Safety and efficacy of nonvitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants versus warfarin in diabetic patients with atrial fibrillation: A study-level meta-analysis of phase III randomized trials

Factor Xa inhibitors versus warfarin in patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation and diabetes mellitus: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Background

Patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation with diabetes face increased stroke and cardiovascular risks. This study compares factor Xa inhibitors and warfarin using data from randomized controlled trials (RCTs).

Methods

MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane CENTRAL databases were searched for RCTs comparing the risk of efficacy and safety of any factor Xa inhibitors with dose-adjusted warfarin by diabetes status. Incidence of stroke/systemic embolism, major bleeding, intracranial hemorrhage, ischemic stroke, all-cause mortality, risk of hemorrhagic stroke, and myocardial infarction were among the outcomes of interest. A generic inverse-weighted random-effects model was used to calculate hazard ratios (HRs) with 95 percent confidence intervals (CIs).

Results

After applying exclusion criteria, four RCTs containing 19 818 patients were included in the analysis. Compared with warfarin, meta-analysis showed statistically significant reduction in incidence of stroke/systemic embolism (HR 0.80 [95% CI 0.69-0.92]; P=0.002), intracranial hemorrhage (HR 0.49 [95% CI 0.37-0.65]; P<0.001), and risk of hemorrhagic stroke (HR 0.37 [95% CI 0.20-0.66]; P=0.001) in patients on factor Xa inhibitors. However, there was no discernible difference between two treatment arms in incidence of major bleeding (HR 0.93 [95% CI 0.84-1.04]; P=0.19), ischemic stroke (risk ratio (RR) 0.90 [95% CI 0.73-1.12; P=0.34), myocardial infarction (RR 0.88 [95% CI 0.67-1.15]; P=0.35), and all-cause mortality (RR 0.89 [95% CI 0.79-1.01]; P=0.06).

Conclusion

Factor Xa inhibitors show a favorable balance between efficacy and safety compared with warfarin, which is consistent across a wide range of patients with atrial fibrillation known to be at high risk for both ischemic and bleeding events.

2023 ACC/AHA/ACCP/HRS Guideline for the Diagnosis and Management of Atrial Fibrillation: A Report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Joint Committee on Clinical Practice Guidelines

AIM

The "2023 ACC/AHA/ACCP/HRS Guideline for the Diagnosis and Management of Atrial Fibrillation" provides recommendations to guide clinicians in the treatment of patients with atrial fibrillation.

METHODS

A comprehensive literature search was conducted from May 12, 2022, to November 3, 2022, encompassing studies, reviews, and other evidence conducted on human subjects that were published in English from PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, and other selected databases relevant to this guideline. Additional relevant studies, published through November 2022, during the guideline writing process, were also considered by the writing committee and added to the evidence tables, where appropriate.

STRUCTURE

Atrial fibrillation is the most sustained common arrhythmia, and its incidence and prevalence are increasing in the United States and globally. Recommendations from the "2014 AHA/ACC/HRS Guideline for the Management of Patients With Atrial Fibrillation" and the "2019 AHA/ACC/HRS Focused Update of the 2014 AHA/ACC/HRS Guideline for the Management of Patients With Atrial Fibrillation" have been updated with new evidence to guide clinicians. In addition, new recommendations addressing atrial fibrillation and thromboembolic risk assessment, anticoagulation, left atrial appendage occlusion, atrial fibrillation catheter or surgical ablation, and risk factor modification and atrial fibrillation prevention have been developed.

2023 ACC/AHA/ACCP/HRS Guideline for the Diagnosis and Management of Atrial Fibrillation: A Report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Joint Committee on Clinical Practice Guidelines

AIM

The "2023 ACC/AHA/ACCP/HRS Guideline for the Diagnosis and Management of Patients With Atrial Fibrillation" provides recommendations to guide clinicians in the treatment of patients with atrial fibrillation.

METHODS

A comprehensive literature search was conducted from May 12, 2022, to November 3, 2022, encompassing studies, reviews, and other evidence conducted on human subjects that were published in English from PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, and other selected databases relevant to this guideline. Additional relevant studies, published through November 2022, during the guideline writing process, were also considered by the writing committee and added to the evidence tables, where appropriate.

STRUCTURE

Atrial fibrillation is the most sustained common arrhythmia, and its incidence and prevalence are increasing in the United States and globally. Recommendations from the "2014 AHA/ACC/HRS Guideline for the Management of Patients With Atrial Fibrillation" and the "2019 AHA/ACC/HRS Focused Update of the 2014 AHA/ACC/HRS Guideline for the Management of Patients With Atrial Fibrillation" have been updated with new evidence to guide clinicians. In addition, new recommendations addressing atrial fibrillation and thromboembolic risk assessment, anticoagulation, left atrial appendage occlusion, atrial fibrillation catheter or surgical ablation, and risk factor modification and atrial fibrillation prevention have been developed.

Heterogeneity of outcomes within diabetic patients with atrial fibrillation on edoxaban: a sub-analysis from the ETNA-AF Europe registry

BACKGROUND

Recent data have suggested that insulin-requiring diabetes mostly contributes to the overall increase of thromboembolic risk in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) on warfarin. We evaluated the prognostic role of a different diabetes status on clinical outcome in a large cohort of AF patients treated with edoxaban.

METHODS

We accessed individual patients' data from the prospective, multicenter, ETNA-AF Europe Registry. We compared the rates of ischemic stroke/transient ischemic attack (TIA)/systemic embolism, myocardial infarction (MI), major bleeding and all-cause death at 2 years according to diabetes status.

RESULTS

Out of an overall population of 13,133 patients, 2885 had diabetes (22.0%), 605 of whom (21.0%) were on insulin. The yearly incidence of ischemic stroke/TIA/systemic embolism was 0.86% in patients without diabetes, 0.87% in diabetic patients not receiving insulin (p = 0.92 vs no diabetes) and 1.81% in those on insulin (p = 0.002 vs no diabetes; p = 0.014 vs diabetes not on insulin). The annual rates of MI and major bleeding were 0.40%, 0.43%, 1.04% and 0.90%, 1.10% and 1.71%, respectively. All-cause yearly mortality was 3.36%, 5.02% and 8.91%. At multivariate analysis, diabetes on insulin was associated with a higher rate of ischemic stroke/TIA/systemic embolism [adjusted HR 2.20, 95% CI 1.37-3.54, p = 0.0011 vs no diabetes + diabetes not on insulin] and all-cause death [aHR 2.13 (95% CI 1.68-2.68, p < 0.0001 vs no diabetes]. Diabetic patients not on insulin had a higher mortality [aHR 1.32 (1.11-1.57), p = 0.0015], but similar incidence of stroke/TIA/systemic embolism, MI and major bleeding, vs those without diabetes.

CONCLUSIONS

In a real-world cohort of AF patients on edoxaban, diabetes requiring insulin therapy, rather than the presence of diabetes per se, appears to be an independent factor affecting the occurrence of thromboembolic events during follow-up. Regardless of the diabetes type, diabetic patients had a lower survival compared with those without diabetes.

Oral anticoagulation across diabetic subtypes in patients with newly diagnosed atrial fibrillation: A report from the GARFIELD-AF registry

AIMS

This study aims to describe both management and prognosis of patients with diabetes mellitus (DM) and newly diagnosed atrial fibrillation (AF), overall as well as by antidiabetic treatment, and to assess the influence of oral anticoagulation (OAC) on outcomes by DM status.

METHODS

The study population comprised 52 010 newly diagnosed patients with AF, 11 542 DM and 40 468 non-DM, enrolled in the GARFIELD-AF registry. Follow-up was truncated at 2 years after enrolment. Comparative effectiveness of OAC versus no OAC was assessed by DM status using a propensity score overlap weighting scheme and weights were applied to Cox models.

RESULTS

Patients with DM [39.3% oral antidiabetic drug (OAD), 13.4% insulin ± OAD, 47.2% on no antidiabetic drug] had higher risk profile, OAC use, and rates of clinical outcomes compared with patients without DM. OAC use was associated in patients without DM and patients with DM with lower risk of all-cause mortality [hazard ratio 0.75 (0.69-0.83), 0.74 (0.64-0.86), respectively] and stroke/systemic embolism (SE) [0.69 (0.58-0.83), 0.70 (0.53-0.93), respectively]. The risk of major bleeding with OAC was similarly increased in patients without DM and those with DM [1.40 (1.14-1.71), 1.37 (0.99-1.89), respectively]. Patients with insulin-requiring DM had a higher risk of all-cause mortality and stroke/SE [1.91 (1.63-2.24)], [1.57 (1.06-2.35), respectively] compared with patients without DM, and experienced significant risk reductions of all-cause mortality and stroke/SE with OAC [0.73 (0.53-0.99); 0.50 (0.26-0.97), respectively].

CONCLUSIONS

In both patients with DM and patients without DM with AF, OAC was associated with lower risk of all-cause mortality and stroke/SE. Patients with insulin-requiring DM derived significant benefit from OAC.

The Synergistic Relationship Between Atrial Fibrillation and Diabetes Mellitus: Implications for Cardiovascular and Metabolic Health

Type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) and atrial fibrillation (AF) are widespread chronic conditions that profoundly impact public health. While the intricate mechanisms linking these two diseases remain incompletely understood, this review sets out to comprehensively analyze the current evidence about their pathophysiology, epidemiology, diagnosis, prognosis, and treatment. We reveal that T2DM can influence the electrical and structural properties of the atria through multiple pathways, including oxidative stress, inflammation, fibrosis, connexin remodeling, glycemic variability, and autonomic dysfunction. Moreover, it significantly influences AF's clinical course, elevating the risk of heart failure, stroke, and cardiovascular mortality. Our review also explores treatment options for individuals with T2DM and AF, encompassing antidiabetic and antiarrhythmic drugs and non-pharmacological interventions, such as cardioversion catheter ablation and direct current cardioversion. This review depicts an insight into the clinical interplay between T2DM and AF. It deepens our comprehension of the fundamental mechanisms, potential therapeutic interventions, and their implications for patient care. This comprehensive resource benefits researchers seeking to deepen their knowledge in this domain. Ultimately, our findings pave the way for more effective strategies in managing AF within the context of T2DM.

ORal anticoaGulants in diAbetic and Nondiabetic patients with nOn-valvular atrial fibrillatioN (ORGANON)

BACKGROUND

Diabetes represents a pro-thrombotic condition.

OBJECTIVES

The primary objective was to evaluate the effects of Vitamin K Antagonist (VKA) compared to direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) in diabetic and nondiabetic patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation, newly diagnosed. The secondary objective was to evaluate the effects on the risk of bleeding.

METHODS

We enrolled 300 patients with newly diagnosed atrial fibrillation. One hundred and sixteen patients were taking warfarin, 31 acenocumarol, 22 dabigatran, 80 rivaroxaban, 34 apixaban, and 17 edoxaban. We evaluated: anthropometric parameters, glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c), fasting and post-prandial glucose (FPG, and PPG), lipid profile, Lp(a), small and dense low-density lipoprotein (SD-LDL), oxidized LDL (Ox-LDL), I-troponin (I-Tn), creatinine, transaminases, iron, red blood cells (RBC); hemoglobin (Hb), platelets (PLT), fibrinogen, D-dimer, anti-thrombin III, C-reactive protein (Hs-CRP), Metalloproteinases-2 (MMP-2), Metalloproteinases-9 (MMP-9), and incidence of bleeding.

RESULTS

We did not record any differences among nondiabetic patients between VKA and DOACs. However, when we considered diabetic patients, we found a slight, but significant improvement of triglycerides and SD-LDL. As regards incidence of bleeding, minor bleeding was more frequent in VKA diabetic group compared to DOACs diabetic group; furthermore, the incidence of major bleeding was higher with VKA in nondiabetic and diabetic group, compared to patients with DOACs. Among DOACs, we recorded a higher incidence of bleeding (minor and major) with dabigatran compared to rivaroxaban, apixaban and edoxaban in nondiabetic and diabetic patients.

CONCLUSION

DOACs seem to be metabolically favourable in diabetic patients. Regarding incidence of bleeding, DOACs with the exception of dabigatran, seem better than VKA in diabetic patients.

Healthcare Resource Utilization and Costs of Rivaroxaban Versus Warfarin Among Non-valvular Atrial Fibrillation (NVAF) Patients with Diabetes in a US Population

INTRODUCTION

The healthcare resource utilization (HRU) and costs of oral anticoagulant-naïve patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF) and diabetes initiated on rivaroxaban or warfarin in the United States (US) has not been previously evaluated.

METHODS

This retrospective study used data from the Optum's de-identified Clinformatics^® Data Mart Database (1 January, 2012 to 30 September, 2021) to evaluate the HRU and costs of adult patients with NVAF and diabetes newly initiated on rivaroxaban or warfarin (on or after January 2013). Inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) was used to adjust for confounding between cohorts. HRU and costs (USD 2021) were assessed per patient-year (PPY) post-treatment initiation. Weighted cohorts were compared using rate ratios (RR) from Poisson regression models, odds ratios (OR) from logistic regression models, and cost differences; 95% confidence intervals (CI) and p values were generated using non-parametric bootstrap procedures.

RESULTS

After IPTW, 17,881 and 19,274 patients initiated on rivaroxaban and warfarin were included, respectively (mean age: 73 years; 40% female). During 12 months of follow-up, the rivaroxaban cohort had lower all-cause HRU PPY across all components, including lower rates of inpatient stays (RR: 0.84, 95% CI 0.81, 0.88), outpatient visits (RR: 0.67, 95% CI 0.66, 0.68), and 30 day hospital readmission (OR: 0.75, 95% CI 0.66, 0.83; all p < 0.001) compared to the warfarin cohort. Moreover, rivaroxaban was associated with medical cost savings PPY (mean cost difference: - $9306, 95% CI - $11,769, - $6607), which compensated for higher pharmacy costs relative to warfarin (mean cost difference: $5518, 95% CI $5193, $5839), resulting in significantly lower all-cause total healthcare costs for rivaroxaban versus warfarin (mean cost difference: - $3788, 95% CI - $6258, - $1035; all p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Among NVAF patients with diabetes in a real-world US setting, rivaroxaban was associated with lower healthcare costs compared to warfarin.

Efficacy and safety of novel oral anticoagulants in patients with atrial nonvalvular atrial fibrillation and diabetes mellitus: a systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

This study incorporates the results of subgroup analyses of currently published randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and real-world cohort studies to compare the effectiveness and safety of new direct oral anticoagulants (NOACs) and warfarin among nonvalvular atrial fibrillation patients with diabetes.

METHODS

The PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, Web of Science and ClinicalTrials.gov databases were searched. Five retrospective cohort studies and four subgroup analyses of RCTs were included in this meta-analysis.

RESULTS

A meta-analysis of the data of 26,7272 patients showed that for patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation and diabetes, NOACs can significantly reduce the incidence of stroke/systemic embolism (SSE), ischaemic stroke, and haemorrhagic stroke compared with warfarin, with no significant difference in major bleeding and all-cause mortality. Additionally, NOACs were superior to warfarin in the incidence of intracranial bleeding, gastrointestinal bleeding, myocardial infarction, and vascular death.

CONCLUSIONS

Among nonvalvular atrial fibrillation patients with diabetes, NOACs were associated with a lower risk of SSE versus warfarin, with no significant difference in major bleeding. Therefore, NOACs may be a better clinical choice.

Effect of Sodium-Glucose Cotransporter Inhibitors on Major Adverse Cardiovascular Events and Hospitalization for Heart Failure in Patients With Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus and Atrial Fibrillation

Sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 (SGLT2) inhibitors have been shown to lower cardiovascular morbidity and mortality in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) and high cardiovascular risks. Here, we aimed to evaluate the effect of SGLT2 inhibitors on major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE), a composite of cardiovascular mortality, myocardial infarction, or ischemic stroke and hospitalization for heart failure in patients with T2DM and atrial fibrillation (AF). Using the Korean National Health Insurance Service database, we identified 40,268 patients with T2DM and AF who were newly prescribed oral hypoglycemic drugs (2,977 patients with SGLT2 inhibitors and 37,291 patients without SGLT2 inhibitors) between 2014 and 2018. After 1: 4 propensity score matching, patients who received SGLT2 inhibitors (n = 2,958) and those who did not receive SGLT2 inhibitors (n = 10,691) were enrolled, and followed up until December 31, 2018. During a mean follow-up duration of 2.1 ± 1.4 years, the risk of major adverse cardiovascular events was similar between the 2 groups (hazard ratio [HR] 0.96, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.76 to 1.21). There were no significant differences between the 2 groups for cardiovascular mortality, myocardial infarction, or ischemic stroke. However, patients who received SGLT2 inhibitors had significantly lower risks of hospitalization for heart failure (HR 0.70, 95% CI 0.53 to 0.93) and all-cause mortality (HR 0.74, 95% CI 0.56 to 0.98) than those who did not receive SGLT2 inhibitors. In conclusion, in this real-world cohort of Asian patients with T2DM and AF, use of SGLT2 inhibitors was associated with a lower risk of hospitalization for heart failure.

The safety and efficacy of the use of oral anticoagulant medications in patients with diabetes mellitus: A systematic review

Aims

Diabetes mellitus (DM) and atrial fibrillation (AF) commonly co-exist. Oral anticoagulants (OACs) are widely used in patients with DM. This review aims to summarise the available literature on the safety (hypoglycaemia or bleeding) and efficacy (stroke or systemic embolism) of the use of OACs in patients with DM.

Methods

We searched the Medline, the Excerpta Medica dataBASE (Embase) and Cochrane databases up to the 10th of December 2020. The search strategy was conducted using both keywords and MeSH terms. We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies that reported on the safety and efficacy of the use of OACs in patients with diabetes from all age groups. Study selection, data extraction and quality assessment were conducted independently by two reviewers.

Results

A total of 3,976 articles were identified through the search process, of which seven studies met the inclusion criteria of the systematic review: four observational studies and three studies that were randomised controlled trials, with a total of 703,855 patients. Two observational studies reported that the use of warfarin was associated with a higher risk of hypoglycaemic events, specifically with sulfonylurea. One observational study and three randomised controlled trials reported that the use of warfarin compared to other oral anticoagulants was associated with a higher risk of bleeding. In addition, three randomised controlled trials reported that the use of warfarin compared to other oral anticoagulants was associated with a lower risk of stroke or systemic embolism.

Conclusions

This systematic review found that DOACs had a better efficacy outcome and safer clinical outcomes in comparison to warfarin in patients with diabetes.

Antiplatelet and Antithrombotic Therapy in Type I Diabetes Mellitus: Update on Current Data

Diabetes mellitus type 1 (T1DM) is an autoimmune disease characterized by a markedly elevated cardiovascular (CV) risk due to premature atherosclerosis. Previous studies have shown that intense glycemic control reduces the incidence of CV disease. Antiplatelet therapy is considered to be a very important therapy for secondary prevention of recurrent atherothrombotic events in patients with DM, while it may be considered for primary prevention in individuals with T1DM with additional CV risk factors. The aim of the present review is to summarize existing literature data regarding the thrombotic risk in T1DM patients and discuss current treatment strategies.

Clinical impact of left atrial enlargement in Korean patients with atrial fibrillation

We sought to evaluate the clinical implication of LAE based on left atrial anterior–posterior (LA AP) dimension or LA volume index (LAVI) in Korean patients with atrial fibrillation (AF). We enrolled 8159 AF patients from the CODE-AF registry. The primary outcome was rate of stroke or systemic embolism (SSE). The prevalence of mild, moderate, and severe LAE by LA AP dimension was 30.6%, 18.5%, and 21.4%, and by LAVI (available in 5808 patients) was 15.7%, 12.5% and 37.8%, respectively. Compared with no or mild LAE, patients with significant LAE (moderate to severe LAE, n = 3258, 39.9%) were associated with a higher rate of SSE (2.5% vs. 1.4%, P = 0.001). Multivariable analysis suggested presence of significant LAE by LA AP dimension was associated with a higher risk of SSE in the overall population (HR 1.57, 95% CI: 1.14–2.17, P = 0.005) and in patients using anticoagulants (n = 5836, HR 1.79, 95% CI: 1.23–2.63, P = 0.002). Patients with significant LAE by LAVI were also at higher risk of SSE (HR 1.58, 95% CI: 1.09–2.29, P = 0.017). In conclusion, significant LAE by LA dimension or LAVI was present in 39.9% and 50.2% of AF patients, respectively, and was associated with a higher rate of SSE.

Medical therapies for prevention of cardiovascular and renal events in patients with atrial fibrillation and diabetes mellitus

Atrial fibrillation (AF), type 2 diabetes mellitus (DM), and chronic kidney disease (CKD) are three global epidemics with significant effects on morbidity and mortality. Diabetes is a risk factor for AF, and a risk factor for thromboembolism, comorbidity, and mortality when AF is present. The pathophysiology of diabetes-related AF and interrelationships with cardiovascular events and renal events is not fully understood but is in part related to structural, electrical, electromechanical, and autonomic remodelling. The current practice guidelines offer limited recommendations on the management of patients with AF (or risk of AF) and diabetes with its own heterogeneity for the prevention of cardiovascular and renal events. This document discusses possible clinical approaches for these patients. In the last decade, there have been major improvements for the prevention of stroke in AF patients with direct oral anticoagulants, which are preferable to vitamin K antagonists for stroke prevention in DM. Because of the increased risk rate for several cardiovascular adverse events in diabetic patients, a similar relative risk reduction generally translates into greater absolute risk reduction in the diabetic population. Recent trials with non-insulin diabetes drugs using glucagon-like peptide-1 agonists and sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors showed a significant reduction for the risk of major adverse cardiovascular events in patients with type 2 DM. Sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors also showed a large reduction in hospitalization for heart failure and renal events, which need to be more completely evaluated in patients with AF. Mechanisms, risks, and optimal management of AF patients with DM who have or are under risk of developing heart failure or CKD are also discussed in this document. The benefits of medical therapies for these patients still need to be put into perspective, and gaps in evidence on some of these issues are likely to be addressed in future years.

Healthcare Resource Utilization and Costs of Rivaroxaban Versus Warfarin Among Nonvalvular Atrial Fibrillation Patients with Obesity and Diabetes

INTRODUCTION

Nonvalvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF) is associated with a substantial economic burden, particularly in patients with comorbid conditions. This study compared healthcare resource utilization (HRU) and costs of rivaroxaban and warfarin in patients with NVAF, obesity, and diabetes.

METHODS

A de-identified healthcare claims database was used to identify adult patients newly initiating rivaroxaban or warfarin and having at least one medical claim with a diagnosis of AF, obesity determined by validated algorithm, and at least one claim with a diagnosis of diabetes or for antidiabetic medication from December 2011 to March 2020. Propensity score matching was used to balance the treatment cohorts on the basis of demographics and baseline characteristics. All-cause and NVAF-related HRU rates and costs were compared between treatments using rate ratios, and mean cost differences were calculated on a per patient per year (PPPY) basis.

RESULTS

A total of 9999 matched pairs of patients with NVAF, obesity, and diabetes were identified in the rivaroxaban and warfarin cohorts. Rate ratios of all-cause HRU were significantly reduced with rivaroxaban versus warfarin in all healthcare settings evaluated, except emergency room visits. The greatest impact was on physician office visits followed by hospital outpatient and inpatient visits. NVAF-related HRU was significantly lower for rivaroxaban versus warfarin in all care settings. Consistent with these findings, the length of hospital stay was significantly reduced by approximately 4 days among all patients for both all-cause and NVAF-related hospitalizations in the rivaroxaban cohort compared with the warfarin cohort. Rivaroxaban was associated with reductions in all-cause total healthcare costs by more than $5000 PPPY and NVAF-related medical costs by approximately $1100 PPPY.

CONCLUSION

In comparison with warfarin, rivaroxaban reduced HRU and costs, particularly hospital inpatient and outpatient visits and physician office visits, in patients with NVAF and comorbidities of obesity and diabetes.

Efficacy and Safety of Direct Oral Anticoagulants in Patients with Diabetes and Nonvalvular Atrial Fibrillation: Meta-Analysis of Observational Studies

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.

Effectiveness and safety of rivaroxaban versus warfarin among nonvalvular atrial fibrillation patients with obesity and diabetes

AIMS

To compare clinical outcomes of rivaroxaban and warfarin in patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF) and concurrent obesity and diabetes.

METHODS

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.

RESULTS

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).

CONCLUSIONS

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.

A network meta-analysis of non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants versus warfarin in patients with atrial fibrillation and diabetes mellitus

PURPOSE

With the aim of recommending proper anticoagulation for patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) and diabetes mellitus, we performed the network meta-analysis comparing the non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants (NOACs) and warfarin in terms of efficacy (stroke or systemic embolism) and safety (major bleeding) outcome.

METHODS

A systematic search of PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science and Cochrane Library was performed with the items "dabigatran, edoxaban, apixaban, rivaroxaban, warfarin, AF and diabetes mellitus". On the basis of R (version 3.5.1, R Foundation for Statistical Computing) and JAGS (version 4.3.0) to perform the network meta-analysis, our work was also conducted with the help of NetMetaXL (version1.6.1) and winBUGS (version1.4.3) to obtain the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) of treatments.

RESULTS

With respect to the most effective drug for preventing systemic embolism or stroke, there was a high probability that dabigatran150 (SUCRA 0.88) would ranked first, followed by apixaban (SUCRA 0.63), dabigatran110 (SUCRA 0.59) and rivaroxaban (SUCRA 0.51). In comparison, probability of ranking the safest drug for preventing major bleeding was edoxaban (SUCRA 0.94), followed by dabigatran110 (SUCRA 0.59) and rivaroxaban (SUCRA 0.52).

CONCLUSION

In patients suffering from AF and diabetes, dabigatran 110 mg (bid) was more likely to become the choice for its performance on preventing systemic embolism or stroke and major bleeding, followed by rivaroxaban 20 mg (QD).

Diabetes, Vascular Aging and Stroke: Old Dogs, New Tricks?

BACKGROUND

Stroke remains a leading cause of death and disability throughout the world. It is well established that Diabetes Mellitus (DM) is a risk factor for stroke, while other risk factors include dyslipidaemia and hypertension. Given that the global prevalence of diabetes steadily increases, the need for adequate glycaemic control and prevention of DM-related cardiovascular events remains a challenge for the medical community. Therefore, a re-examination of the latest data related to this issue is of particular importance.

OBJECTIVE

This review aims to summarise the latest data on the relationship between DM and stroke, including epidemiology, risk factors, pathogenesis, prevention and biomarkers.

METHODS

For this purpose, comprehensive research was performed on the platforms PubMed, Google Scholar and EMBASE with a combination of the following keywords: diabetes mellitus, stroke, macrovascular complications, diabetic stroke, cardiovascular disease.

CONCLUSIONS

Much progress has been made in stroke in people with DM in terms of prevention and early diagnosis. In the field of prevention, the adaptation of the daily habits and the regulation of co-morbidity of individuals play a particularly important role. Simultaneously, the most significant revolution has been brought by the relatively new treatment options that offer protection to the cardiovascular system. Moreover, many prognostic and diagnostic biomarkers have been identified, paving the way for early and accurate diagnoses. However, to date, there are crucial points that remain controversial and need further clarification.

A Systematic Review of the Efficacy and Safety of Direct Oral Anticoagulants in Atrial Fibrillation Patients with Diabetes Using a Risk Index

Diabetes mellitus (DM) represents an independent risk factor for chronic AF and is associated with unfavorable outcomes. We aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF), with and without diabetes mellitus (DM), using a new risk index (RI) defined as: RI =Rate&nbsp;of&nbsp;EventsRate&nbsp;of&nbsp;Patients&nbsp;at&nbsp;Risk. In particular, an RI lower than 1 suggests a favorable treatment effect. We searched MEDLINE, MEDLINE In-Process, EMBASE, PubMed, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials. The risk index (RI) was calculated in terms of efficacy (rate of stroke/systemic embolism (stroke SEE)/rate of patients with and without DM; rate of cardiovascular death/rate of patients with and without DM) and safety (rate of major bleeding/rate of patients with and without DM) outcomes. AF patients with DM (n = 22,057) and 49,596 without DM were considered from pivotal trials. DM doubles the risk index for stroke/SEE, major bleeding (MB), and cardiovascular (CV) death. The RI for stroke/SEE, MB, and CV death was comparable in patients treated with warfarin or DOACs. The lowest RI was in DM patients treated with Rivaroxaban (stroke/SEE, RI = 0.08; CV death, RI = 0.13). The RIs for bleeding were higher in DM patients treated with Dabigatran (RI110 = 0.32; RI150 = 0.40). Our study is the first to use RI to homogenize the efficacy and safety data reported in the DOACs pivotal studies against warfarin in patients with and without DM. Anticoagulation therapy is effective and safe in DM patients. DOACs appear to have a better efficacy and safety profile than warfarin. The use of DOACs is a reasonable alternative to vitamin-K antagonists in AF patients with DM. The RI can be a reasonable tool to help clinicians choose between DOACs or warfarin in the peculiar set of AF patients with DM.

Comparative effectiveness and safety of non-vitamin-K antagonist oral anticoagulants and warfarin in older adults with atrial fibrillation and diabetes

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate comparative effectiveness and safety of non-vitamin-K antagonist oral anticoagulants (NOACs) versus warfarin in Medicare beneficiaries with non-valvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF) and comorbid diabetes mellitus (DM).

METHODS

A retrospective cohort study using 2014-2016 5% national Medicare data was undertaken. NVAF patients with DM aged ≥65 years having at least one prescription for NOACs or warfarin between July 2014 and December 2015 were included in the study. Propensity score matching was used to balance demographic and baseline clinical characteristics of patients in two treatment groups. Cardiovascular outcomes including stroke/systemic embolism (SE) and myocardial infarction (MI) were evaluated to measure effectiveness. Assessment of safety outcomes included intracranial hemorrhage (ICH), major gastrointestinal bleeding (MGB), bleeding from other sites (OB) and all-cause mortality. Stratified Cox proportional hazards models were used to estimate hazard ratios for the outcomes in the matched cohort.

RESULTS

The matched sample consisted of 4582 patients (2291 pairs). Compared to warfarin, NOACs had a significantly lower risk of stroke/SE (hazard ratio (HR): 0.373, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.247-0.564, p < .001) and all-cause mortality (HR: 0.783, CI: 0.656-0.873, p = .007). NOACs were found to significantly reduce the risk of ICH (HR: 0.500, CI: 0.300-0.834, p = .008) and OB (HR: 0.608, CI: 0.424-0.870, p = .007), but no difference was observed in the risk of MGB (HR: 0.862, CI: 0.640-1.160, p = .326) between NOACs and warfarin. The composite outcome demonstrated superior overall effectiveness and safety of NOAC therapy compared to warfarin therapy (HR: 0.685, CI: 0.587-0.801, p < .001).

CONCLUSION

Oral anticoagulation therapy with NOACs was found to be more effective than warfarin therapy among older adults with NVAF and comorbid DM.

Thromboembolism, bleeding and vascular death in nonvalvular atrial fibrillation patients with type 2 diabetes receiving rivaroxaban or warfarin

BACKGROUND

Diabetes increases a patient's risk of developing atrial fibrillation by 49%. Patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation are at a fivefold increased risk of stroke and die more frequently from vascular causes. We sought to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of rivaroxaban versus warfarin in nonvalvular atrial fibrillation patients with type 2 diabetes.

METHODS

This was an analysis of Optum® De-Identified electronic health record data from 11/2010 to 12/2019. We included adults with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation and type 2 diabetes, newly started on rivaroxaban or warfarin and with ≥ 12-months of prior electronic health record activity. Patients who were pregnant, had alternative indications for oral anticoagulation or valvular heart disease were excluded. We evaluated the incidence rate (%/year) of developing the composite outcome of stroke/systemic embolism or vascular death and major or clinically relevant nonmajor bleeding as well as each endpoint individually. Hazard ratios with 95% confidence intervals were calculated using propensity score-overlap weighted proportional hazards regression.

RESULTS

We included 32,078 rivaroxaban (31% initiated on 15 mg dose) and 83,971warfarin users (time-in-therapeutic range = 47 ± 28%). Rivaroxaban was associated with a reduced risk of stroke/systemic embolism or vascular death (3.79 vs. 4.19; hazard ratio = 0.91, 95% confdience interval = 0.88-0.95), driven mostly by reductions in vascular death (2.81 vs 3.18, hazard ratio = 0.90, 95% confidence interval = 0.86-0.95) and systemic embolism (0.13 vs. 0.16; hazard ratio = 0.82, 95% confidence interval = 0.66-1.02). Major/clinically relevant nonmajor bleeding was less frequent with rivaroxaban versus warfarin (2.17 vs. 2.31; hazard ratio = 0.94, 95% confidence interval = 0.89-0.99) due to decreased critical organ bleeding (including intracranial hemorrhage) (0.35 vs. 0.54; hazard ratio = 0.63, 95% confidence interval = 0.55-0.72).

CONCLUSIONS

In nonvalvular atrial fibrillation patients with type 2 diabetes, rivaroxaban was associated with an ~ 10% relative reduction in vascular mortality and fewer bleeding-related hospitalizations versus warfarin.

The Safety and Efficacy of Rivaroxaban Compared with Warfarin in Patients with Atrial Fibrillation and Diabetes: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

AIMS

This meta-analysis was conducted to compare the efficacy and safety of rivaroxaban with warfarin in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) and diabetes mellitus.

METHODS

PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science databases were systematically searched from the establishment of databases up to 15 October 2019. Studies on efficacy and safety outcomes of rivaroxaban and warfarin were included. Efficacy and safety outcomes, including stroke, ischemic stroke, stroke or systemic embolism, myocardial infarction, major adverse cardiac events, major bleeding, intracranial hemorrhage, and major gastrointestinal bleeding were collected for meta-analysis.

RESULTS

Compared with warfarin, rivaroxaban could significantly reduce stroke (risk ratio [RR] 0.77; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.63-0.95; P = 0.01), ischemic stroke (RR 0.74; 95% CI 0.63-0.87; P = 0.0004), stroke or systemic embolism (RR 0.73; 95% CI 0.60-0.89; P = 0.002), myocardial infarction (RR 0.68; 95% CI 0.56-0.82; P < 0.0001), and major adverse cardiac events (RR 0.71; 95% CI 0.53-0.94; P = 0.02) in patients with AF and diabetes. Moreover, rivaroxaban was associated with a lower risk of major bleeding (RR 0.79; 95% CI 0.65-0.96; P = 0.02), intracranial hemorrhage (RR 0.52; 95% CI 0.39-0.69; P < 0.00001), and major gastrointestinal bleeding (RR 0.74; 95% CI 0.56-0.98; P = 0.04). Similar results were obtained in stratified meta-analysis of cohort studies.

CONCLUSION

Our study suggests a favorable risk-benefit profile of rivaroxaban, with superior efficacy and safety over warfarin in patients with AF and diabetes.

Mejorar la prevención de la trombosis y las complicaciones cardiovasculares durante la pandemia de COVID-19

Las complicaciones cardiovasculares son frecuentes en el paciente con la enfermedad coronavírica de 2019 (COVID-19), y se asocian con una mayor mortalidad. Entre las complicaciones cardiovasculares, destacan el síndrome coronario agudo, el daño miocárdico agudo (elevación de troponinas con coronarias normales), arritmias (principalmente fibrilación auricular y arritmias ventriculares), insuficiencia cardiaca, pericarditis/derrame pericárdico y complicaciones tromboembólicas (tromboembolia arterial y venosa, trombosis microvascular, embolia pulmonar, ictus). Por lo tanto, uno de los objetivos del tratamiento del paciente con COVID-19, sobre todo en sus formas más graves, es la prevención de las complicaciones cardiovasculares y trombóticas, lo que sin duda tendría un impacto positivo en el pronóstico de estos pacientes.

Fuera de este contexto, los resultados provenientes tanto de ensayos clínicos como de estudios en la práctica clínica muestran que el rivaroxabán es eficaz y seguro en todo el espectro de la enfermedad cardiovascular (fibrilación auricular, enfermedad tromboembólica venosa y enfermedad cardiovascular ateroesclerótica), por lo que podría aportar un valor añadido en la prevención de las complicaciones trombóticas y cardiovasculares durante la pandemia de COVID-19.

Comparative effectiveness and safety of direct oral anticoagulants versus warfarin in UK patients with atrial fibrillation and type 2 diabetes: A retrospective cohort study

PURPOSE

To estimate the effectiveness and safety of direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) compared with warfarin in AF patients with type 2 diabetes (T2DM).

METHODS

A retrospective cohort study was designed, using the UK Clinical Practice Research Datalink (August 2011-June 2018). Participants were 1-year naïve users of DOACs or warfarin, followed from the date of first prescription of an oral anticoagulant until the end of the study period, death, discontinuation of treatment, switching to another anticoagulant, or an outcome of interest, whichever came first. Cox regression analysis was performed to estimate the hazard ratio (HR) adjusted for potential confounders.

RESULTS

A total of 8555 patients were identified. No significant differences were found between DOACs and warfarin in the risk of stroke (adjusted HR 1.15; 95% CI 0.82-1.60), ischemic and unspecified stroke (adjusted HR 1.23; 95% CI 0.86-1.76) or haemorrhagic stroke (adjusted HR 0.75; 95% CI 0.30-1.85), and myocardial infarction (adjusted HR 1.39;95% CI 0.99-1.97). DOAC and warfarin users were comparable with respect to risk of major bleed (adjusted HR 0.83; 95% CI 0.68-1.03), intracranial bleeding (HR 0.66; 95% CI 0.34-1.30), gastrointestinal bleeding (HR 0.88; 95% CI 0.60-1.30), and bleeding on other clinically relevant sites (HR 0.89; 95% CI 0.60-1.31). In the subgroup analyses stratified by gender and diabetes severity, the risk for stroke and bleeding remained consistent.

CONCLUSION

DOACs are effective and safe alternatives to warfarin for the prevention of stroke in AF patients with T2DM.

Concomitant diabetes with atrial fibrillation and anticoagulation management considerations

Atrial fibrillation is a highly prevalent cardiac arrhythmia. It is associated with numerous co mobilities. Approximately 30% of diabetic patients have atrial fibrillation and 15% of atrial fibrillation regulation patients have diabetes mellitus. Diabetes increases the likelihood of the development of atrial fibrillation and contributes to the high risk of thromboembolism seen in patients with both diabetes and atrial fibrillation. Chronic kidney disease is often a consequence of diabetes and presents an additional challenge to the management of patients with both atrial fibrillation and diabetes. All non-vitamin K oral anticoagulants are partially eliminated via the kidney and must be carefully prescribed according to strict dosing schedules to avoid anticoagulation overdose. However, NOACs have the advantage of being associated with less progressive impairment of renal function compared with vitamin K antagonist therapy in both diabetics and non-diabetics. Otherwise, diabetic patients benefit from NOAC therapy as opposed to vitamin K antagonists to a similar extent as patients without diabetes. This review deals with anticoagulation treatment in patients with fibrillation and diabetes mellitus, often complicated by progressive renal impairment.

Does the presence of diabetes mellitus confer an increased risk of stroke in patients with atrial fibrillation on direct oral anticoagulants? A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

There is limited data on clinical outcomes in high risk groups such as patients with diabetes mellitus (DM) with atrial fibrillation (AF) on direct-acting oral anticoagulants (DOACs). Using a systematic review and meta-analysis of published studies, we aimed to determine the risk of stroke and other clinical outcomes in patients with AF on DOACs, with or without DM.

METHODS

Observational cohort studies reporting clinical outcomes in patients with AF on DOACs, with or without DM were identified from MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, the Cochrane Library, and search of bibliographies to April 2020. Summary measures of effect were relative risks with 95% confidence intervals (CIs).

RESULTS

Eight studies comprising of 4 observational cohorts (n = 76,260 participants) and 4 randomised controlled trials (RCTs) (n = 71,683 participants) were included. In RCTs, DOACs compared with warfarin reduced the risk of the composite outcome of stroke and systemic embolism, CVD death and intracranial bleeding in patients with DM: RRs (95% CIs) of 0.75 (0.62-0.90), 0.84 (0.72-0.97), and 0.57 (0.40-0.81) respectively. The corresponding estimates for patients without DM were 0.81 (0.68-0.96), 0.93 (0.80-1.08), and 0.47 (0.31-0.70) respectively. There was no evidence of interactions between DM status and effects of DOACs. The absolute reduction in clinical outcomes with DOACs compared to warfarin was greater in DM than without DM. Regardless of treatment strategy, interventional and observational evidence indicate that patients with DM had higher rates of stroke or systemic embolism, mortality and major bleeding compared to patients without DM.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with AF and DM have increased risk of vascular events, which is reduced with the use of DOACs. The use of DOACs should be considered as an option in reducing the risk of stroke in these populations.

SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION

PROSPERO 2020: CRD42020157196.

Patients with diabetes mellitus and atrial fibrillation treated with non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants: meta-analysis of eight outcomes in 58 634 patients across four randomized controlled trials

AIMS

Concomitant atrial fibrillation (AF) and diabetes mellitus (DM) increases the risk of stroke and systemic embolic events (SEE). This meta-analysis assessed the benefit/risk balance of non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants (NOACs) vs. warfarin, and explored whether there was effect modification by DM or heterogeneity in outcomes between NOACs in patients with and without DM.

METHODS AND RESULTS

We performed a meta-analysis of 58 634 patients from four Phase 3 trials of NOAC vs. warfarin in patients with AF, comparing the primary outcomes of efficacy and safety and six other secondary outcomes in patients stratified by the presence of DM. Interaction testing was used to assess for heterogeneity of treatment effects. A meta-regression was performed to evaluate the influence of baseline characteristics. NOACs reduced the risk of stroke/SEE in 18 134 patients with DM [hazard ratio (HR) 0.80; 95% confidence interval (CI) (0.69-0.93), I2 3.90] to a similar degree as in 40 500 patients without DM [HR 0.82; 95% CI (0.74-0.91), I2 16.33; P-int 0.81]. There was no effect modification of DM on the relative reduction with NOACs vs. warfarin in major bleeding (DM: 0.95, 95% CI 0.75-1.20, I2 43.83; no DM: 0.83, 95% CI 0.55-1.24; I2 87.90; P-int 0.37). Intracranial haemorrhage (HRs 0.51 and 0.47, P-int 0.70) and cardiovascular death (HRs 0.87 and 0.90, P-int 0.70) were significantly reduced by NOACs in the presence or absence of DM.

CONCLUSION

Non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants are more effective and safer than warfarin in AF patients with or without DM. Absent contraindications, NOACs should be the anticoagulation treatment choice in patients with diabetes.

Cardiovascular risks and bleeding with non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulant versus warfarin in patients with type 2 diabetes: a tapered matching cohort study

BACKGROUND

We compared the risk of bleeding and cardiovascular disease (CVD) events between non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulant (NOAC) and warfarin in people with type 2 diabetes (T2DM).

METHODS

862 Incident NOAC users and 626 incident warfarin users with T2DM were identified from within 40 UK general practice (1/4/2017-30/9/2018). Outcomes included incident hospitalisation for bleeding, CVD and re-hospitalisation for CVD within 12 months since first anticoagulant prescription, identified from linked hospitalisation data. A tapered matching method was applied to form comparison cohorts: coarsened exact matching restricted the comparison to areas of sufficient overlap in missingness and characteristics: (i) demographic characteristics; (ii) clinical measurements; (iii) prior bleeding and CVD history; (iv) prescriptions with bleeding; (v) anti-hypertensive treatment(s); (vi) anti-diabetes treatment(s). Entropy balancing sequentially balanced NOAC and warfarin users on their distribution of (i-vi). Weighted logistic regression modelling estimated outcome odds ratios (ORs), using entropy balancing weights from steps i-vi.

RESULTS

The 12-month ORs of bleeding with NOAC (n = 582) vs matched/balanced warfarin (n = 486) were 1.93 (95% confidence interval 0.97-3.84), 2.14 (1.03-4.44), 2.31 (1.10-4.85), 2.42 (1.14-5.14), 2.41 (1.12-5.18), and 2.51 (1.17-5.38) through steps i-vi. ORs for CVD re-hospitalisation was increased with NOAC treatment through steps i-vi: 2.21 (1.04-4.68), 2.13 (1.01-4.52), 2.47 (1.08-5.62), 2.46 (1.02-5.94), 2.51 (1.01-6.20), and 2.66 (1.02-6.94).

CONCLUSIONS

Incident NOAC use among T2DM is associated with increased risk of bleeding hospitalisation and CVD re-hospitalisation compared with incident warfarin use. For T2DM, caution is required in prescribing NOACs as first anticoagulant treatment. Further large-scale replication studies in external datasets are warranted.

Stroke in the patient with diabetes (Part 2) - Prevention and the effects of glucose lowering therapies

There is a higher incidence of stroke in both the type 2 diabetic and the non-diabetic insulin resistant patient which is accompanied by higher morbidity and mortality. Stroke primary prevention can be achieved by controlling atrial fibrillation and hypertension, and the utilization of statins and anticoagulant therapies. Utilizing pioglitazone and GLP-1 receptor agonists reduce the risk of stroke while the utilization of metformin, α-glucosidase inhibitors, DPP-4 and SGLT-2 inhibitors have no effect. Insulin use may be a marker of increased risk of stroke, but not necessarily causative. Utilizing intravenous insulin to normalize plasma glucose levels in the acute phase of a stroke does not improve the outcome. Antiplatelet agents are not proven to be of benefit in primary prevention whereas the use of direct-acting oral anticoagulants to avoid stroke and the early use of tpA in the acute phase have been shown to be beneficial.

Clinical Outcome of Edoxaban vs. Vitamin K Antagonists in Patients with Atrial Fibrillation and Diabetes Mellitus: Results from a Multicenter, Propensity-Matched, Real-World Cohort Study

Diabetes mellitus (DM) is a chronic metabolic disease which is independently associated with unfavorable clinical outcomes in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF). Few real-world data are available about the clinical performance of non-vitamin K oral anticoagulants (NOACs) among patients with atrial fibrillation and diabetes. The aim of our propensity score-matched cohort study was to compare the safety and effectiveness of Edoxaban versus well-controlled vitamin K antagonists (VKAs) therapy among this population. In this study, we considered patients with AF and diabetes on Edoxaban or VKAs therapy included in the multicenter Atrial Fibrillation Research Database (NCT03760874). The occurrence of major bleedings (MB) and thromboembolic events (a composite of ischemic stroke, transient ischemic attack, systemic embolism) was respectively considered primary safety and effectiveness outcome. We identified 557 AF patients with diabetes who received Edoxaban (n: 230) or VKAs (n: 327) treatment. After propensity score matching analysis, 135 Edoxaban and 135 VKA recipients with similar clinical characteristics were evaluated. The mean follow-up was 27 ± 3 months. The incidence rate of thromboembolic events (TE) was 3.0 per 100 person-years (1.11 in Edoxaban vs. 1.9 in the VKA group, hazard ratio (HR): 0.59; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.14 to 2.52; p = 0.48). The incidence rate of major bleedings (MB) was 3.7 per 100 person-years (1.2 in Edoxaban vs. 2.7 in the VKA group, HR: 0.43; 95% CI: 0.10 to 1.40; p = 0.14). The incidence rate of intracranial hemorrhage was 0.35 per 100 person-years in Edoxaban vs. 0.74 in the VKA group (HR: 0.49; 95% CI: 0.05 to 5.54; p = 0.56). A positive net clinical benefit (NCB) of Edoxaban over VKAs was found (+1.39). Insulin therapy (HR: 1.76, p = 0.004) and glycated hemoglobin (HR: 1.17, p = 0.002) were found to be independent predictors of TE; moreover, the concomitant use of antiplatelet drugs (HR: 2.41, p = 0.001) was an independent predictor of MB. Conclusions: Our data support the hypothesis of the safety and efficacy of Edoxaban for use in patients with AF and diabetes, justified by a favorable NCB over VKAs.

Effectiveness, safety, and major adverse limb events in atrial fibrillation patients with concomitant diabetes mellitus treated with non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants

BACKGROUND

Evidence of adverse clinical outcomes for non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulant (NOACs) and warfarin in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) and diabetes mellitus are limited. We investigated the effectiveness, safety, and major adverse limb events for NOACs versus warfarin among diabetic AF patients.

METHODS

In this nationwide retrospective cohort study collected from Taiwan National Health Insurance Research Database, we identified a total of 20,967 and 5812 consecutive AF patients with diabetes taking NOACs and warfarin from June 1, 2012, to December 31, 2017, respectively. We used propensity-score stabilized weighting to balance covariates across study groups.

RESULTS

NOAC was associated with a lower risk of major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) (adjusted hazard ratio (aHR):0.88; [95% confidential interval (CI) 0.78-0.99]; P = 0.0283), major adverse limb events (MALE) (aHR:0.72;[95% CI 0.57-0.92]; P = 0.0083), and major bleeding (aHR:0.67;[95% CI 0.59-0.76]; P < 0.0001) compared to warfarin. NOACs decreased MACE in patients of ≥ 75 but not in those aged < 75 years (P interaction = 0.01), and in patients with ischemic heart disease (IHD) compared to those without IHD (P interaction < 0.01). For major adverse limb events, the advantage of risk reduction for NOAC over warfarin persisted in high risk subgroups including age ≥ 75 years, chronic kidney disease, IHD, peripheral artery disease, or use of concomitant antiplatelet drugs.

CONCLUSION

Among diabetic AF patients, NOACs were associated with a lower risk of thromboembolism, major bleeding, and major adverse limb events than warfarin. Thromboprophylaxis with NOACs should be considered in the diabetic AF population with a high atherosclerotic burden.

Effectiveness and Safety of Oral Anticoagulants in Patients With Nonvalvular Atrial Fibrillation and Diabetes Mellitus

OBJECTIVE

To address gaps in the data comparing non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants (NOACs) and warfarin among patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF) and diabetes.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A retrospective study was conducted on patients with NVAF and diabetes newly initiating apixaban, dabigatran, rivaroxaban, or warfarin from January 1, 2013, through September 30, 2015, with Medicare data from the US Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services and 4 other US commercial claims databases. One-to-one propensity score matching was completed between NOACs and warfarin and between NOACs in each database, and the results were pooled. Cox proportional hazards models were used to evaluate the risk of stroke/systemic embolism (SE) and major bleeding (MB).

RESULTS

A total of 154,324 patients were included in the 6 matched cohorts, with a mean follow-up time of 6 to 8 months. Compared with warfarin, apixaban (hazard ratio [HR], 0.67; 95% CI, 0.57-0.77) and rivaroxaban (HR, 0.79; 95% CI, 0.71-0.89) were associated with a lower risk of stroke/SE; dabigatran (HR, 0.84; 95% CI, 0.67-1.07) was associated with a similar risk of stroke/SE. Apixaban (HR, 0.60; 95% CI, 0.56-0.65) and dabigatran (HR, 0.78; 95% CI, 0.69-0.88) were associated with a lower risk of MB; rivaroxaban (HR, 1.02; 95% CI, 0.94-1.10) was associated with a similar risk of MB compared with warfarin. Compared with dabigatran and rivaroxaban, apixaban was associated with a lower risk of MB. Compared with rivaroxaban, dabigatran was associated with a lower risk of MB.

CONCLUSION

This study-the largest observational study to date of patients with NVAF and diabetes taking anticoagulants-found that NOACs were associated with variable rates of stroke/SE and MB compared with warfarin.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT03087487.

Glycemic status and risks of thromboembolism and major bleeding in patients with atrial fibrillation

Background

Studies specifically examining the association between glycated hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) levels and ischemic stroke/systemic thromboembolism (IS/SE) risk in atrial fibrillation (AF) patients are limited. Here, we investigated the association between HbA1c levels and the risk of IS/SE, as well as major bleeding, among AF patients with or without oral anticoagulants (OACs). We also compared the effectiveness and safety of warfarin and direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) in different HbA1c categories.

Methods

We utilized medical data from a multi-center healthcare provider in Taiwan, which included 34,036 AF patients with serum HbA1c data available within 3 months after AF being diagnosed. Patients were divided into seven study groups according to their HbA1c levels: < 5.4%, 5.4%–5.6%, 5.7%–5.9%, 6.0%–6.4%, 6.5%–6.9%, 7.0%–7.9%, and ≥ 8.0%. The risks of IS/SE and major bleeding were compared among the groups after adjusting for baseline stroke and bleeding risk factors.

Results

Compared with the patients with HbA1c level < 5.4%, IS/SE risk significantly increased at HbA1c levels higher than 6.5% [adjusted hazard ratio (HR): 1.20, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.00–1.43 for HbA1c level 6.5%–6.9%; 1.32, (95% CI 1.11–1.57) for HbA1c level 7.0%–7.9%; and 1.48 (95% CI 1.25–1.76) for HbA1c level ≥ 8.0%]. These results were generally consistent in AF patients without OACs (n = 24,931). However, among 9105 patients receiving OACs, IS/SE risk was not higher for patients having higher HbA1c levels. The risk of major bleeding was comparable across all HbA1c categories. Compared with warfarin, DOACs were associated with lower risks of IS/SE (adjusted HR: 0.61, 95% CI 0.49–0.75) and major bleeding (adjusted HR: 0.30, 95% CI 0.21–0.42) without interactions across different HbA1c categories (all P interactions > 0.05).

Conclusion

For AF patients, IS/SE risk significantly increased once HbA1c levels exceeded 6.5%, and OACs may attenuate these associations. Compared with warfarin, DOACs were more effective and safer across broad HbA1c categories. Therefore, in addition to prescribing DOACs when indicated, more aggressive glycemic control to achieve an HbA1c level < 6.5% may be considered for eligible AF patients and should be tested in further prospective studies.

Endothelial Dysfunction, Fibrinolytic Activity, and Coagulation Activity in Patients With Atrial Fibrillation According to Type II Diabetes Mellitus Status

Recent findings in atrial fibrillation (AF) patients receiving oral anticoagulation showed that diabetes without insulin therapy has a thromboembolic risk comparable to nondiabetic patients, whereas only diabetic patients on insulin have a heightened thromboembolic risk. We explored possible pathophysiological correlates of such finding on 90 AF patients on oral anticoagulation, divided according to diabetes status (n = 30 without diabetes; n = 29 with diabetes on oral antidiabetic drugs; n = 31 with insulin-requiring diabetes). We assessed von Willebrand Factor (VWF) concentration (VWF:Ag) and activity (VWF R:Co) as measures of endothelial dysfunction; and thrombin-activatable fibrinolysis inhibitor (TAFI) and prothrombin fragment 1 + 2 (F1+2) levels as markers of fibrinolytic activity and thrombin generation. Values of VWF:Ag, VWF:RCo, and TAFI were similar in the 3 groups. Patients with diabetes requiring insulin had significantly higher levels of F1+2 (median 23.1 pg/ml [interquartile range 17.6; 33.5]) than those without diabetes (16.3 pg/ml [11.5; 22.5], p = 0.036) and diabetic patients on oral antidiabetic drugs (20.6 pg/ml [13.3; 29], p = 0.046). Thus, in AF patients receiving oral anticoagulation, those with diabetes, regardless of the diabetes type (with or without insulin therapy), and those without diabetes have comparable indices of the explored parameters of endothelial dysfunction and fibrinolytic activity. Despite anticoagulant therapy, thrombin generation is selectively higher in diabetic patients' on insulin than in those without diabetes or with diabetes on oral antidiabetic drugs, with no differences between these latter 2 conditions. Thrombin generation might thus be a predominant contributor to the excess of thromboembolic risk in AF patients on insulin-requiring diabetes.

The continuous challenge of antithrombotic strategies in diabetes: focus on direct oral anticoagulants

Direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) include dabigatran, which inhibits thrombin, and apixaban, edoxaban, and rivaroxaban, which inhibit factor Xa. They have been extensively studied in large trials involving patients affected by the most common cardiovascular diseases. As the presence of diabetes leads to peculiar changes in primary and secondary hemostasis, in this review we highlight the current evidence regarding DOAC use in diabetic patients included in the majority of recently conducted studies. Overall, in trials involving patients with atrial fibrillation, data seem to confirm at least a similar efficacy and safety of DOACs compared to warfarin in patients with or without diabetes. Furthermore, in diabetic patients, treatment with DOACs is associated with a significant relative reduction in vascular death compared to warfarin. In trials enrolling patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention, results concerning bleeding events are consistent in patients with or without diabetes. With regards to the COMPASS study, in patients with diabetes (n = 10,241), addition of rivaroxaban 2.5 mg to aspirin resulted in a significantly lower incidence of major adverse cardiovascular events (HR 0.74, 95% CI 0.61-0.90; interaction p = 0.68) with higher rates of major bleeding expected (HR 1.70, 95% CI 1.25-2.31). The 3287 patients with peripheral artery disease and diabetes receiving rivaroxaban plus aspirin had a twofold higher absolute reduction in the composite endpoint (cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, and stroke) than patients without diabetes. Finally, we report the involvement of cytochromes or P-glycoprotein on the metabolism of the most commonly prescribed glucose-lowering drugs. No clinically relevant interactions are expected during the concomitant use of DOACs and anti-diabetic agents.

Novel Oral Anticoagulants for the Prevention of Stroke in Patients with Atrial Fibrillation and Hypertension: A Meta-Analysis

INTRODUCTION

Hypertension is associated with increased risk of stroke and bleeding in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF). In the present study, we aimed to investigate the influence of hypertension status in patients with AF receiving treatment with non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants (NOACs).

METHODS

PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library were searched from the inception of each database to November 2017. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that evaluated NOACs versus warfarin in patients with AF and hypertension were identified. A meta-analysis was performed using random- or fixed-effects models according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines.

RESULTS

Five trials (72,967 patients, including 51,378 patients with hypertension) were enrolled. NOACs significantly reduced the risk of stroke and systemic embolism (hazard ratio [HR] 0.87, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.81-0.94, n = 51,378 patients), hemorrhagic stroke (HR 0.55, 95% CI 0.41-0.74, n = 28,818 patients), death from any cause (HR 0.91, 95% CI 0.85-0.97, n = 43,101 patients), major bleeding (HR 0.78, 95% CI 0.74-0.83, n = 51,378 patients) and intracranial bleeding (HR 0.50, 95% CI 0.38-0.67, n = 27,185 patients). The benefits of NOACs in comparison with warfarin were consistent in AF patients with or without hypertension (P_interaction for all outcomes > 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings suggest that NOACs can be recommended for the prevention of stroke or systemic embolism in patients with AF and hypertension.

Prevention of atherothrombotic events in patients with diabetes mellitus: from antithrombotic therapies to new-generation glucose-lowering drugs

Diabetes mellitus is an important risk factor for a first cardiovascular event and for worse outcomes after a cardiovascular event has occurred. This situation might be caused, at least in part, by the prothrombotic status observed in patients with diabetes. Therefore, contemporary antithrombotic strategies, including more potent agents or drug combinations, might provide greater clinical benefit in patients with diabetes than in those without diabetes. In this Consensus Statement, our Working Group explores the mechanisms of platelet and coagulation activity, the current debate on antiplatelet therapy in primary cardiovascular disease prevention, and the benefit of various antithrombotic approaches in secondary prevention of cardiovascular disease in patients with diabetes. While acknowledging that current data are often derived from underpowered, observational studies or subgroup analyses of larger trials, we propose antithrombotic strategies for patients with diabetes in various cardiovascular settings (primary prevention, stable coronary artery disease, acute coronary syndromes, ischaemic stroke and transient ischaemic attack, peripheral artery disease, atrial fibrillation, and venous thromboembolism). Finally, we summarize the improvements in cardiovascular outcomes observed with the latest glucose-lowering drugs, and on the basis of the available evidence, we expand and integrate current guideline recommendations on antithrombotic strategies in patients with diabetes for both primary and secondary prevention of cardiovascular disease.

NOACs in Anesthesiology

Background

Due to increasing use of new oral anticoagulants (NOACs), clinicians are faced more and more frequently with clinical issues related to these drugs.

Objective

The objective of this publication is to make practical suggestions for the perioperative management of NOACs as well as for their handling in overdoses and bleedings.

Recommendations

In elective surgery and creatinine clearance ≥ 50 ml/min, a NOAC should be discontinued 24-36 h before the intervention, and even earlier in case of reduced kidney function. In emergency interventions that cannot be delayed, the management is dependent on the NOAC plasma levels. With levels ≤ 30 ng/ml, surgery can be performed. With levels >30 ng/ml, reversal agents should be considered. In low bleeding risk surgery, NOACs can be re-started 24 h after the intervention, which is prolonged to 48-72 h after surgery with high bleeding risk. In case of NOAC overdose and minor bleedings, temporary discontinuation and supportive care are usually sufficient to control the situation. In severe or life-threatening bleedings, nonspecific and specific reversal agents should be considered.

Left atrial appendage occlusion for stroke prevention in diabetes mellitus patients with atrial fibrillation: Long-term results

BACKGROUND

Concomitant diabetes mellitus (DM) in atrial fibrillation (AF) may increase the risk of thromboembolism. Left atrial appendage occlusion (LAAO) is an alternative treatment in AF patients in whom antithrombotic therapy is ineffective or contraindicated. The aim of this study was to evaluate the long-term efficacy of LAAO in DM patients with AF.

METHODS

A retrospective study was conducted in 139 patients who had undergone LAAO and were categorized into two groups: 28 patients with DM and 111 patients without DM. Overall, the follow-up period was 530 patient-years.

RESULTS

Mean CHADS₂ and CHA₂ DS₂ -VASc scores were higher in patients with than without DM (2.6 vs 1.7 [P < 0.001] and 3.5 vs 2.8 [P = 0.056], respectively). There were no significant differences between the two groups in terms of HAS-BLED scores and other patient factors (sex, age, heart failure, hypertension, previous stroke or transient ischemic attack, peripheral vascular disease) that may increase the risk of thromboembolism based on CHA₂ DS₂ -VASc. The mean follow-up period was 51.6 and 50 months in patients with DM and without DM, respectively. Comparing patients with and without DM, there were no significant differences in thromboembolic events (4% vs 1.9%), severe bleeding (0% vs 3.1%), or mortality (4% vs 5.9%). The estimated reductions in thromboembolic and bleeding risk were 77% and 100%, respectively, for patients with DM, compared with 85% and 62%, respectively, for patients without DM.

CONCLUSION

The present study indicates that LAAO in AF patients with DM has similar safety endpoints and long-term efficacy as LAAO in patients without DM.

Use of non-vitamin K oral anticoagulants in people with atrial fibrillation and diabetes mellitus

AIMS

To examine the efficacy and safety of non-vitamin K oral anticoagulants in people with both atrial fibrillation and diabetes mellitus.

METHODS

We reviewed efficacy and safety data from the warfarin-controlled phase III non-vitamin K oral anticoagulants trials (ARISTOTLE, RE-LY, ROCKET-AF, ENGAGE AF-TIMI 48) and their post hoc analyses with regard to diabetes status. We also reviewed the updated literature regarding this population.

RESULTS

At baseline 20-40% of the participants in the phase III non-vitamin K oral anticoagulants trials had diabetes mellitus at baseline. This population, in comparison with those without diabetes, was more likely to have other comorbidities, such as hypertension and coronary artery disease; thus, their cardiovascular risk was higher. Participants with diabetes had higher rates of stroke and systemic embolism than participants without diabetes. This risk was decreased using non-vitamin K oral anticoagulants, with no significant interaction by diabetic status or the specific drug used. Overall, compared with warfarin, non-vitamin K oral anticoagulants were safe and reduced the incidence of major bleeding in people with atrial fibrillation and diabetes, although the results varied with the different non-vitamin K oral anticoagulants.

CONCLUSIONS

The efficacy and safety of non-vitamin K oral anticoagulants compared with warfarin generally extend to participants with diabetes mellitus, although dedicated randomized trials or real-world data are lacking.

Comparison of Anticoagulant Therapy for Atrial Fibrillation - Novel Oral Anticoagulants Versus Vitamin K Antagonists

In patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF), oral anticoagulation is important for prevention of stroke and systemic embolism (SE). While Vitamin K antagonists (VKAs) have historically been the standard of care, these medications are limited by numerous food and drug interactions with onerous requirements for frequent monitoring and dose adjustments. Over the past decade, several novel oral anticoagulants (NOACs) have been developed to directly inhibit factor IIa/thrombin (dabigatran) or activated factor X (apixaban, rivaroxaban, edoxaban). These medications have been shown to be at least as effective as warfarin for stroke prevention in NVAF with more favorable safety profiles. However, their advantages are underscored by a lack of specific antidotes and assays quantifying their anticoagulant effects. This paper addresses the use of NOACs compared to VKAs in patients with NVAF, with a special focus on high-risk populations, including the elderly, those with renal disease, diabetes mellitus, coronary artery disease, and previous stroke. The current literature surrounding special clinical scenarios including the treatment of bleeding, perioperative management, and the use of NOACs in cardioversion and catheter ablation will be also discussed.

High overall cardiovascular risk and mortality in patients with atrial fibrillation and diabetes: A nationwide report

AIM

To describe nationwide complication patterns in patients with atrial fibrillation and diabetes mellitus.

METHODS

All ( n = 326,832) patients in Sweden with non-valvular atrial fibrillation during 2006-2012 were identified, and information on events, comorbidities and pharmacological therapy was extracted using nationwide mandatory registers. Patients were followed until 31 December 2013 and the mean follow-up time was 3.7 years (0.9-8 years).

RESULTS

Diabetes was present in 17.7%. The most frequent events in those with and without diabetes were mortality (48.8% vs 36.4%; p < 0.001), heart failure (21.4% vs 13.1%; p < 0.001), ischaemic stroke (8.2% vs 6.8%; p < 0.001), myocardial infarction (7.3% vs 4.3%; p < 0.001) and any bleeding (6.3% vs 5.2%; p < 0.001), respectively. Diabetes predicted mortality (hazard ratio = 1.28; 95% confidence interval = 1.25-1.31), combined event (first of mortality, heart failure, ischaemic stroke or myocardial infarction; hazard ratio = 1.22; 95% confidence interval = 1.20-1.25), single events and bleeding (hazard ratio = 1.12; 95% confidence interval = 1.06-1.19). The standardised mortality ratio for patients with atrial fibrillation and diabetes compared to the general population was 2.06 (95% confidence interval = 2.00-2.12) and for patients with atrial fibrillation without diabetes was 1.33 (95% confidence interval = 1.31-1.35).

CONCLUSION

In this real-world setting, patients with atrial fibrillation and diabetes have a high cardiovascular risk, with mortality and heart failure rates exceeding those for stroke.

Non-Vitamin K Oral Anticoagulants for Stroke Prevention in Special Populations with Atrial Fibrillation

Atrial fibrillation (AF) is associated with an increased risk of ischemic stroke or systemic embolism compared with normal sinus rhythm. These strokes may efficiently be prevented in patients with risk factors using oral anticoagulant therapy, with either vitamin K antagonists (VKAs) or non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants (NOACs) (i.e., direct thrombin inhibitors or direct factor Xa inhibitors). Owing to their specific risk profiles, some AF populations may have increased risks of both thromboembolic and bleeding events. These AF patients may be denied oral anticoagulants, whilst evidence shows that the absolute benefits of oral anticoagulants are greatest in patients at highest risk. NOACs are an alternative to VKAs to prevent stroke in patients with "non-valvular AF", and NOACs may offer a greater net clinical benefit compared with VKAs, particularly in these high-risk patients. Physicians have to learn how to use these drugs optimally in specific settings. We review concrete clinical scenarios for which practical answers are currently proposed for use of NOACs based on available evidence for patients with kidney disease, elderly patients, women, patients with diabetes, patients with low or high body weight, and those with valve disease.