Coronary events in elderly patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation: a prespecified sub-analysis of the ANAFIE registry

Real-world data on coronary events (CE) in elderly patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) are lacking in the direct oral anticoagulant era. This prespecified sub-analysis of the ANAFIE Registry, a prospective observational study in > 30,000 Japanese patients aged ≥ 75 years with non-valvular AF (NVAF), investigated CE incidence and risk factors. The incidence and risk factors for new-onset CE (a composite of myocardial infarction [MI] and cardiac intervention for coronary heart diseases other than MI), MI, and cardiac intervention for coronary heart diseases other than MI during the 2-year follow-up were assessed. Bleeding events in CE patients were also examined. Among 32,275 patients, the incidence rate per 100 patient-years was 0.48 (95% confidence interval (CI): 0.42-0.53) for CE during the 2-year follow-up, 0.20 (0.16-0.23) for MI, and 0.29 (0.25-0.33) for cardiac intervention for coronary heart diseases other than MI; that of stroke/systemic embolism was 1.62 (1.52-1.73). Patients with CE (n = 287) likely had lower creatinine clearance (CrCL) and higher CHADS2 and HAS-BLED scores than patients without CE (n = 31,988). Significant risk factors associated with new-onset CE were male sex, systolic blood pressure of ≥ 130 mmHg, diabetes mellitus (glycated hemoglobin ≥ 6.0%), CE history, antiplatelet agent use, and CrCL < 50 mL/min. Major bleeding incidence was significantly higher in patients with new-onset CE vs without CE (odds ratio [95% CI], 3.35 [2.06-5.43]). In elderly patients with NVAF, CE incidence was lower than stroke/systemic embolism incidence. New-onset CE (vs no CE) was associated with a higher incidence of major bleeding.Trial registration: UMIN000024006.

Edoxaban treatment in a post-infarction experimental model

BACKGROUND

The sequelae of myocardial infarction (MI) require specific pharmacological therapy to minimise the post-MI remodelling, which in many cases evolves into cardiovascular complications. The aim of this study was to analyse the effect of edoxaban, an oral anticoagulant, on cardiac recovery in a rat model of permanent coronary artery ligation.

METHODS

An experimental method to assess the post-MI remodelling in rats for 4 weeks, based on cardiac magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and final histological analysis of the hearts was performed. The influence of daily oral treatment with edoxaban (20 mg/kg/day) for 28 days post-MI was analysed in comparison to vehicle.

RESULTS

In our model, edoxaban was shown to be safe and bleeding was observed in 1 of 10 animals. General physical recovery of the treated animals was shown by higher body weight recovery compared with non-treated animals (38.6 ± 2.9 vs. 29.9 ± 3.1 g, respectively, after 28 days). There was not a pronounced effect of edoxaban in post-MI cardiac remodelling, but mitigated fibrosis was observed by the reduced expression of vascular endothelial growth factor and tumour growth factor β1 in the peri-infarct zone.

CONCLUSIONS

Our analysis provided the experimental basis to support the feasibility of MRI to study cardiac function and characterise myocardial scarring in a rat model. Overall data suggested the safety of edoxaban in the model, and compared to placebo, it showed a better post-MI recovery, probably by reducing fibrosis of the heart. Further research on mid-term cardiac recovery with edoxaban after MI is justified.

Stroke Prevention in Atrial Fibrillation: A Scientific Statement of JACC: Asia (Part 1)

Atrial fibrillation is the most common sustained cardiac arrhythmia and is associated with substantial increases in the risk of stroke and systemic thromboembolism. With the successful introduction of the first non-vitamin K antagonist direct oral anticoagulant (NOAC) in 2009, the role of vitamin K antagonists has been replaced in most clinical settings except in a few conditions when NOACs are contraindicated. Data for the use of NOACs in different clinical scenarios have been accumulating in the recent decade, and a more sophisticated strategy for atrial fibrillation patients is now warranted. JACC: Asia recently appointed a working group to summarize the most updated information regarding stroke prevention in AF. This statement aimed to provide possible treatment option in daily practice. Local availability, cost, and patient comorbidities should also be considered. Final decisions may still need to be individualized and based on clinicians' discretion. This is the part 1 of the whole statement.

Edoxaban versus Warfarin in high-risk patients with atrial fibrillation: A comprehensive analysis of high-risk subgroups

BACKGROUND

To compare the efficacy and safety of edoxaban vs warfarin in high-risk subgroups.

METHODS

ENGAGE AF-TIMI 48 was a multicenter randomized, double-blind, controlled trial in 21,105 patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) within 12 months and CHADS₂ score >2 randomized to higher-dose edoxaban regimen (HDER) 60 mg/reduced 30 mg, lower-dose edoxaban regimen (LDER) 30 mg/reduced 15 mg, or warfarin, and followed for 2.8 years (median). The primary outcome for this analysis was the net clinical outcome (NCO), a composite of stroke/systemic embolism events, major bleeding, or death. Multivariable risk-stratification analysis was used to categorize patients by the number of high-risk features.

RESULTS

The annualized NCO rates in the warfarin arm were highest in patients with malignancy (19.2%), increased fall risk (14.0%), and very-low body weight (13.5%). The NCO rates increased with the numbers of high-risk factors in the warfarin arm: 4.5%, 7.2%, 9.9% and 14.6% in patients with 0 to 1, 2, 3, and >4 risk factors, respectively (P_trend <0.001). Versus warfarin, HDER was associated with significant reductions of NCO in most of the subgroups: elderly, patients with moderate renal dysfunction, prior stroke/TIA, of Asian race, very-low body weight, concomitant single antiplatelet therapy, and VKA-naïve. With more high-risk features (0->4+), the absolute risk reductions favoring edoxaban over warfarin increased: 0.3%->2.0% for HDER; 0.4%->3.4% for LDER vs warfarin (P = .065 and P < .001, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

While underuse of anticoagulation in high-risk patients with AF remains common, substitution of effective and safer alternatives to warfarin, such as edoxaban, represents an opportunity to improve clinical outcomes.

Rivaroxaban monotherapy versus combination therapy according to patient risk of stroke and bleeding in atrial fibrillation and stable coronary disease: AFIRE trial subanalysis

BACKGROUND

In the AFIRE trial, rivaroxaban monotherapy was noninferior to combination therapy with rivaroxaban and an antiplatelet agent for thromboembolic events or death, and superior for major bleeding in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) and stable coronary artery disease. Little is known about impacts of stroke and bleeding risks on the efficacy and safety of rivaroxaban monotherapy.

METHODS

In this subanalysis of the AFIRE trial, we assessed the risk of stroke and bleeding by the CHADS₂, CHA₂DS₂-VASc, and HAS-BLED scores. The primary efficacy end point was the composite of stroke, systemic embolism, myocardial infarction (MI), unstable angina requiring revascularization, or death from any cause. The primary safety end point was major bleeding defined by the International Society on Thrombosis and Haemostasis.

RESULTS

Rivaroxaban monotherapy significantly reduced the primary efficacy and safety end points with no evidence of differential effects by stroke risk (CHADS₂, p for interaction = 0.727 for efficacy, 0.395 for safety; CHA₂DS₂-VASc, p for interaction = 0.740 for efficacy, 0.265 for safety) or bleeding risk (HAS-BLED, p for interaction = 0.581 for efficacy, 0.225 for safety). There was also no evidence of statistical heterogeneity across patient risk categories for other end points; stroke or systemic embolism, ischemic stroke, hemorrhagic stroke, MI, MI or unstable angina, death from any cause, any bleeding, or net adverse clinical events.

CONCLUSIONS

The advantages of rivaroxaban monotherapy compared with those of combination therapy with respect to all prespecified end points, including thromboembolism, bleeding, and mortality were similar across patients with AF and stable coronary artery disease, irrespective of their risk for stroke and bleeding.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

UMIN Clinical Trials Registry number, UMIN000016612, and ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02642419.

Characteristics and antithrombotic treatment patterns of patients with concomitant coronary artery disease and atrial fibrillation from Thailand's COOL-AF registry

BACKGROUND

Concomitant coronary artery disease (CAD) and atrial fibrillation (AF) are common in clinical practice. The aim of this study was to investigate the characteristics and antithrombotic treatment patterns of patients with concomitant CAD and AF from the COhort of antithrombotic use and Optimal INR Level in patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation in Thailand (COOL-AF Thailand) registry.

METHODS

Registry enrollment criteria included patients aged ≥ 18 years who were diagnosed with AF for any duration at any of 27 public hospitals located across Thailand during 2014-2017. The That Clinical Trials Registry study registration number is TCTR20160113002. Statistical comparisons of characteristics and treatment strategies were performed between patients with and without CAD.

RESULTS

Of a total of 3461 AF patients, 557 had concomitant CAD (16.1%). Patients with concomitant CAD and AF were significantly older, more likely to be male, had more comorbidities, and had more cardiovascular implantable electronic devices. History of stroke/transient ischemic attack and prior bleeding was not significantly different between groups. CHA2DS2-VASc score and HAS-BLED score were both higher in patients with CAD than in patients without CAD (4.17 vs. 2.78, p < 0.001, and 2.01 vs. 1.45, p < 0.001, respectively). Utilization of oral anticoagulant was less in patients with CAD (76.0% vs. 84.3%, p < 0.001). Concomitant use of antiplatelet was found to be a major cause of oral anticoagulant (OAC) underutilization. Specifically, the rate of OAC prescription was 95.9% in patients without antiplatelet, and 43.7% in patients with antiplatelet. Among patients with CAD who were on OAC, the rate of concomitant antiplatelet prescription was still high. In this group, 63% of patients were on triple therapy when percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with drug eluting stent was performed within 1 year, and 32.2% of patients without prior PCI or acute coronary syndrome were taking at least one antiplatelet with OAC.

CONCLUSION

Among patients with concomitant CAD and AF, physicians were reluctant to discontinue antiplatelet. The use of antiplatelet discourages physicians from prescribing OAC. Underutilization of OAC may increase the risk of ischemic stroke, and an inappropriate combination of OAC and antiplatelet may increase the risk of bleeding. Trial registration The trial has been registered with the Thai Clinical Trials Registry (TCTR) which complied with WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform dataset. The Registration Number is TCTR20160113002 (05/01/2016).

Cardiovascular- and Bleeding-Related Hospitalization Rates With Edoxaban Versus Warfarin in Patients With Atrial Fibrillation Based on Results of the ENGAGE AF–TIMI 48 Trial

Background

The ENGAGE AF–TIMI 48 trial (Effective Anticoagulation With Factor Xa Next Generation in Atrial Fibrillation–Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction 48) demonstrated noninferiority of once-daily 60 mg (30 mg dose-reduced) edoxaban compared with warfarin for prevention of stroke/systemic embolism in patients with atrial fibrillation. No previous analysis has explored the impact of treatment with edoxaban versus warfarin on rates of hospitalizations.

Methods

Detailed healthcare resource utilization data from ENGAGE AF–TIMI 48 for the 14 024 randomized patients who received at least one dose of study drug were used to compare the rates of bleeding- and cardiovascular-related hospitalizations for edoxaban versus warfarin. Hospitalization rates were calculated for each treatment group, and relative rates were estimated using Poisson regression. The influence of patient characteristics on the impact of edoxaban versus warfarin was evaluated through the inclusion of interaction terms.

Results

The overall rate of cardiovascular- or bleeding-related hospitalization was significantly lower for edoxaban than warfarin (relative rate [RR], 0.91 [95% CI, 0.85–0.97], P =0.003). Rates of hospitalizations for cardiovascular reasons (RR, 0.91 [95% CI, 0.85–0.97], P =0.004), stroke (RR, 0.80 [95% CI, 0.72–0.88], P <0.0001), and for each stroke subtype (ischemic: RR, 0.89 [95% CI, 0.81–0.99], P =0.03; hemorrhagic: RR, 0.60 [95% CI, 0.54–0.68], P <0.0001) were also lower for edoxaban. Notably, significantly greater reductions with edoxaban versus warfarin were seen for ischemic stroke–related hospitalizations in vitamin K antagonist naive patients and patients with CHADS 2 scores 4 to 6, previous stroke or transient ischemic attack, age ≥75, and no previous coronary artery disease. For nonstroke bleeding–related hospitalizations, greater reductions with edoxaban were seen in vitamin K antagonist naive patients, patients with CHADS 2 scores 4 to 6, and patients with moderate renal dysfunction.

Conclusions

Edoxaban 60 mg (30 mg dose-reduced) was associated with a significantly lower overall rate of cardiovascular- or bleeding-related hospitalization and significant reductions in the subcategories of cardiovascular-related, stroke-related, bleed-related, and nonstroke cardiovascular–related hospitalizations, when compared with warfarin. These results suggest the potential for cost offsets with edoxaban, with even greater reductions in higher-risk patients.

Registration:

URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov ; Unique identifier: NCT00781391

New oral anticoagulants for nonvalvular atrial fibrillation with stable coronary artery disease: A meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

New oral anticoagulants (NOACs) are effective and safe in patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF). Limited evidence is available regarding outcomes for NVAF patients with stable coronary artery disease (CAD).

METHODS

A systematic search of Medline, Embase, and the Cochrane Register was performed. Two reviewers independently performed data extraction and quality assessment using the Cochrane Collaboration risk-of-bias assessment tool. We evaluated all primary publications and secondary analyses comparing NOACs with any other OAC agent for preventing stroke in patients with both NVAF and stable CAD from phase III clinical randomized control trials. The primary outcomes were stroke, systemic embolism (SE), major bleeding, and intracranial hemorrhage (ICH), and the secondary outcomes were cardiovascular (CV) death, all-cause death, and myocardial infarction (MI).

RESULTS

Four articles with a total of 19 266 patients were included in this study. The pooled results showed a relative risk for stroke/SE with NOACs of 0.83 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.71-0.97), for major bleeding 0.85 (95% CI: 0.63-1.14), for ICH 0.36 (95% CI: 0.19-0.54), for MI 1.00 (95% CI: 0.82-1.20), for CV death 0.94 (95% CI: 0.83-1.06), and for all-cause death 0.95 (95% CI: 0.85-1.07).

CONCLUSION

NOACs were effective in preventing stroke/SE and reducing the risk of ICH in patients with both NVAF and CAD.

Edoxaban's contribution to key endothelial cell functions

BACKGROUND

We aimed to study the effects of the new oral anticoagulant edoxaban, a factor X activated (FXa) inhibitor, on key endothelial functions that could contribute to cardiovascular benefit.

METHODS

Human umbilical endothelial cells (HUVEC) were obtained from donated umbilical cords and used to analyse 1) structural functions like cell proliferation, migration, and angiogenesis in appropriate assays; 2) anti-inflammatory reactions as mononuclear cell (PBMC) or platelet adhesion to HUVEC monolayers; and 3) haemostasis control by fibrin formation or plasminogen activator modulation. Key molecular effectors and signalling pathways on each function were explored by profiled protein arrays, mRNA, or protein expression analyses.

RESULTS

Edoxaban promoted viability and growth in HUVEC cultures, as well as counteracted the promigratory and antiangiogenic effects of FXa, through action on the PI3K/AKT pathway. Edoxaban inhibited the adhesion to endothelial cells and the transmigration through endothelial monolayers of PBMC, and even counteracted the action of pro-inflammatory stimuli such as FXa by blocking the FXa-induced expression of cell adhesion molecules via the PAR 1-2/PI3K/NF-kB pathway. Haemostatic control of edoxaban could be exerted from the endothelium by the reduction of platelets' adhesion to endothelial cells and the possible acute activation of urokinase plasminogen activator.

CONCLUSIONS

Edoxaban is a safe and structural stabilizing factor for endothelial cells and also has remarkable anti-inflammatory action, preventing PBMC adhesion and transmigration through the endothelium. It may also contribute to haemostasis control by reducing platelet adhesion. Its main molecular mechanism seems to be the control of the PI3K/NF-κB pathways.

Non-Vitamin K Antagonist Oral Anticoagulants Versus Warfarin in Patients with Atrial Fibrillation with Coronary or Peripheral Artery Disease

The efficacy and safety of non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants (NOACs) in atrial fibrillation (AF) with coronary or peripheral artery disease (CAD or PAD) remain largely unresolved. We, therefore, conducted a meta-analysis to explore the effect of NOACs compared with warfarin in these populations.We systematically searched the Cochrane Library, PubMed, and Embase databases for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) involving NOACs versus warfarin in AF patients with CAD or PAD. A random-effect model was selected to pool the risk ratios (RRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs).A total of 7 RCTs were included. In AF patients with CAD, compared with warfarin use, the use of NOACs was associated with reduced risks of stroke/systemic embolism (RR 0.82; 95% CI 0.70-0.96) and intracranial hemorrhage (RR 0.41; 95% CI 0.26-0.63), but NOACs versus warfarin showed similar risks of all-cause death (RR 0.95; 95% CI 0.86-1.05), cardiovascular death (RR 0.95; 95% CI 0.80-1.13), stroke (RR 0.80; 95% CI 0.64-1.00), myocardial infarction (RR 1.00; 95% CI 0.83-1.21), and major bleeding (RR 0.82; 95% CI 0.65-1.04). Among patients with AF and PAD, NOACs versus warfarin had similar risks for stroke (RR 0.93; 95% CI 0.61-1.42), myocardial infarction (RR 1.10; 95% CI 0.64-1.90), all-cause death (RR 0.91; 95% CI 0.70-1.19), major bleeding (RR 1.12; 95% CI 0.70-1.81), and intracranial hemorrhage (RR 0.54; 95% CI 0.16-1.85).NOACs seem to be at least as effective and safe as warfarin in AF patients with CAD. whereas NOACs versus warfarin have similar efficacy and safety in patients with PAD.

Equivalent inpatient mortality among direct-acting oral anticoagulant and warfarin users presenting with major hemorrhage

BACKGROUND

Extrapolation of clinical trial results comparing warfarin and direct-acting oral anticoagulant (DOAC) users experiencing major hemorrhage to clinical care is challenging due to differences seen among non-randomized oral anticoagulant users, bleed location, and etiology. We hypothesized that inpatient all-cause-mortality among patients presenting with major hemorrhage differed based on the home-administered anticoagulant medication class, DOAC versus warfarin.

METHODS

More than 1.5 million hospitalizations were screened and 3731 patients with major hemorrhage were identified in the REDS-III Recipient Database. Propensity score matching and stratification were used to account for potentially confounding factors.

RESULTS

Inpatient all-cause-mortality was lower for DOAC (HR = 0.60, 95%CI 0.45-0.80, p = 0.0005) before accounting for confounding and competing events. Inpatient all-cause-mortality for 1266 propensity-score-matched patients compared using proportional hazards regression did not differ (HR = 0.84, 95%CI 0.58-1.22, p = 0.36). Inpatient all-cause-mortality in stratified analyses (warfarin as reference) produced: HR = 0.69 (95%CI 0.31-1.55) for traumatic head injuries; HR = 1.10 (95%CI 0.62-1.95) for non-traumatic head injuries; HR = 0.62 (95%CI 0.20-1.94) for traumatic, non-head injuries; and HR = 0.69 (95%CI 0.29-1.63) for non-traumatic, non-head injuries. Mean time to discharge was shorter for DOAC (HR = 1.17, 95%CI 1.05-1.30, p = 0.0034) in the propensity score matched analysis. Plasma transfusion occurred in 42% of warfarin hospitalizations and 11% of DOAC hospitalizations. Vitamin K was administered in 63% of warfarin hospitalizations.

CONCLUSIONS

After accounting for differences in patient characteristics, location of bleed, and traumatic injury, inpatient survival was no different in patients presenting with major hemorrhage while on DOAC or warfarin.

Adverse clinical events in Japanese atrial fibrillation patients with and without coronary artery disease-findings from the SAKURA AF Registry

Background: Although atrial fibrillation (AF) and coronary artery disease (CAD) are increasing in prevalence in Japan, real-world data regarding clinical outcomes in Japanese AF patients with CAD are limited.Methods: The SAKURA AF Registry is a prospective multi-center registry created to investigate outcomes of oral anticoagulant (OAC) use in Japanese AF patients. A study was conducted involving 3237 enrollees from 63 Tokyo-area institutions who were followed up for a median of 39.3 months. Clinical adverse events were compared between the patients accompanied with (n = 312) and without CAD (n = 2925).Results: The incidence of cardiovascular events and all-cause mortality rates were significantly higher among patients with CAD than among those without CAD (5.98 vs 2.52 events per 100 patient-years, respectively, p < 0.001; 3.27 vs 1.94 deaths per 100 patient-years, respectively, p = 0.012), but there was no difference in strokes/transient ischemic attacks or systemic embolisms (1.70 vs 1.34). After a multivariate adjustment, CAD remained a risk factor for cardiovascular events (hazard ratio [HR] = 1.57, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.08-2.25, p = 0.018). Among CAD patients, the propensity score-adjusted risk for major bleeding was significantly decreased among direct oral anticoagulant (DOAC) users in comparison to that among warfarin users (HR = 0.29, 95% CI = 0.07-0.94, p = 0.04), but other adverse clinical events did not differ significantly between these two groups.Conclusions: CAD did not appear to be a major determinant of strokes/TIAs, major bleeding, or all-cause mortality, but appeared to increase the risk of cardiovascular events in Japanese AF patients. The risk of major bleeding in CAD patients appeared to decrease when a DOAC rather than warfarin was administered. The data suggested that patients with AF and concomitant CAD require careful management and follow-up to reduce cardiovascular risks, and DOACs may be a better choice over warfarin when considering the risk of major bleeding.

Efficacy and safety of edoxaban compared with warfarin according to the burden of diseases in patients with atrial fibrillation: insights from the ENGAGE AF-TIMI 48 trial

Aims

Non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants represent a new option for prevention of embolic events in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF). However, little is known about the impact of non-cardiac comorbidities on the efficacy and safety profile of these drugs.

Methods and results

In a post hoc analysis of the ENGAGE AF-TIMI 48 trial, we analysed 21 105 patients with AF followed for an average of 2.8 years and randomized to either a higher-dose edoxaban regimen (HDER), a lower-dose edoxaban regimen, or warfarin. We used the updated Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI) to stratify the patients according to the burden of concomitant disease (CCI = 0, 1, 2, 3, and ≥4). The treatment groups were then compared for safety, efficacy, and net clinical outcomes across CCI categories. There were 32.0%, 7.3%, 42.1%, 12.7%, and 6.0% of patients with CCI scores of 0, 1, 2, 3, and ≥4, respectively. A CCI score ≥4 was associated with significantly higher rates of thromboembolic events, bleeding, and death compared to CCI = 0 (P &lt; 0.05 for each). The annualized rates of the primary net clinical outcome (stroke/systemic embolism, major bleeding, or death) for CCI = 0, 1, 2, 3, or ≥4 were 5.9%, 8.7%, 6.6%, 10.3%, and 13.6% (Ptrend &lt; 0.001). There were no significant interactions between treatment with HDER vs. warfarin and efficacy, safety, and net outcomes across the CCI groups (P-interaction &gt; 0.10 for each).

Conclusion 

Although increasing CCI scores are associated with worse outcomes, the efficacy, safety, and net clinical outcomes of edoxaban vs. warfarin were independent of the degree of comorbidity present.

Interventions for Preventing Thromboembolic Events in Patients With Atrial Fibrillation: A Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

The comparative safety and effectiveness of treatments to prevent thromboembolic complications in atrial fibrillation (AF) remain uncertain.

PURPOSE

To compare the effectiveness of medical and procedural therapies in preventing thromboembolic events and bleeding complications in adults with nonvalvular AF.

DATA SOURCES

English-language studies in several databases from 1 January 2000 to 14 February 2018.

STUDY SELECTION

Two reviewers independently screened citations to identify comparative studies of treatments to prevent stroke in adults with nonvalvular AF who reported thromboembolic or bleeding complications.

DATA EXTRACTION

Two reviewers independently abstracted data, assessed study quality and applicability, and rated strength of evidence.

DATA SYNTHESIS

Data from 220 articles were included. Dabigatran and apixaban were superior and rivaroxaban and edoxaban were similar to warfarin in preventing stroke or systemic embolism. Apixaban and edoxaban were superior and rivaroxaban and dabigatran were similar to warfarin in reducing the risk for major bleeding. Treatment effects with dabigatran were similar in patients with renal dysfunction (interaction P > 0.05), and patients younger than 75 years had lower bleeding rates with dabigatran (interaction P < 0.001). The benefit of treatment with apixaban was consistent in many subgroups, including those with renal impairment, diabetes, and prior stroke (interaction P > 0.05 for all). The greatest bleeding risk reduction was observed in patients with a glomerular filtration rate less than 50 mL/min/1.73 m2 (P = 0.003). Similar treatment effects were observed for rivaroxaban and edoxaban in patients with prior stroke, diabetes, or heart failure (interaction P > 0.05 for all).

LIMITATION

Heterogeneous study populations, interventions, and outcomes.

CONCLUSION

The available direct-acting oral anticoagulants (DOACs) are at least as effective and safe as warfarin for patients with nonvalvular AF. The DOACs had similar benefits across several patient subgroups and seemed safe and efficacious for a wide range of patients with nonvalvular AF.

PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE

Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute. (PROSPERO: CRD42017069999).