Relationship between time in therapeutic range and comparative treatment effect of rivaroxaban and warfarin: results from the ROCKET AF trial

Time-in-therapeutic-range defined warfarin and direct oral anticoagulants in atrial fibrillation: a Nationwide Cohort Study

BACKGROUND

Little is known how individual time-in-therapeutic-range (TTR) impacts the effectiveness and safety of warfarin therapy compared to direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF).

OBJECTIVE

To compare the effectiveness and safety of standard dose DOACs to warfarin in patients with AF, while categorizing warfarin treated patients into quartiles based on their individual TTR.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We conducted a nationwide study including all patients with new-onset AF between 2011 and 2018 in Finland. Hazard ratios (HR) were calculated using Cox regression analysis with the inverse probability of treatment weighted method to assess the risks of ischaemic stroke (IS), intracranial haemorrhage (ICH) and mortality for users of apixaban (n = 12,426), dabigatran (n = 4545), rivaroxaban (n = 12,950) and warfarin (n = 43,548).

RESULTS

The median TTR for warfarin users was 72%. Compared to the second best TTR quartile (reference), the risk of IS was higher in the two poorest TTR quartiles, and lower in the best TTR quartile and on rivaroxaban [2.35 (95% confidence interval, 1.85-2.85), 1.44 (1.18-1.75), 0.60 (0.47-0.77) and 0.72 (0.56-0.92)]. These differences were non-significant for apixaban and dabigatran. HR of ICH was 6.38 (4.88-8.35) and 1.87 (1.41-2.49) in the two poorest TTR groups, 1.44 (1.02-1.93) on rivaroxaban, and 0.58 (0.40-0.85) in the best TTR group compared to the reference group. Mortality was higher in the two poorest TTR groups and lowest in the best TTR group.

CONCLUSIONS

The outcome was unsatisfactory in the two lowest TTR quartiles - in half of the patients treated with warfarin. The differences between the high TTR groups and standard dose DOACs were absent or modest.

Anticoagulation control among patients on vitamin K antagonists in nine countries in Sub-Saharan Africa

Vitamin K antagonists (VKA) is the primary anticoagulant in most settings of Sub-Saharan Africa. Understanding the quality of anticoagulation services in the continent is vital in optimising the intended benefits. This study assessed the quality of anticoagulation and associated factors among VKA-treated patients in nine SSA countries. We conducted a retrospective cohort study of randomly selected patients on anticoagulation from 20 clinics in Botswana, the Democratic Republic of Congo, Ethiopia, Gambia, Ghana, Mozambique, Nigeria, Tanzania, and South Africa. Eligible participants were those on VKAs for at least three months and with at least four international normalised ratios (INR) results in 2019-2021. We report the proportion of INR values in the therapeutic range, time-in-therapeutic range (TTR) using the Rosendaal method, and the proportion of patients with TTR ≥ 65% (optimal anticoagulation). The mean age was 51.1(16.1) years, and 64.2% were women. The most common indications for VKA included venous thromboembolism (29.6%), prosthetic valves (26.7%) and atrial fibrillation/flutter (30.1%). We analysed 6743 INR tests from 1011 participants, and of these, 48.5% were sub-therapeutic, 34.1% therapeutic, and 17.4% were supratherapeutic relative to disease-specific reference ranges. TTR was calculated for 660 patients using 4927 INR measurements. The median (interquartile range [IQR]) TTR was 35.8(15.9,57.2) %. Optimal anticoagulation control was evident in 19.2% of participants, varying from 2.7% in Tanzania to 23.1% in Ethiopia. The proportion of patients with TTR ≥ 65% was 15,4% for prosthetic heart valves, 21.1% for venous thromboembolism and 23.7% for atrial fibrillation or flutter. Countries with universal health coverage had higher odds of optimal anticoagulation control (adjusted odds ratio (aOR) 1.79, 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.15- 2.81, p = 0.01). Patients on VKAs for different therapeutic indications in SSA had suboptimal TTR. Universal health coverage increased the odds of achieving TTR by 79%. The evidence calls for more intensive warfarin management strategies in SSA, including providing VKA services without out-of-pocket payments.

Efficacy and Safety of Direct Oral Anticoagulants for Stroke Prevention in Older Patients With Atrial Fibrillation: A Network Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

BACKGROUND

Although older patients with atrial fibrillation are at heightened risk of thromboembolic and bleeding events, their optimal treatment choice remains uncertain.

METHODS AND RESULTS

This meta-analysis was conducted according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. We searched the PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane databases for randomized controlled trials that compared thromboembolic or bleeding outcomes between a direct oral anticoagulant (DOAC) and a vitamin K antagonist (VKA) and reported outcomes for patients aged ≥75 years with atrial fibrillation. The efficacy outcome was the composite of stroke and systemic embolism. Safety outcomes included major bleeding, any clinically relevant bleeding, and intracranial hemorrhage. Each DOAC and VKA was compared pairwise in a network meta-analysis. High- and low-dose regimens and factor IIa and Xa inhibitors were also compared. Seven randomized controlled trials were included in the analysis. Stroke and systemic embolism risks did not differ significantly among DOACs. There were no significant differences in major bleeding between each DOAC and VKA. Intracranial hemorrhage risk was significantly lower with dabigatran, apixaban, and edoxaban than with VKA and rivaroxaban, which had similar risks. High-dose regimens led to lower risks of stroke or systemic embolism compared with VKA and low-dose regimens, with both doses having similar bleeding risks.

CONCLUSIONS

In patients aged ≥75 years with atrial fibrillation, DOACs were associated with fewer thromboembolic events compared with VKA, whereas dabigatran, apixaban, and edoxaban were associated with lower risks of intracranial hemorrhage compared with VKA and rivaroxaban.

REGISTRATION

URL: www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/. Unique identifier: CRD42022329557.

Effectiveness and safety of edoxaban versus warfarin in patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation: a systematic review and meta-analysis of observational studies

Background: Atrial fibrillation (AF) is the most prevalent cardiac arrhythmia type. Patients with AF are often administered anticoagulants to reduce the risk of ischemic stroke due to an irregular heartbeat. We evaluated the efficacy and safety of edoxaban versus warfarin in patients with nonvalvular AF by conducting an updated meta-analysis of real-world studies. Methods: In this comprehensive meta-analysis, we searched two databases, PubMed and EMBASE, and included retrospective cohort observational studies that compared edoxaban with warfarin in patients with nonvalvular AF from 1 January 2009, to 30 September 2023. The effectiveness and safety outcomes were ischemic stroke and major bleeding, respectively. In the final analysis, six retrospective observational studies involving 87,236 patients treated with warfarin and 40,933 patients treated with edoxaban were included. To analyze the data, we used a random-effects model to calculate the hazard ratio (HR). Results: Patients treated with edoxaban had a significantly lower risk of ischemic stroke [hazard ratio (HR) = 0.66; 95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.61-0.70; p < 0.0001] and major bleeding (HR = 0.58; 95% CI = 0.49-0.69; p < 0.0001) than those treated with warfarin. The sensitivity analysis results for ischemic stroke and major bleeding were as follows: HR = 0.66; 95% CI = 0.61-0.70; p < 0.0001 and HR = 0.58; 95% CI = 0.49-0.69; p < 0.0001, respectively. Conclusion: Our findings revealed that edoxaban performed better than warfarin against major bleeding and ischemic stroke.

Vitamin-K Antagonists vs. Direct Oral Anticoagulants on Severity of Upper Gastrointestinal Bleeding: A Retrospective Analysis of Italian and UK Data

Background: Gastrointestinal bleeding (GIB) is one of most frequent and significant challenges for emergency physicians and gastroenterologists. Mortality for upper (U) GIB is high, especially in the elderly and comorbid patients. However, there is scant evidence in the literature concerning an assessment of warfarin (VKA) and direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) in terms of upper gastrointestinal bleeding (UGIB) severity. Aims: Using data from two different settings (Italy and the UK), we aimed to compare the impact of VKA and DOACs on the severity of UGIB. Methods: Retrospective bicentric study on adult patients under VKA or DOACs admitted either to the emergency department at the Gemelli Hospital in Rome, Italy or University College Hospital in London, UK, with suspected UGIB from 01/01/2017 to 31/12/2018. Univariate analysis with Fisher’s exact test, and analysis of variance (ANOVA) were used. Results: 106 patients (62 M/44 F; mean age 71.2 ± 16.9 yrs) were enrolled and divided into the VKA group (N = 57; M: 56%, mean age: 64.9 ± 21.3 yrs) and the DOAC group (N = 49; M: 61%; mean age: 77.6 ± 12.5 yrs). At univariate analysis, the VKA group presented two endoscopic diagnoses more frequently than the DOAC group (26% vs. 8%, p < 0.05), were more frequently endoscopically treated (44% vs. 22%, p < 0.05), rescoped (12% vs. 2%, p = 0.048) and hospitalized (79% vs. 53%, p = 0.01) with a longer length of stay, LOS (VKA: 58% > 5 days vs. DOAC: 68% < 5 days, p = 0.01). There was no difference in terms of hemoglobin level on admission, however the requirement of blood transfusions was higher in the VKA group (60% vs. 41%, p = 0.041). One third of the VKA group showed a lower platelet count than the DOAC group (33% vs. 8%, p = 0.01). No statistically significant differences for in-hospital mortality were observed. For the ANOVA, the type of anticoagulant used was the only significant predictor of need to rescope (p = 0.041) and a significant co-predictor for a LOS > 5 days (p = 0.009; as well as cirrhosis, p = 0.013 and age, p = 0.005). Conclusions: Our outcomes revealed a more severe UGIB in patients on VKA, but the impact of comorbidities (i.e., more cirrhotic patients in the VKA group) cannot be disregarded. DOAC subgroup descriptive analysis, even though on a little cohort, showed higher bleeding severity for rivaroxaban.

Drug-related problem characterization and the solved status associated factor analysis in a pharmacist-managed anticoagulation clinic

Drug-related problems (DRPs) in a pharmacist-managed anticoagulation clinic (AC) have not been extensively studied. We aimed to characterize the DRPs in a pharmacist-managed AC, identify the factors associated with the solved status of DRPs, and analyze the secondary outcomes, including the safety and efficacy of AC service. The patients receiving services at a pharmacist-managed AC in a medical center for the first time from March 2019 to August 2020 were reviewed retrospectively. The DRPs were retrieved from a self-developed Intelligent AC Service System and classified according to the Pharmaceutical Care Network Europe Foundation v9.0 classification system. Logistic regression models were performed to identify the potential factors associated with the solved status of DRPs. A total of 78 direct oral anticoagulant (DOAC) and 34 warfarin users were included. The major types of DRPs identified at the initial service were adverse drug events (ADEs) (68.4%) and untreated symptoms or indications (14.8%) in the DOAC group, and ADEs (51.6%) and suboptimal effect of drug treatment (38.7%) in the warfarin group. The rates of totally solved DRPs were 56.8% and 51.6% in the DOAC and warfarin groups, respectively. According to the multivariable analysis, receiving AC services 3 times or more in 180 days (OR 3.11, 95% CI 1.30–7.44) was associated with the totally solved status of DRPs in the DOAC group, but no relevant factor was identified in the warfarin group. The secondary outcomes showed that DOAC users demonstrated fewer thromboembolism events, major bleeding, and bleeding-related hospitalizations after AC services, whereas the warfarin users increased percentage time in therapeutic range (TTR% 55.0% vs. 74.6%, P = 0.006) after AC services. These findings may be utilized to develop DOAC and warfarin AC services.

Ethnic Diversity and Warfarin Pharmacogenomics

Warfarin has remained the most commonly prescribed vitamin K oral anticoagulant worldwide since its approval in 1954. Dosing challenges including having a narrow therapeutic window and a wide interpatient variability in dosing requirements have contributed to making it the most studied drug in terms of genotype-phenotype relationships. However, most of these studies have been conducted in Whites or Asians which means the current pharmacogenomics evidence-base does not reflect ethnic diversity. Due to differences in minor allele frequencies of key genetic variants, studies conducted in Whites/Asians may not be applicable to underrepresented populations such as Blacks, Hispanics/Latinos, American Indians/Alaska Natives and Native Hawaiians/other Pacific Islanders. This may exacerbate health inequalities when Whites/Asians have better anticoagulation profiles due to the existence of validated pharmacogenomic dosing algorithms which fail to perform similarly in the underrepresented populations. To examine the extent to which individual races/ethnicities are represented in the existing body of pharmacogenomic evidence, we review evidence pertaining to published pharmacogenomic dosing algorithms, including clinical utility studies, cost-effectiveness studies and clinical implementation guidelines that have been published in the warfarin field.

Improved Time in Therapeutic Range with International Normalized Ratio Remote Monitoring for Patients with Left Ventricular Assist Devices

Despite advances in therapy, bleeding and thromboembolic events are frequent complications in patients with left ventricular assist device (LVAD) support. Maintaining warfarin in therapeutic range has been shown to be more challenging in this patient population compared to other indications. Patients with LVADs on warfarin typically are within goal international normalized ratio (INR) range 36-57% of the time, compared to about 65% for other indications. The goal of this study was to evaluate if an INR remote monitoring system along with the implementation of a standardized warfarin management protocol improves warfarin time in therapeutic range (TTR) for patients with LVADs. This single-center, retrospective, observational study included 78 patients with LVADs that were followed at our academic center from January 2015 to October 2017. In October 2016, we updated our warfarin management protocol and implemented a remote monitoring system with patients' weekly INR results monitored. The primary objective of the study was to determine the difference between TTRs in remote monitoring versus standard monitoring. We found that the average TTR was significantly higher in the remote monitoring group compared to the standard monitoring cohort (61.1% vs. 40.0%, p < 0.005). However, bleeding, thrombotic incidence, and hospital readmission rates were similar between the two patient cohorts. Remote monitoring improved warfarin TTR significantly in this study and may have the potential to improve anticoagulation-related outcomes in patients with LVADs.

Many Good Reasons to Switch from Vitamin K Antagonists to Non-Vitamin K Antagonists in Patients with Non-Valvular Atrial Fibrillation

Non-vitamin K oral anticoagulants (NOACs) are the first choice for prophylaxis of cardioembolism in patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation (AF) who are anticoagulant-naïve, as well as the preferable anticoagulation strategy in those who are on vitamin K antagonists (VKAs), but with a low time in therapeutic range (TTR). Nonetheless, there are many good reasons to consider switching from VKAs to NOACs also when TTR is >70%. From the pharmacological standpoint, anticoagulation with VKAs may remain erratic even in those patients who have high TTR values, owing to the mode of action of this drug class. Furthermore, experimental data suggest that, unlike VKAs, NOACs favorably modulate the effects of factor Xa and thrombin in the cardiovascular system through the protease-activated receptor family. Clinically, the most striking advantage provided by NOACs over VKAs, irrespective of the TTR, is the substantially lower risk of intracranial hemorrhage. NOACs have also been associated with less deterioration of renal function as compared with VKAs and may confer protection against cardiovascular events not strictly related to AF, especially the acute complications of peripheral artery disease. In this narrative review, we discuss the evidence according to which it is warranted to systematically substitute NOACs for VKAs for the prevention of AF-related stroke and systemic embolism.

Meta-Analysis of Safety and Efficacy of Direct Oral Anticoagulants Versus Warfarin According to Time in Therapeutic Range in Atrial Fibrillation

Among atrial fibrillation (AF) patients, it is unclear whether the efficacy and safety of direct oral anticoagulants (DOAC) relative to warfarin is consistent across various levels of international normalized ratio (INR) control. To determine the efficacy and safety of DOAC agents compared with warfarin for patients with various levels of anticoagulation control as reflected by their time in therapeutic range (TTR), we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of published randomized controlled trials of DOAC versus (vs) warfarin which reported outcomes stratified by TTR. Based on reported center-based TTR (cTTR) ranges, degrees of INR control were categorized into 3 cTTR strata: low (<60%), intermediate (60% to 66%), and high (>66%). Pooled hazard ratios (HR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were determined for stroke or systemic embolism (SSE), major bleeding, and intracranial hemorrhage (ICH). Across all cTTR strata, DOAC-treated patients had lower risk of SSE versus warfarin, with a HR of 0.73 (95% CI 0.61 to 0.88) for the low, 0.76 (95% CI 0.59 to 0.98) intermediate; and 0.78 (95% CI 0.63 to 0.96) high cTTR subgroups. Compared with warfarin, DOAC-treated patients had lower risk of major bleeding in the low and intermediate cTTR strata, and similar risk in the highest cTTR stratum (HR 1.00, 95% CI 0.80 to 1.26). Patients treated with DOAC had lower risk of ICH compared with warfarin (HR 0.55, 95% CI; 0.40 to 0.74) which was observed across all cTTR strata. In conclusion, regardless of the degree of INR control, DOAC agents are preferable over warfarin as stroke prevention therapy for patients with AF.

Thromboembolism in Older Adults

Arterial and venous thromboembolism are both more common in older adults. The use of anticoagulants, the mainstay to prevent thromboembolism, requires consideration of the balance between risk and benefit. Such consideration is even more important in the very elderly in whom the risk of anticoagulant-related bleeding and thrombosis are higher. This review will focus on the challenges of implementing and managing anticoagulant therapy in older patients in an era when the options for anticoagulants include not only vitamin K antagonists (VKAs), but also direct-acting oral anticoagulants (DOACs).

Non-Vitamin K Antagonist Oral Anticoagulants (NOACs) Versus Warfarin in Patients with Atrial Fibrillation and (Morbid) Obesity or Low Body Weight: a Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

PURPOSE

Oral anticoagulants are crucial for preventing systemic thromboembolism in atrial fibrillation (AF), with guidelines preferring non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants (NOACs) over vitamin K antagonists (VKAs) in the general AF population. However, as NOACs are administered in fixed doses, concerns of unintentional underdosing in morbidly obese patients and unintentional overdosing in underweight patients have emerged. Therefore, a critical appraisal of the benefit-risk profile of NOACs in AF patients across the body weight spectrum is needed.

METHODS AND RESULTS

After searching Medline, this systematic review discusses the impact of body weight on the risk-benefit profile of NOACs versus VKAs. The meta-analysis demonstrated that NOAC use in obese and class III obese AF patients (body mass index (BMI) ≥ 30 and ≥ 40 kg/m², respectively) was associated with significantly lower stroke/systemic embolism (stroke/SE) risks (RR 0.82, 95%CI [0.71-0.96] and RR 0.75, 95%CI [0.64-0.87], respectively), similar to lower major bleeding risks (RR 0.83, 95%CI [0.69-1.00] and RR 0.74, 95%CI [0.57-0.95], respectively) and similar mortality risks (RR 0.92, 95%CI [0.73-1.15] and RR 1.17, 95%CI [0.83-1.64], respectively) compared to VKAs. In AF patients ≤ 60 kg, significantly lower stroke/SE (RR 0.63, 95%CI [0.56-0.71]) and major bleeding risks (RR 0.71, 95%CI [0.62-0.80]), but similar mortality risks (RR 0.68, 95%CI [0.42-1.10]), were observed for NOAC- versus VKA-treated patients.

CONCLUSION

The benefit-risk profile of NOACs seems preserved in (morbidly) obese AF patients and patients with low body weight. However, more data are needed on underweight AF patients (BMI < 18.5 kg/m²) and on differences between NOACs in these patients.

Influence of renal insufficiency on anticoagulant effects and safety of warfarin in Chinese patients: analysis from a randomized controlled trial

This study aimed to analyze the influence of renal insufficiency on the anticoagulant effects and safety of warfarin in Chinese patients. Data on the creatinine levels of participants enrolled in a randomized controlled study were screened and divided into the non-renal insufficiency group, mild renal insufficiency group, and moderate renal insufficiency group, according to the creatinine clearance rate. The primary outcome measures were stable dose and average daily dose of warfarin. Secondary outcome measures were percentage of time in the therapeutic international normalized ratio (INR) (%TTR), and the first time to reach the therapeutic INR. Adverse events included bleeding events, thromboembolic events, and mortality. All participants with renal function test results and a baseline INR of less than 1.5 were included in the primary and secondary outcome analysis. The SPSS Statistics 21.0 software was used for statistical analysis. The randomized controlled trial was registered in Clinicaltrials.gov (NCT02211326). A total of 571 patients were included in this analysis. Multiple regression analysis showed that the renal function was correlated with stable dose, average daily dose, and the first time to reach therapeutic INR after adjusting for confounding factors. However, no correlation was noted between kidney function and %TTR. No significant differences were observed across the various safety parameters among the three groups. Renal function is an important consideration in patients using warfarin.

Use of oral anticoagulants after ischaemic stroke in patients with atrial fibrillation and cancer

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

The use of oral anticoagulants (OACs) amongst patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) has increased in the last decade. We aimed to describe temporal trends in the utilization of OACs for secondary prevention after ischaemic stroke amongst patients with AF and active cancer.

METHODS

This is a cross-sectional and cohort study of patients with active cancer (n = 1518) and without cancer (n = 50 953) in the Swedish national register Riksstroke, including all patients with ischaemic stroke between 1 July 2005 and 30 December 2017, discharged with AF. Prescription and dispensation before and after the introduction of nonvitamin K OACs (NOACs) in late 2011 were compared. We used logistic and Cox regression to analyse associations with OAC use, adjusting for hospital clustering and the competing risk of death.

RESULTS

The proportion of cancer patients with AF prescribed OACs at discharge after ischaemic stroke increased by 40.2% after 2011, compared with 69.3% in noncancer patients during the same period. Stroke and bleeding risk scores remained similar between patients with and without cancer. OAC dispensation during the following year did not increase as much in cancer patients (43.8% to 64.5%) as that in noncancer patients (46.0% to 74.9%), and the median time to OAC dispensation or censoring was significantly longer in cancer patients (94 vs. 30 days).

CONCLUSION

OAC treatment in poststroke patients with AF and active cancer has increased after the introduction of NOACs. However, the growing treatment gap in these patients compared to that in noncancer patients raises the possibility of underutilization.

Effectiveness and Safety of Oral Anticoagulants in Older Patients With Atrial Fibrillation: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Background and Objective

Atrial fibrillation (AF), the most common cardiac arrhythmia, typically increases with age. Oral anticoagulants (OACs) are the cornerstone of treatment to reduce the associated risk for systemic thromboembolism. Four large randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have shown that non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants (NOACs) are non-inferior to vitamin K antagonists (VKAs) in preventing stroke and systemic embolism, as well as regarding their risk for major bleeding. However, as vulnerable geriatric patients with AF were largely underrepresented in these trials, physicians are faced with the challenge of choosing the right anticoagulant for geriatric patients in real-life clinical practice. In this vulnerable patient group, NOACs tend to be underused or underdosed due to concerns of excessive fall-related intracranial bleeding, cognitive impairment, multiple drug-drug interactions, low body weight or impaired renal function. As life expectancy continues to rise worldwide, the number of geriatric patients substantially increases. Therefore, there is an urgent need for a critical appraisal of the added value of NOACs in geriatric patients with AF at high thromboembolic and bleeding risk.

Methods and Results

This systematic review provides an overview of the literature on the impact of increased age (≥75 years), multimorbidity, polypharmacy, increased falling risk, frailty and dementia on the effectiveness and safety of NOACs as compared to VKAs, after searching the Medline database. Moreover, a meta-analysis on the impact of increased age ≥75 years old was performed after pooling results from 6 post hoc analyses of RCTs and 6 longitudinal observational cohort studies, highlighting the superior effectiveness (hazard ratio (HR) 0.83, 95% confidence interval (CI) [0.74–0.94] for stroke/SE; HR 0.77, 95%CI [0.65–0.92] for mortality) and non-inferior safety (HR 0.93, 95%CI [0.86–1.01] for major bleeding; HR 0.58, 95%CI [0.50–0.67] for intracranial bleeding; HR 1.17, 95%CI [0.99–1.38] for gastrointestinal bleeding) of NOACs versus VKAs in older AF patients.

Conclusion

Across geriatric subgroups, apixaban was consistently associated with the most favourable benefit-risk profile and should therefore be preferred in geriatric patients with AF. However, research gaps on the impact of increased falling risk, frailty and baseline dementia were identified, requiring careful consideration while awaiting more results.

A Review on the Use of Reversal Agents of Direct Oral Anticogulant Drugs in Case of Gastrointestinal Bleeding

BACKGROUND

Major bleeding is a life-threatening condition and a medical emergency with high mortality risk. It is often the complication of anticoagulant's intake. Anticoagulants are commonly used for the prevention and treatment of thrombotic events. The standard therapy with vitamin K antagonist (warfarin) has been frequently replaced by direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs). The latter agents (rivaroxaban, apixaban, edoxaban, dabigatran, and betrixaban) showed better efficacy and safety compared to standard warfarin treatment and they are recommended for the reduction of ischemic stroke. Literature data reported a high risk of gastrointestinal bleeding with DOACs, in particular with dabigatran and rivaroxaban. In case of life-threatening gastrointestinal bleeding, these patients could benefit from the use of reversal agents.

METHODS

We performed an electronic search on PUBMED of the literature concerning reversal agents for DOACs and gastrointestinal bleeding in the Emergency Department from 2004 to 2020.

AIM

This review summarizes the current evidence about three reversal agents idarucizumab, andexanet alfa and ciraparantag, and the use of the first two in the emergency setting in patients with active major bleeding or who need urgent surgery which physicians indicate for a better management approach in order to increase patient's safety.

CONCLUSION

Although these agents have been marketed for five years (idarucizumab) and two years (andexanet alfa) respectively, and despite guidelines considering antidotes as first-line agents in treating life-threatening hemorrhage when available, these antidotes seem to gain access very slowly in the clinical practice. Cost, logistical aspects and need for plasma level determination of DOAC for an accurate therapeutic use probably have an impact on this phenomenon.. An expert multidisciplinary bleeding team should be established so as to implement international guidelines based on local resources and organization.

Effectiveness and Safety of Off-label Dosing of Non-vitamin K Antagonist Anticoagulant for Atrial Fibrillation in Asian Patients

Non–vitamin K antagonist anticoagulants (NOACs) have been used to prevent thromboembolism in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) and shown favorable clinical outcomes compared with warfarin. However, off-label use of NOACs is frequent in practice, and its clinical results are inconsistent. Furthermore, the quality of anticoagulation available with warfarin is often suboptimal and even inaccurate in real-world data. We have therefore compared the effectiveness and safety of off-label use of NOACs with those of warfarin whose anticoagulant intensity was accurately estimated. We retrospectively analyzed data from 2,659 and 3,733 AF patients at a tertiary referral center who were prescribed warfarin and NOACs, respectively, between 2013 and 2018. NOACs were used at off-label doses in 27% of the NOAC patients. After adjusting for significant covariates, underdosed NOAC (off-label use of the reduced dose) was associated with a 2.5-times increased risk of thromboembolism compared with warfarin, and overdosed NOAC (off-label use of the standard dose) showed no significant difference in either thromboembolism or major bleeding compared with warfarin. Well-controlled warfarin (TTR ≥ 60%) reduced both thromboembolism and bleeding events. In conclusion, the effectiveness of NOACs was decreased by off-label use of the reduced dose.

International normalized ratio control and subsequent clinical outcomes in patients with atrial fibrillation using warfarin

We explored associations between INR measures and clinical outcomes in patients with AF using warfarin, and whether INR history predicted future INR measurements. We included patients in ARISTOTLE who were randomized to and received warfarin. Among patients who had events, we included those with ≥ 3 INR values in the 180 days prior to the event, with the most recent ≤ 60 days prior to the event, who were on warfarin at the time of event (n = 545). Non-event patients were included in the control group if they had ≥ 180 days of warfarin exposure with ≥ 3 INR measurements (n = 7259). The median (25th, 75th) number of INR values per patient was 29 (21, 38) over a median follow-up of 1.8 years. A total of 87% had at least one INR value < 1.5; 49% had at least one value > 4.0. The last INRs before events (median 14 [24, 7] days) were < 3.0 for at least 75% of patients with major bleeding and > 2.0 for half of patients with ischemic stroke. Historic time in therapeutic range (TTR) was weakly associated with future TTR (R² = 0.212). Historic TTR ≥ 80% had limited predictive ability to discriminate future TTR ≥ 80% (C index 0.61). In patients with AF receiving warfarin, most bleeding events may not have been preventable despite careful INR control. Our findings suggest that INRs collected through routine management are not sufficiently predictive to provide reassurance about future time in therapeutic range or to prevent subsequent outcomes, and might be over-interpreted in clinical practice.

Outcomes Among Patients With Atrial Fibrillation and Appropriate Anticoagulation Control

BACKGROUND

Atrial fibrillation (AF) patients on a vitamin K antagonist (VKA) with time in therapeutic range (TTR) ≥70% are not recommended to switch to a direct oral anticoagulant according to guidelines.

OBJECTIVES

This study sought to assess future TTR and risk of stroke/thromboembolism and major bleeding among AF patients on VKA with TTR ≥70%.

METHODS

The authors used Danish nationwide registries to identify AF patients on VKA from 1997 to 2011 with available international normalized ratio values. Patients were included 6 months after VKA initiation, divided according to TTR, and followed for 12 months after inclusion. Cox proportional hazard models estimated hazard ratios (HRs). TTR was examined both as a baseline variable and as a time-dependent covariate in the Cox models.

RESULTS

Of the 4,772 included AF patients still on VKA 6 months after initiation, 1,691 (35.4%) had a TTR ≥70%, and 3,081 (65.6%) had a TTR <70%. Among patients with prior TTR ≥70% still on treatment 12 months after inclusion, only 513 (55.7%) still had a TTR ≥70%. Compared with prior TTR ≥70%, prior TTR <70% was not associated with a higher risk of stroke/thromboembolism (HR: 1.14; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.77 to 1.70) or major bleeding (HR: 1.12; 95% CI: 0.84 to 1.49). When the authors estimated TTR time-dependently during follow-up, TTR <70% was associated with an increased risk of stroke/thromboembolism (HR: 1.91; 95% CI: 1.30 to 2.82) and major bleeding (HR: 1.34; 95% CI: 1.02 to 1.76).

CONCLUSIONS

Among AF patients on VKA, almost one-half of patients with prior TTR ≥70% had TTR <70% during the following year. Prior TTR ≥70% per se had limited long-term prognostic value.

Comparative effectiveness of warfarin, dabigatran, rivaroxaban and apixaban in non-valvular atrial fibrillation: A nationwide pharmacoepidemiological study

OBJECTIVE

To compare effectiveness and safety of warfarin and the direct oral anticoagulants (DOAC) dabigatran, rivaroxaban and apixaban in non-valvular atrial fibrillation in routine care.

METHODS

From nationwide registries, we identified treatment-naïve patients initiating warfarin, dabigatran, rivaroxaban or apixaban for non-valvular atrial fibrillation from July 2013 to December 2015 in Norway. We assessed prescription duration using reverse waiting time distribution. Adjusting for confounding in a Cox proportional hazards model, we estimated one-year risks for ischemic stroke, transient ischemic attack (TIA) or systemic embolism, major or clinically relevant non-major bleeding; intracranial; gastrointestinal; and other bleeding. We censored at switch of treatment or 365 days of follow-up.

RESULTS

We included 30,820 treatment-naïve patients. Compared to warfarin, the adjusted hazard ratios (HR) for ischemic stroke, TIA or systemic embolism were 0.96 (95% CI 0.71-1.28) for dabigatran, 1.12 (95% CI 0.87-1.45) for rivaroxaban and 0.97 (95% CI 0.75-1.26) for apixaban. Corresponding hazard ratios for major or clinically relevant non-major bleeding were 0.73 (95% CI 0.62-0.86) for dabigatran, 0.97 (95% CI 0.84-1.12) for rivaroxaban and 0.71 (95% CI 0.62-0.82) for apixaban. Statistically significant differences of other safety outcomes compared to warfarin were fewer intracranial bleedings with dabigatran (HR 0.28, 95% CI 0.14-0.56), rivaroxaban (HR 0.40, 95% CI 0.23-0.69) and apixaban (HR 0.56, 95% CI 0.34-0.92); fewer gastrointestinal bleedings with apixaban (HR 0.70, 95% CI 0.52-0.93); and fewer other bleedings with dabigatran (HR 0.67, 95% CI 0.55-0.81) and apixaban (HR 0.70, 95% CI 0.59-0.83).

CONCLUSION

After 1 year follow-up in treatment-naïve patients initiating oral anticoagulation for non-valvular atrial fibrillation, all DOACs were similarly effective as warfarin in prevention of ischemic stroke, TIA or systemic embolism. Safety from bleedings was similar or better, including fewer intracranial bleedings with all direct oral anticoagulants, fewer gastrointestinal bleedings with apixaban and fewer other bleedings with dabigatran and apixaban.

An easy-to-use tool to flag patients at risk of poor INR control: A streak of subtherapeutic INRs

INTRODUCTION

Vitamin K antagonist therapy is safest and most effective with a high time within the therapeutic range (TTR). The TTR is difficult to calculate in the consultation room, therefore physicians need an easier-to-use tool to predict poor VKA control. We explored the prognostic value of subtherapeutic INRs on future TTR in two settings: MATERIALS AND METHODS: Retrospective cohort of 17,711 patients from a dedicated thrombosis service, using acenocoumarol (target range 2.0-3.0), with a "streak" defined as four consecutive INRs <2.0.

RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS

Clinical review setting: The occurrence of any streak in the last 180 days or 1 year increased the odds of a TTR <45%: ORs 2.84 (95% CI 2.41-3.34) and 3.25 (95% CI 2.72-3.87), respectively. Day-to-day INR management setting: A current streak increases the odds of poor TTR over the next 90 days 3.58 (95% CI 2.64-4.87) fold. We conclude that a streak of four consecutive subtherapeutic INRs can aid physicians in flagging at-risk patients.

NOACs only for those who cannot tolerate a VKA: where is the evidence?

The 2016 European Society of Cardiology Guidelines recommend non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants (NOACs) in preference to vitamin K antagonists (VKA) for stroke prevention in atrial fibrillation. A recent report from the Belgian Healthcare Knowledge Centre (KCE) raised concerns about the results of the phase 3 randomised trials that led to the approval of the NOACs for this indication and concluded that NOACs should only be used for patients who fail or cannot undergo treatment with a vitamin K antagonist because they cannot achieve stable INR values. Evidence from community-based studies suggests that NOACs are often not optimally used; however, our critical review of the randomised trial data provides no support for the concerns raised by the Belgian KCE about the trials. Furthermore, the results of observational studies involving more than 700,000 participants replicate those of the randomised trials, indicating that the benefits of NOACs seen in the trials can be readily translated to patient care. Due to their superior convenience and safety, NOACs also have the potential to reduce undertreatment of atrial fibrillation patients.

Anticoagulant plus antiplatelet therapy for atrial fibrillation : Cost-utility of combination therapy with non-vitamin K oral anticoagulants vs. warfarin

BACKGROUND

Emerging evidence indicates combination therapy with anticoagulants and antiplatelet agents for atrial fibrillation (AF) will be increasingly required. Numerous studies compare the efficacy and cost-effectiveness of anticoagulation alone in AF, i. e., non-vitamin K oral anticoagulants (NOACs) vs. warfarin. However, the addition of antiplatelet agents with their potential for decreasing thromboembolic stroke counter-balanced by an increased bleeding risk has received less attention. Thus, we evaluated the cost-utility of this combination therapy.

METHOD AND RESULTS

We obtained event estimates from our recent meta-analysis of four randomized clinical trials designed to compare NOACs with warfarin in patients with AF. We examined patient subgroups within each trial that received antiplatelet therapy in addition to anticoagulation. Utilities were derived from the literature and cost estimates from the German health-care system. A decision tree was constructed and populated with these parameters. We used a 1-year time horizon because combination therapy is not recommended beyond this time. We calculated the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY). The derived ICER was 13,168.50 € per QALY. NOAC prices exerted considerable influence on the calculation. Nevertheless, there is potential for ICER shifts in favor of warfarin, e.g., if warfarin-mediated anticoagulation control is improved and thereby adverse events decrease. Conversely, if NOAC adherence decreases, adverse events could increase.

CONCLUSION

The derived ICER was 13,168.50 € per QALY, consistent with NOACs being cost-effective vs. warfarin when anticoagulation is used with antiplatelet agents. Nevertheless, country-, practice-, and patient-related factors influence the ICER. Our cost-utility calculation should be used a starting point for decision-making.

Quality of Chronic Anticoagulation Control in Patients with Intracranial Haemorrhage due to Vitamin K Antagonists

Introduction

Patients treated with vitamin K antagonists (VKA) are at increased risk of intracranial haemorrhage (ICH). The purpose of our study was to determine the quality of previous anticoagulation control in patients with VKA-associated ICH.

Materials and Methods

We prospectively assessed every consecutive patient admitted to our stroke unit with VKA-associated ICH between 2013 and 2016. Demographic, clinical, and radiological variables, as well as consecutive international normalized ratios (INR) during 7 previous months, were extracted. Time in therapeutic range (TTR), time over range (TOR), time below range (TBR), and percentage of INR within range (PINRR) were calculated.

Results and Discussion

The study population comprised 53 patients. Mean age was 79 years; 42% were women. Forty-eight patients had atrial fibrillation (AF) and 5 mechanical prosthetic valves. Therapeutic or infratherapeutic INR on arrival was detected in 64.4% of patients (95% CI 2.7 to 3.2). TTR was 67.8% (95% CI: 60.2 to 75.6 %) and PINRR was 75% (95% CI: 49.9-100). TOR was 17.2% (95% CI: 10.4 to 23.9% ) and TBR was 17% (95% CI: 10.6 to 23.9%).

Conclusion

VKA-associated ICH happens usually in the context of good chronic anticoagulation control. Newer risk assessment methods are required.

Fitting the right non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulant to the right patient with non-valvular atrial fibrillation: an evidence-based choice

Atrial fibrillation (AF) is the most prevalent arrhythmia and is associated with an increased risk of ischemic stroke (IS) and systemic embolism (SE). Stroke prevention is a key element for the overall management of AF patients. The non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants (NOACs), such as dabigatran, rivaroxaban, apixaban and edoxaban, are at least as effective as warfarin in reducing IS/SE with a lower rate of major bleeding. Various analyses from the large Phase III randomized trials demonstrated different efficacy and safety of NOACs in specific subgroups of patients. The randomized trials are supplemented by effectiveness and safety data from real-world observational cohorts following the availability of these drugs for use in everyday clinical practice. Given the clinical heterogeneity of AF patients, the available data from trials and real-world studies allow us to fit the right NOAC to the particular patient's characteristics, with the aim of optimizing outcomes for the individual patient. This review article aims to provide a summary of the evidence on the performance of NOACs in AF patients with specific clinical characteristics. Evidence-based suggestions are presented to provide a simple and viable strategy for clinicians for the choice of a particular NOAC. KEY MESSAGE Given the different performance of the new-oral anticoagulants in patients with the different clinical situation, evidence-based choice of fitting the right new-oral anticoagulants to the patients is provided in this review article.

Real-world effectiveness and safety of oral anticoagulation strategies in atrial fibrillation: a cohort study based on a German claims dataset

Objective

To compare the real-world effectiveness and safety of non-vitamin-K-antagonist oral anticoagulant (NOAC) treatment in atrial fibrillation (AF) patients with a vitamin-K-antagonist (VKA)-based treatment.

Methods

This was a retrospective analysis of an anonymized claims dataset from 3 German health insurance funds covering the period from January 01, 2010 to June 30, 2014, with a minimum observation time of 12 months. All continuously insured patients with at least 2 outpatient AF diagnoses and/or 1 inpatient respective diagnosis who received at least 1 outpatient prescription of a NOAC or VKA were included.

Outcomes and measures

Death, ischemic strokes (IS), non-specified strokes, transient ischemic attacks (TIAs), myocardial infarctions (MIs), arterial embolism (AE), hemorrhagic strokes, severe bleedings, and composite outcomes. Main comparisons were done based on propensity score-matched (PSM) cohorts. Results were reported as incidence rate ratios and hazard ratios (HRs).

Results

We assigned 37,439 AF patients to each PSM cohort (NOAC cohort: mean age 78.2 years, mean CHA₂DS₂VASc score 2.96, mean follow-up 348.5 days; VKA cohort: mean age 78.2 years, mean CHA₂DS₂VASc 2.95, mean follow-up 365.5 days). NOAC exposure was associated with significantly higher incidence rate ratios; 95% CI/HRs; 95% CI for the following outcomes: death (1.22; 1.17–1.28/1.22; 1.17–1.28), IS (1.90; 1.69–2.15/1.92; 1.69–2.19), non-specified strokes (2.04; 1.16–3.70/1.93; 1.13–3.32), TIAs (1.52; 1.29–1.79/1.44; 1.21–1.70), MIs (1.26; 1.10–1.15/1.31; 1.13–1.52), AE (1.75; 1.32–2.32/1.81; 1.36–2.34) and severe bleeding (1.92; 1.71–2.15/1.95; 1.74–2.20). Multivariable Cox regression analyses and additional sensitivity analysis, including analysis of PSM-matched NOAC/VKA treatment-naive patients, only confirmed the above results. The study was documented under clinicaltrials.gov (NCT02657616).

Conclusion and relevance

A VKA therapy seems to be more effective and safer than a NOAC therapy in a real-world cohort of German AF patients.

Rivaroxaban versus nadroparin for preventing deep venous thrombosis after total hip arthroplasty following femoral neck fractures: A retrospective comparative study

Objective This study was performed to evaluate the efficacy of rivaroxaban versus nadroparin for preventing deep venous thrombosis (DVT) in elderly patients with osteoporosis undergoing initial total hip arthroplasty (THA) for femoral neck fractures. Methods Prospectively maintained databases were reviewed to retrospectively compare elderly patients with osteoporosis who underwent initial THA for femoral neck fractures from 2007 to 2015. The patients received peroral rivaroxaban at 10 mg/day for 2 weeks or subcutaneous injections of nadroparin at 0.3 mL/day for 2 weeks until the primary analysis cut-off date. The time to first on-study DVT was the primary endpoint. Results In total, 399 patients were included (rivaroxaban group: n=200; mean age, 70.20 ± 9.16 years and nadroparin group: n = 199; mean age, 69.90 ± 8.87 years), with a mean 3-year follow-up. The time to first on-study DVT was significantly longer in the rivaroxaban than nadroparin group (12 and 5 days, respectively). The incidence of DVT within the 2-week follow-up was significantly higher in the nadroparin than rivaroxaban group (6.8% and 19.7%, respectively), but this difference was no longer present at the final follow-up. Conclusion Rivaroxaban was associated with a significant reduction in the occurrence of first on-study DVT compared with nadroparin.

Warfarin Management and Outcomes in Patients with Nonvalvular Atrial Fibrillation Within an Integrated Health Care System

BACKGROUND

Warfarin is a common treatment option to manage patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF) in clinical practice. Understanding current pharmacist-led anticoagulation clinic management patterns and associated outcomes is important for quality improvement; however, currently little evidence associating outcomes with management patterns exists.

OBJECTIVES

To (a) describe warfarin management patterns and (b) evaluate associations between warfarin treatment and clinical outcomes for patients with NVAF in an integrated health care system.

METHODS

A retrospective cohort study was conducted among NVAF patients with warfarin therapy between January 1, 2006, and December 31, 2011, using Kaiser Permanente Southern California data, and followed until December 31, 2013. Management patterns related to international normalized ratio (INR) monitoring, anticoagulation clinic pharmacist intervention (consultation), and warfarin dose adjustments were investigated along with yearly attrition rates, time-in-therapeutic ranges (TTRs), and clinical outcomes (stroke or systemic embolism and major bleeding). Descriptive statistics and multivariable Cox proportional hazard models were used to determine associations between TTR and clinical outcomes.

RESULTS

A total of 32,074 NVAF patients on warfarin treatment were identified and followed for a median of 3.8 years. About half (49%) of the patients were newly initiating warfarin therapy. INR monitoring and pharmacist interventions were conducted roughly every 3 weeks after 6 months of warfarin treatment. Sixty-three percent of the study population had ≥ 1 warfarin dose adjustments with a mean (SD) of 6.7 (6.3) annual dose adjustments. Warfarin dose adjustments occurred at a median of 1 day (interquartile ranges [IQR] 1-3) after the INR measurement. Yearly attrition rate was from 3.3% to 6.3% during the follow-up, and median (IQR) TTR was 61% (46%-73%). Patients who received frequent INR monitoring (≥ 27 times per year), pharmacist interventions (≥ 24 times per year), or frequently adjusted warfarin dose (≥ 11 times per year) consistently showed poor TTRs (mean TTR for the highest quartiles was 45.3%-48.3%). A higher TTR was associated with a lower risk of clinical outcomes regardless of frequency of INR monitoring, pharmacist interventions, or number of dose adjustments. Patients whose TTRs were < 65%, even with frequent pharmacist interventions, had similar stroke or systemic embolism event rates, as compared with patients with TTRs < 65% and less frequent interventions (1.88 vs. 1.54 stroke or systemic embolism rates per 100 person-years, respectively, P = 0.78). The lowest TTR quartile (< 46%) was associated with a 3 times higher risk of stroke or systemic embolism (hazard ratio [HR] = 3.19, 95% CI = 2.71-3.77) and a 2 times higher risk of major bleeding (HR = 2.10, 95% CI = 1.96-2.24) compared with the highest TTR quartile (≥ 73%).

CONCLUSIONS

Despite close monitoring with timely warfarin dose adjustments, there were still a substantial number of challenging patients whose TTRs were suboptimal despite a higher number of pharmacist interventions. These patients eventually experienced more stroke or systemic embolism and bleeding events among NVAF patients managed by anticoagulation clinics. New individualized treatment or management strategies for patients who are not able to reach optimal therapeutic ranges are necessary to improve outcomes.

DISCLOSURES

This research and manuscript were funded by Bristol-Myers Squibb Company and Pfizer. Authors from Bristol-Myers Squibb Company and Pfizer participated in the design of the study, interpretation of the data, review/revision of the manuscript, and approval of the final version of the manuscript. An received a grant for research support from Bristol-Myers Squibb/Pfizer. Niu, Rashid, and Zheng received a grant from Bristol-Myers Squibb/Pfizer to their institutions for salary reimbursement. Vo, Singh, and Aranda are employed by Bristol-Myers Squibb; Bruno was employed by Bristol-Myers Squibb at the time of this study. Mendes and Dills are employed by Pfizer, and Mendes was a member of the Pfizer Cardiovascular and Metabolic Field Medical Team during the time of this study. Lang, Jazdzewski, and Le have no known conflicts of interest to report. Study concept and design were contributed primarily by An and Rashid, along with the other authors. Niu took the lead in data collection, along with Zheng, and data interpretation was performed by An, along with Mendes and Dills, with assistance from the other authors. The manuscript was written by An and revised by Mendes, Dills, Vo, Singh, Bruno, and Aranda, along with Lang, Le, and Jazdezewski. Part of this study's findings was presented at the CHEST 2015 Annual Meeting in Montreal, Canada, on October 28, 2015.

Improved risk stratification of patients with atrial fibrillation: an integrated GARFIELD-AF tool for the prediction of mortality, stroke and bleed in patients with and without anticoagulation

OBJECTIVES

To provide an accurate, web-based tool for stratifying patients with atrial fibrillation to facilitate decisions on the potential benefits/risks of anticoagulation, based on mortality, stroke and bleeding risks.

DESIGN

The new tool was developed, using stepwise regression, for all and then applied to lower risk patients. C-statistics were compared with CHA₂DS₂-VASc using 30-fold cross-validation to control for overfitting. External validation was undertaken in an independent dataset, Outcome Registry for Better Informed Treatment of Atrial Fibrillation (ORBIT-AF).

PARTICIPANTS

Data from 39 898 patients enrolled in the prospective GARFIELD-AF registry provided the basis for deriving and validating an integrated risk tool to predict stroke risk, mortality and bleeding risk.

RESULTS

The discriminatory value of the GARFIELD-AF risk model was superior to CHA₂DS₂-VASc for patients with or without anticoagulation. C-statistics (95% CI) for all-cause mortality, ischaemic stroke/systemic embolism and haemorrhagic stroke/major bleeding (treated patients) were: 0.77 (0.76 to 0.78), 0.69 (0.67 to 0.71) and 0.66 (0.62 to 0.69), respectively, for the GARFIELD-AF risk models, and 0.66 (0.64-0.67), 0.64 (0.61-0.66) and 0.64 (0.61-0.68), respectively, for CHA₂DS₂-VASc (or HAS-BLED for bleeding). In very low to low risk patients (CHA₂DS₂-VASc 0 or 1 (men) and 1 or 2 (women)), the CHA₂DS₂-VASc and HAS-BLED (for bleeding) scores offered weak discriminatory value for mortality, stroke/systemic embolism and major bleeding. C-statistics for the GARFIELD-AF risk tool were 0.69 (0.64 to 0.75), 0.65 (0.56 to 0.73) and 0.60 (0.47 to 0.73) for each end point, respectively, versus 0.50 (0.45 to 0.55), 0.59 (0.50 to 0.67) and 0.55 (0.53 to 0.56) for CHA₂DS₂-VASc (or HAS-BLED for bleeding). Upon validation in the ORBIT-AF population, C-statistics showed that the GARFIELD-AF risk tool was effective for predicting 1-year all-cause mortality using the full and simplified model for all-cause mortality: C-statistics 0.75 (0.73 to 0.77) and 0.75 (0.73 to 0.77), respectively, and for predicting for any stroke or systemic embolism over 1 year, C-statistics 0.68 (0.62 to 0.74).

CONCLUSIONS

Performance of the GARFIELD-AF risk tool was superior to CHA₂DS₂-VASc in predicting stroke and mortality and superior to HAS-BLED for bleeding, overall and in lower risk patients. The GARFIELD-AF tool has the potential for incorporation in routine electronic systems, and for the first time, permits simultaneous evaluation of ischaemic stroke, mortality and bleeding risks.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier for GARFIELD-AF (NCT01090362) and for ORBIT-AF (NCT01165710).

The importance of mean time in therapeutic range for complication rates in warfarin therapy of patients with atrial fibrillation: A systematic review and meta-regression analysis

Background

\Anticoagulation is used for stroke prophylaxis in non-valvular atrial fibrillation, amongst other by use of the vitamin K antagonist, warfarin. Quality in warfarin therapy is often summarized by the time patients spend within the therapeutic range (percent time in therapeutic range, TTR). The correlation between TTR and the occurrence of complications during warfarin therapy has been established, but the influence of patient characteristics in that respect remains undetermined. The objective of the present papers was to examine the association between mean TTR and complication rates with adjustment for differences in relevant patient cohort characteristics.

Methods

A systematic literature search was conducted in MEDLINE and Embase (2005–2015) to identify eligible studies reporting on use of warfarin therapy by patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation and the occurrence of hemorrhage and thromboembolism. Both randomized controlled trials and observational cohort studies were included. The association between the reported mean TTR and major bleeding and stroke/systemic embolism was analyzed by random-effects meta-regression with and without adjustment for relevant clinical cohort characteristics. In the adjusted meta-regressions, the impact of mean TTR on the occurrence of hemorrhage was adjusted for the mean age and the proportion of populations with prior stroke or transient ischemic attack. In the adjusted analyses on thromboembolism, the proportion of females was, furthermore, included.

Results

Of 2169 papers, 35 papers met pre-specified inclusion criteria, holding relevant information on 31 patient cohorts. In univariable meta-regression, increasing mean TTR was significantly associated with a decreased rate of both major bleeding and stroke/systemic embolism. However, after adjustment mean TTR was no longer significantly associated with stroke/systemic embolism. The proportion of residual variance composed by between-study heterogeneity was substantial for all analyses.

Conclusions

Although higher mean TTR in warfarin therapy was associated with lower complication rates in atrial fibrillation, the strength of the association was decreased when adjusting for differences in relevant clinical characteristics of the patient cohorts. This study suggests that mainly the safety of warfarin therapy increases with higher mean TTR, whereas effectiveness appears not to be substantially improved.

Due to the limitations immanent in the meta-regression methods, the results of the present study should be interpreted with caution. Further research on the association between the quality of warfarin therapy and risk of complications is warranted with adjustment for clinically relevant characteristics.

Direct oral anticoagulants versus warfarin for preventing stroke and systemic embolic events among atrial fibrillation patients with chronic kidney disease

BACKGROUND

Chronic kidney disease (CKD) is an independent risk factor for atrial fibrillation (AF), which is more prevalent among CKD patients than the general population. AF causes stroke or systemic embolism, leading to increased mortality. The conventional antithrombotic prophylaxis agent warfarin is often prescribed for the prevention of stroke, but risk of bleeding necessitates regular therapeutic monitoring. Recently developed direct oral anticoagulants (DOAC) are expected to be useful as alternatives to warfarin.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the efficacy and safety of DOAC including apixaban, dabigatran, edoxaban, and rivaroxaban versus warfarin among AF patients with CKD.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Kidney and Transplant Specialised Register (up to 1 August 2017) through contact with the Information Specialist using search terms relevant to this review. Studies in the Specialised Register are identified through searches of CENTRAL, MEDLINE, and EMBASE, conference proceedings, the International Clinical Trials Register (ICTRP) Search Portal, and ClinicalTrials.gov.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included all randomised controlled trials (RCTs) which directly compared the efficacy and safety of direct oral anticoagulants (direct thrombin inhibitors or factor Xa inhibitors) with dose-adjusted warfarin for preventing stroke and systemic embolic events in non-valvular AF patients with CKD, defined as creatinine clearance (CrCl) or eGFR between 15 and 60 mL/min (CKD stage G3 and G4).

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently selected studies, assessed quality, and extracted data. We calculated the risk ratio (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CI) for the association between anticoagulant therapy and all strokes and systemic embolic events as the primary efficacy outcome and major bleeding events as the primary safety outcome. Confidence in the evidence was assessing using GRADE.

MAIN RESULTS

Our review included 12,545 AF participants with CKD from five studies. All participants were randomised to either DOAC (apixaban, dabigatran, edoxaban, and rivaroxaban) or dose-adjusted warfarin. Four studies used a central, interactive, automated response system for allocation concealment while the other did not specify concealment methods. Four studies were blinded while the other was partially open-label. However, given that all studies involved blinded evaluation of outcome events, we considered the risk of bias to be low. We were unable to create funnel plots due to the small number of studies, thwarting assessment of publication bias. Study duration ranged from 1.8 to 2.8 years. The large majority of participants included in this study were CKD stage G3 (12,155), and a small number were stage G4 (390). Of 12,545 participants from five studies, a total of 321 cases (2.56%) of the primary efficacy outcome occurred per year. Further, of 12,521 participants from five studies, a total of 617 cases (4.93%) of the primary safety outcome occurred per year. DOAC appeared to probably reduce the incidence of stroke and systemic embolism events (5 studies, 12,545 participants: RR 0.81, 95% CI 0.65 to 1.00; moderate certainty evidence) and to slightly reduce the incidence of major bleeding events (5 studies, 12,521 participants: RR 0.79, 95% CI 0.59 to 1.04; low certainty evidence) in comparison with warfarin.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Our findings indicate that DOAC are as likely as warfarin to prevent all strokes and systemic embolic events without increasing risk of major bleeding events among AF patients with kidney impairment. These findings should encourage physicians to prescribe DOAC in AF patients with CKD without fear of bleeding. The major limitation is that the results of this study chiefly reflect CKD stage G3. Application of the results to CKD stage G4 patients requires additional investigation. Furthermore, we could not assess CKD stage G5 patients. Future reviews should assess participants at more advanced CKD stages. Additionally, we could not conduct detailed analyses of subgroups and sensitivity analyses due to lack of data.

Impact of renal function on ischemic stroke and major bleeding rates in nonvalvular atrial fibrillation patients treated with warfarin or rivaroxaban: a retrospective cohort study using real-world evidence

OBJECTIVES

Renal dysfunction is associated with increased risk of cardiovascular disease and is an independent predictor of stroke and systemic embolism. Nonvalvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF) patients with renal dysfunction may face a particularly high risk of thromboembolism and bleeding. The current retrospective cohort study was designed to assess the impact of renal function on ischemic stroke and major bleeding rates in NVAF patients in the real-world setting (outside a clinical trial).

METHODS

Medical claims and Electronic Health Records were retrieved retrospectively from Optum's Integrated Claims-Clinical de-identified dataset from May 2011 to August 2014. Patients with NVAF treated with warfarin (2468) or rivaroxaban (1290) were selected. Each treatment cohort was stratified by baseline estimated creatinine clearance (eCrCl) levels. Confounding adjustments were made using inverse probability of treatment weights (IPTWs). Incidence rates and hazard ratios of ischemic stroke and major bleeding events were calculated for both cohorts.

RESULTS

Overall, patients treated with rivaroxaban had an ischemic stroke incidence rate of 1.9 per 100 person-years (PY) while patients treated with warfarin had a rate of 4.2 per 100 PY (HR = 0.41 [0.21-0.80], p = .009). Rivaroxaban patients with an eCrCl below 50 mL/min (N = 229) had an ischemic stroke rate of 0.8 per 100 PY, while the rate for the warfarin cohort (N = 647) was 6.0 per 100 PY (HR = 0.09 [0.01-0.72], p = .02). For the other renal function levels (i.e. eCrCl 50-80 and ≥80 mL/min) HRs indicated no statistically significant differences in ischemic stroke risks. Bleeding events did not differ significantly between cohorts stratified by renal function.

CONCLUSIONS

Ischemic stroke rates were significantly lower in the overall NVAF population for rivaroxaban vs. warfarin users, including patients with eCrCl below 50 mL/min. For all renal function groups, major bleeding risks were not statistically different between treatment groups.

Highlights from the Ninth International Symposium of Thrombosis and Anticoagulation (ISTA IX), October 15, 2016, Salvador, Bahia, Brazil

To discuss and share knowledge about advances in the care of patients with thrombotic disorders, the Ninth International Symposium of Thrombosis and Anticoagulation was held in Salvador, Bahia, Brazil, on October 15, 2016. This scientific program was developed by clinicians for clinicians and was promoted by two major clinical research institutes-the Brazilian Clinical Research Institute and the Duke Clinical Research Institute of the Duke University School of Medicine. Comprising academic presentations and open discussion, the symposium had as its primary goal to educate, motivate, and inspire internists, cardiologists, hematologists, and other physicians by convening national and international visionaries, thought-leaders, and dedicated clinician-scientists. This paper summarizes the symposium proceedings.

Once- versus twice-daily direct oral anticoagulants in non-valvular atrial fibrillation

INTRODUCTION

Direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) have emerged as alternatives to vitamin K antagonists for the prevention of stroke in patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF). Four DOACs: dabigatran, rivaroxaban, apixaban and edoxaban, are currently available. In the absence of head-to-head clinical comparisons of DOACs, dosing regimen may influence drug choice. Areas covered: Edoxaban and rivaroxaban are administered once daily, dabigatran and apixaban twice daily. The selection of these dosage regimens is largely based on studies for the prevention or treatment of venous thromboembolism or acute coronary syndrome. Edoxaban is the only DOAC in which once and twice-daily regimens were compared in patients with NVAF; bleeding rates were higher in the twice-daily groups. Once-daily versus twice-daily regimens have a number of practical implications. Missing a once-daily dose would have a greater impact on anticoagulation. Some real world and retrospective studies found that a once-daily dosing regimen leads to better adherence and persistence to therapy, an important consideration for maintaining optimum anticoagulation. However, other studies have not found increased adherence among once daily regimens. Expert opinion: Prescription of DOACs should be tailored to the individual patient and dosing regimen is only one of the variables that should be taken into account.

Comparative effectiveness of rivaroxaban in the treatment of nonvalvular atrial fibrillation

Rivaroxaban is a direct oral anticoagulant (DOAC) approved for the prevention of stroke and systemic embolism in patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation, a common arrhythmia. In this review, we summarize the effectiveness of rivaroxaban versus warfarin and the DOACs dabigatran, apixaban and edoxaban. The primary focus is on primary evidence from clinical trials, indirect comparison studies and real-world studies. While there are gaps in the literature, the evidence thus far indicates that rivaroxaban is superior to warfarin and similar to dabigatran, apixaban and edoxaban for the prevention of stroke or systemic embolism in patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation, although rivaroxaban may be associated with an elevated bleeding risk compared with other DOACs.

Quick reference guide to apixaban

Direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) are being increasingly used in the clinical setting for patients at risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE) and/or stroke. These medications offer valued benefits for long-term use, including a fast onset of anticoagulation, fixed anticoagulation profile (and consequent prescription of specified doses) and no requirement for routine monitoring. Apixaban is a selective factor Xa inhibitor, approved for use in the prevention of stroke in patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation and in the prevention and treatment of acute VTE. Like many of the DOACs, it has a fast onset of action and works to deliver predictable coagulation results. Multiple randomized controlled trials including ARISTOTLE and AMPLIFY have shown apixaban to be noninferior to vitamin K antagonists in the prevention of stroke and VTE, with a good safety profile. This article aims to review the use of apixaban for the prevention and treatment of thromboembolic disease, highlighting the key study results that have led to its current licensing and use.

Pillbox Use and INR Stability in a Prospective Cohort of New Warfarin Users

BACKGROUND

Warfarin, a frequently prescribed oral anticoagulant, is well known for its narrow therapeutic index. Adherence to warfarin may help to achieve a stable international normalized ratio (INR), but little data are available regarding the impact of using a pillbox as a potential adherence aid device.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the association between pillbox use and time in therapeutic range (TTR) < 60% and INR instability pattern.

METHODS

This study was based on a prospective cohort of 1,069 new warfarin users who initiated warfarin between May 2010 and July 2013 within 17 hospitals in Quebec, Canada. Demographic, lifestyle, and clinical data were collected for 3 months to a year after warfarin initiation, and genetic factors were assessed. Patients usingh self-prepared and pharmacist-prepared pillboxes were compared with nonusers for the 3- to 12-month follow-up period. The primary outcome was a TTR < 60%, which represents a low percentage of time in the INR therapeutic range or an unstable patient. The secondary outcome was the INR instability pattern (unstable below range; unstable over range; unstable with erratic pattern; and stable) to better describe patient INR profiles. A multivariate generalized linear mixed model was used for the primary outcome, along with a multivariate multinomial linear mixed model for the secondary outcome.

RESULTS

The cohort included patients with a mean age of 70.4 ± 11.7 years; 61.8% of patients were men; 76.3% had atrial fibrillation as warfarin's primary indication; and 35.6% had a previous history of myocardial infarction or angina. Self-prepared and pharmacist-prepared pillbox use was not associated with TTR < 60% or a specific INR instability pattern. A sensitivity analysis showed that self-prepared pillbox users had a higher TTR than nonusers (3.55% ± 1.69%; P = 0.036). This effect was greater among patients aged < 70 years (5.48% ± 2.50%; P = 0.029) than among older patients (1.92% ± 2.31%; P =0.406).

CONCLUSIONS

Pillbox use was not associated with TTR < 60% or a specific INR instability pattern. The impact of self-prepared pillbox use was greater among younger patients, but results were not clinically significant. Future studies adjusting for concomitant drug use are needed to clarify these results.

DISCLOSURES

This study was funded by Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR) and the Centre for Excellence in Personalised Medicine. Both funding sources were not involved in the design, conduct, and reporting of this study. The data used for this study came from the Quebec Warfarin Cohort Study (QWCS), which was supported by the CIHR and the Centre for Excellence in Personalised Medicine. Dumas received a doctoral training award from the CIHR. Perreault and Dubé received a salary award from the Fonds Québécois de Recherche en Santé. Study concept and design were contributed by Talajic, Tardif, Dubé, and Perreault. Dumas, Rouleau-Mailloux, Bouchama, and Lahcene collected the data, which was interpreted by Dumas, Dubé, and Perreault. The manuscript was written and revised by Dumas, Dubé, and Perreault.

Time in the Therapeutic Range (TTR): An Overly Simplified Conundrum

Anticoagulation with warfarin has been used for over 60 years; however, its administration is fraught with difficulty since many factors can affect warfarin dosing. The concept of time in therapeutic range (TTR) has become a popular way to report warfarin management and compare anticoagulation management across clinical trials. However, TTR is a much more complex concept than most clinicians and trialists recognize. This manuscript attempts to discuss some of the important factors underlying this complexity and presents a suggestion to improve reports on TTR.

Time in Therapeutic Range and Outcomes After Warfarin Initiation in Newly Diagnosed Atrial Fibrillation Patients With Renal Dysfunction

Background

It is unknown whether renal dysfunction conveys poor anticoagulation control in warfarin‐treated patients with atrial fibrillation and whether poor anticoagulation control associates with the risk of adverse outcomes in these patients.

Methods and Results

This was an observational study from the Stockholm CREatinine Measurements (SCREAM) cohort including all newly diagnosed atrial fibrillation patients initiating treatment with warfarin (n=7738) in Stockholm, Sweden, between 2006 and 2011. Estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR; mL/min per 1.73 m²) was calculated from serum creatinine. Time‐in‐therapeutic range (TTR) was assessed from international normalized ratio (INR) measurements up to warfarin cessation, adverse event, or end of follow‐up (2 years). Adverse events considered a composite of intracranial hemorrhage, ischemic stroke, myocardial infarction, or death. During median 254 days, TTR was 83%, based on median 21 INR measurements per patient. TTR was 70% among patients with eGFR <30, around 10% lower than in those with normal renal function. During observation, adverse events occurred in 4.0% of patients, and those with TTR ≤75% were at higher adverse event risk. This was independent of patient characteristics, comorbidities, number of INR tests, days exposed to warfarin, and, notably, independent of eGFR: adjusted odds ratio (OR) 1.84 (95% CI, 1.41–2.40) for TTR 75% to 60% and adjusted OR 2.09 (1.59–2.74) for TTR <60%. No interaction was observed between eGFR and TTR in association to adverse events (P=0.2).

Conclusion

Severe chronic kidney disease (eGFR <30) patients with atrial fibrillation have worse INR control while on warfarin. An optimal TTR (>75%) is associated with lower risk of adverse events, independently of underlying renal function.

Decision-Making in Clinical Practice: Oral Anticoagulant Therapy in Patients with Non-valvular Atrial Fibrillation and a Single Additional Stroke Risk Factor

Approximately 1 in 3-4 patients presenting with an ischemic stroke will also have atrial fibrillation (AF), and AF-related strokes can be effectively prevented using oral anticoagulant therapy (OAC), either with well-controlled vitamin K antagonists (VKAs) or non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants (NOACs). In addition, OAC use (both VKAs and NOACs) is associated with a 26% reduction in all-cause mortality (VKAs) or an additional 10% mortality reduction with NOACs relative to VKAs. The decision to use OAC in individual AF patient is based on the estimated balance of the benefit from ischemic stroke reduction against the risk of major OAC-related bleeding [essentially intracranial hemorrhage (ICH)]. Better appreciation of the importance of VKAs' anticoagulation quality [a target time in therapeutic range (TTR) of ≥70%] and the availability of NOACs (which offer better safety compared to VKAs) have decreased the estimated threshold for OAC treatment in AF patients towards lower stroke risk levels. Still, contemporary registry-based data show that OAC is often underused in AF patients at increased risk of stroke. The uncertainty whether to use OAC may be particularly pronounced in AF patients with a single additional stroke risk factor, who are often (mis)perceived as having a "borderline" or insufficient stroke risk to trigger the use of OAC. However, observational data from real-world AF cohorts show that the annual stroke rates in such patients are higher than in patients with no additional stroke risk factors, and OAC use has been associated with reduction in stroke, systemic embolism, or death in comparison to no therapy or aspirin, with no increase in the risk of bleeding relative to aspirin. In this review article, we summarize the basic principles of stroke risk stratification in AF patients and discuss contemporary real-world evidence on OAC use and outcomes of OAC treatment in AF patients with a single additional stroke risk factor in various real-world AF cohorts.