Kidney function and the comparative effectiveness and safety of direct oral anticoagulants vs. warfarin in adults with atrial fibrillation: a multicenter observational study

Direct Comparison of the Effectiveness and Safety Among Direct Oral Anticoagulants and Warfarin in Japanese Patients: Nationwide Cohort Study in Japan

Direct oral anticoagulant drugs (DOACs) are available in addition to warfarin for the treatment of patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF). Anticoagulants are useful for practical pharmacotherapy in Asian populations, but their responses are different from those in Caucasian populations. Therefore, we aimed to identify the most useful anticoagulant using a nationwide insurance claims database in Japan. We extracted information on patients with NVAF treated with DOACs or warfarin for the first time between September 2015 and February 2018 to conduct a retrospective observational cohort study using the claims database of Japan. We calculated hazard ratios (HR) of effectiveness and safety endpoints among DOACs or warfarin after adjusting for backgrounds by propensity scores (inverse probability weighting). Using negative control outcomes, we considered renal function as an unmeasured confounding factor. After adjusting for their backgrounds, patients treated with DOACs showed higher effectiveness endpoints (stroke or systemic embolism) than those treated with warfarin (HR; 0.72-0.81) and higher safety in terms of safety end points (clinically significant bleeding) (HR; 0.80-0.88). The net clinical benefit, which reflects the actual clinical usefulness, indicates the advantages of DOACs over warfarin (HR; 0.75-0.82). Dabigatran had lower usefulness than edoxaban and rivaroxaban in Japanese patients treated with NVAF, even after considering the unmeasured confounding factor of kidney function. Based on practical clinical data, edoxaban and rivaroxaban were the most useful anticoagulants in Japanese patients with NVAF.

Oral Anticoagulation Use in Individuals With Atrial Fibrillation and Chronic Kidney Disease: A Review

Atrial fibrillation (AF) is highly prevalent in patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD). It is associated with an increased risk of stroke, which increases as kidney function declines. In the general population and in those with a moderate degree of CKD (creatinine clearance 30-50 mL/min), the use of oral anticoagulation to decrease the risk of stroke has been the standard of care based on a favorable risk-benefit profile that had been established in seminal randomized controlled trials. However, evidence regarding the use of oral anticoagulants for stroke prevention is less clear in patients with severe CKD (creatinine clearance <30 mL/min) and those receiving maintenance dialysis, as these individuals were excluded from such large randomized controlled trials. Nevertheless, the direct oral anticoagulants have invariably usurped vitamin K antagonists as the preferred choice for oral anticoagulation among patients with AF across all strata of CKD based on their well-defined safety and efficacy and multiple pharmacokinetic benefits (e.g., less drug-drug interactions). This review summarizes the current literature on the role of oral anticoagulation in the management of AF among patients with CKD and highlights current deficiencies in the evidence base and how to overcome them.

Safety and Effectiveness of Rivaroxaban Versus Warfarin Across GFR Levels in Atrial Fibrillation: A Population-Based Study in Australia and Canada

Rationale & Objective

The benefit-risk profile of rivaroxaban versus warfarin for atrial fibrillation (AF) in patients with chronic kidney disease is uncertain. We compared rivaroxaban with warfarin across the range of kidney function in adults with AF.

Study Design

Multicenter retrospective cohort.

Setting & Participants

Adults with AF and a measure of estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR); using administrative data from 5 jurisdictions across Australia and Canada (2011-2018). Kidney function was categorized as eGFR ≥60, 45-59, 30-44, and <30 mL/min/1.73 m². Patients receiving dialysis and kidney transplant recipients were excluded.

Exposures

New dispensation of either rivaroxaban or warfarin.

Outcomes

Composite (1) effectiveness outcome (all-cause death, ischemic stroke, or transient ischemic attack) and (2) major bleeding events (intracranial, gastrointestinal, or other) at 1 year.

Analytical Approach

Cox proportional hazards models accounting for propensity score matching were performed independently in each jurisdiction and then pooled using random-effects meta-analysis.

Results

55,568 patients (27,784 rivaroxaban-warfarin user matched pairs; mean age 74 years, 46% female, 33.5% with eGFR <60 mL/min/1.73 m²) experienced a total of 4,733 (8.5%) effectiveness and 1,144 (2.0%) bleeding events. Compared to warfarin, rivaroxaban was associated with greater or similar effectiveness across a broad range of kidney function (pooled HRs of 0.72 [95% CI, 0.66-0.78], 0.78 [95% CI, 0.58-1.06], 0.70 [95% CI, 0.57-0.87], and 0.78 [95% CI, 0.62-0.99]) for eGFR ≥60, 45-59, 30-44, and <30 mL/min/1.73 m², respectively). Rivaroxaban was also associated with similar risk of major bleeding across all eGFR categories (pooled HRs of 0.75 [95% CI, 0.56-1.00], 1.01 [95% CI, 0.79-1.30], 0.87 [95% CI, 0.66-1.15], and 0.63 [95% CI, 0.37-1.09], respectively).

Limitations

Unmeasured treatment selection bias and residual confounding.

Conclusions

In adults with AF, rivaroxaban compared with warfarin was associated with lower or similar risk of all-cause death, ischemic stroke and transient ischemic attack and similar risk of bleeding across a broad range of kidney function.

Plain-Language Summary

This real-world study involved a large cohort of 55,568 adults with atrial fibrillation from 5 jurisdictions across Australia and Canada. It showed that the favorable safety (bleeding) and effectiveness (stroke or death) profile of rivaroxaban compared with warfarin was consistent across different levels of kidney function. This study adds important safety data on the use of rivaroxaban in patients with reduced kidney function, including those with estimated glomerular filtration rate <30 mL/min/1.73 m² in whom the risks and benefits of rivaroxaban use is most uncertain. Overall, the study supports the use of rivaroxaban as a safe and effective alternative to warfarin for atrial fibrillation across differing levels of kidney function.