Comparative risk of major bleeding with rivaroxaban and warfarin: Population‐based cohort study of unprovoked venous thromboembolism

Safety profile of rivaroxaban in first-time users treated for venous thromboembolism in four European countries

BACKGROUND

The European rivaroxaban post-authorization safety study evaluated bleeding risk among patients initiated on rivaroxaban or vitamin K antagonists for the treatment and secondary prevention of venous thromboembolism in routine clinical practice.

METHODS

Cohorts were created using electronic healthcare databases from the UK, the Netherlands, Germany and Sweden. Patients with a first prescription of rivaroxaban or vitamin K antagonist during the period from December 2011 (in the UK, January 2012) to December 2017 (in Germany, December 2016) for venous thromboembolism indication, with no record of atrial fibrillation or recent cancer history, were observed until the occurrence of each safety outcome (hospitalization for intracranial, gastrointestinal, urogenital or other bleeding), death or study end (December 2018; in Germany, December 2017). Crude incidence rates of each outcome per 100 person-years were computed.

RESULTS

Overall, 44 737 rivaroxaban and 45 842 vitamin K antagonist patients were enrolled, mean age, 59.9-63.8 years. Incidence rates were similar between rivaroxaban and vitamin K antagonist users with some exceptions, including higher incidence rates for gastrointestinal bleeding in rivaroxaban users than in vitamin K antagonist users. Among rivaroxaban users, mortality and bleeding risk generally increased with age, renal impairment and diabetes.

CONCLUSIONS

This study provides further data from routine clinical practice that broadly support safety profile of rivaroxaban for VTE indication and complement findings from previous randomized clinical trials.

Effectiveness and Safety of Direct Oral Anticoagulants vs. Warfarin and Recurrence After Discontinuation in Patients With Acute Venous Thromboembolism in the Real World

BACKGROUND

The efficacy of direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) compared with warfarin for the treatment of venous thromboembolism (VTE), and the recurrence of VTE after discontinuation of anticoagulation therapy in research are limited.Methods and Results:This retrospective study enrolled 893 patients with acute VTE between 2011 and 2019. The cohort was divided into the transient risk, unprovoked, continued cancer treatment, and cancer remission groups. The following were compared between DOACs and warfarin: composite outcome of all-cause death, VTE recurrence, bleeding and composite outcome of VTE-related death, recurrence and bleeding. In the continued cancer treatment group, more bleeding was seen in warfarin-treated patients than in patients treated with DOACs (53.2% vs. 31.2%, [P=0.048]). In addition, composite outcome of VTE-related death and recurrence after discontinuation of anticoagulation therapy (n=369) was evaluated. The continued cancer treatment group (multivariate analysis: HR: 3.62, 95% CI: 1.84-7.12, P<0.005) and bleeding-related discontinuation of therapy (HR: 2.60, 95% CI: 1.32-5.13, P=0.006) were independent predictors of the event after discontinuation of anticoagulation therapy. VTE recurrence after discontinuation of anticoagulation therapy in the cancer remission group was 1.6% and a statistically similar occurrence was found in the transient risk group (12.4%) (P=0.754).

CONCLUSIONS

DOACs may decrease bleeding incidence in patients continuing to receive cancer treatment. In patients with bleeding-related discontinuation of anticoagulation therapy, VTE recurrence may increase. Discontinuation of anticoagulant therapy might be a treatment option in patients who have completed their cancer treatment.

Development of rivaroxaban microemulsion-based hydrogel for transdermal treatment and prevention of venous thromboembolism

We have developed a microemulsion (ME)-based hydrogel, containing propylene glycol, Azone®, Labrasol®, isobutanol and water (20:3:18:3:56), for the transdermal delivery of rivaroxaban (RVX). Formulation ME-1:RVX, which was loaded with 0.3 mg/g of RVX, presented as a clear, homogenous fluid with a droplet size of 82.01 ± 6.32 nm and a PdI of 0.207 ± 0.01. To provide gelation properties, 20 % (w/w) of Pluronic® F-127 was added to ME-1:RVX to generate formulation PME-1a. An added benefit was an increased capacity for RVX to 0.4 mg/g (formulation PME-1b). PME-1b displayed spherical droplets with a nanoscale diameter as observed by Transmission Electron Microscopy. The release of RVX from PME-1b was 20.71 ± 0.76 μg/cm² with a permeation through pig epidermis of 18.32 ± 8.87 μg/cm² as measured in a Franz Cell for 24 h. PME-1b presented a pseudoplastic behavior, pH value compatible with the skin and good stability over 60 days at room and elevated temperatures. The prothrombin time was assessed for each concentration of RVX obtained in the permeation assay and each demonstrated a relevant anticoagulant activity. PME-1b also presented no cytotoxicity against HaCaT cells. Utilizing GastroPlus® software, an in silico analysis was performed to simulate the delivery of PME-1b through a transdermal system that suggested a minimum dose of RVX for the treatment and prevention of venous thromboembolism could be achieved with an 8 h administration regimen. These results suggest that PME-1b is a promising transdermal formulation for the effective delivery of RVX that could be a viable alternative for the treatment and prevention of venous thromboembolism.

Rivaroxaban for treatment of livedoid vasculopathy: A systematic review

Rivaroxaban is a direct inhibitor of activated coagulation factor X and competitively targets factor Xa via reversible binding. We conducted a systematic review of the efficacy and safety of rivaroxaban for treatment of livedoid vasculopathy (LV) by searching the PubMed, Cochrane and Embase databases. A total of 22 articles and 1 registered clinical trial were identified in the search of which 13 were included. The studies included 73 LV patients receiving rivaroxaban therapy (10-20 mg per day). Overall, 60 patients (82.2%) had responses to therapy, achieving remission of both pain and ulceration. Few adverse effects were observed. Thus, the consensus of the clinical evidence is that rivaroxaban is a well-tolerated and effective treatment for LV. However, this still needs to be confirmed by large prospective and/or case control studies.

Compared to randomized studies, observational studies may overestimate the effectiveness of DOACs: a metaepidemiological approach

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are criticized for including patients who are overselected. Health authorities consequently encourage "real-world" postmarketing cohort studies. Our objective was to determine the differences between RCTs and observational studies as regards their populations and efficacy/safety results.

METHODS

A systematic review was conducted to identify RCTs and observational studies including patients with venous thromboembolism receiving direct oral anticoagulants or conventional treatment. Ratios of hazard ratio (RHR) comparing epidemiological studies (prospective and retrospective cohort studies and studies using living databases) with RCTs were computed.

RESULTS

Six RCTs (27,121 patients) and twenty observational studies (248,971 patients) were identified and analyzed. Prospective cohort studies seemed to recruit patients who were no less selected than those of RCTs whereas other types of observational studies may reflect the population treated in real life. Among observational studies, prospective cohort studies yielded the most favorable estimates of treatment effect compared with RCTs. These studies were associated with a nonsignificant 33% increase in efficacy estimate (RHR 0.67, [95% CI, 0.39-1.18]) but no effect on safety estimate. Studies using living databases were associated with nonsignificant trends toward a greater effect on efficacy (RHR 0.82, [0.66-1.01]) and a smaller effect on safety (RHR 1.33, [0.96-1.84]).

DISCUSSION

Overall, in this clinical setting, an exaggeration of the treatment efficacy estimate was seen with observational studies compared with RCTs.

CONCLUSIONS

As the presence of residual confounding cannot be excluded, these results should be interpreted cautiously.