 0.75 - 1.28, p 0.78) indicating there was no significant difference in the primary efficacy outcome between the two groups. The incidence of major bleeding ranged from 1.5% to 4.8% in DOACS compared to 2.6% to 6.1% in warfarin. Relative risk was 0.72 (confidence interval 0.56 - 0.93, p 0.01) indicating that the risk of major bleeding was low among patient using DOACS. Conclusion: Efficacy of DOACS is similar compared to VKA when used for prevention of recurrence in VTE or prevention of stroke in atrial fibrillation in the patients with BMI>40 kg/m2 or bodyweight >120 kg. There was a trend towards a lower risk of bleeding in the patients with DOACS which is similar to the risk of major bleeding reported in non-obese patients in landmark randomized clinical trials. Only two studies included the patients with VTE, and additional studies are required to assess the safety and efficacy of DOACS among morbidly obese individuals with VTE. Figure Disclosures No relevant conflicts of interest to declare.


2019 ◽  
Vol 8 (4) ◽  
pp. 554 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anneka Mitchell ◽  
Margaret C. Watson ◽  
Tomas Welsh ◽  
Anita McGrogan

Older people, are underrepresented in randomised controlled trials of direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) for stroke prevention in atrial fibrillation (AF). The aim of this study was to combine data from observational studies to provide evidence for the treatment of people aged ≥75 years. Medline, Embase, Scopus and Web of Science were searched. The primary effectiveness outcome was ischaemic stroke. Safety outcomes were major bleeding, intracranial haemorrhage, gastrointestinal bleeding, myocardial infarction, and mortality. Twenty-two studies were eligible for inclusion. Two studies related specifically to people ≥75 years but were excluded from meta-analysis due to low quality; all data in the meta-analyses were from subgroups. The pooled risk estimate of ischaemic stroke was slightly lower for DOACs. There was no significant difference in major bleeding, mortality, or myocardial infarction. Risk of intracranial haemorrhage was 44% lower with DOACs, but risk of GI bleeding was 46% higher. Our results suggest that DOACs may be preferable for the majority of older patients with AF, provided they are not at significant risk of a GI bleed. However, these results are based entirely on data from subgroup analyses so should be interpreted cautiously. There is a need for adequately powered research in this patient group.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document