Andexanet alfa versus four-factor prothrombin complex concentrate for the reversal of apixaban- or rivaroxaban-associated intracranial hemorrhage: a propensity score-overlap weighted analysis

Reversal of direct oral anticoagulants: guidance from the SSC of the ISTH

The currently approved direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) are increasingly used in clinical practice. Although serious bleeding risks are lower with DOACs than with vitamin K antagonists, bleeding remains the most frequent side effect. Andexanet alfa and idarucizumab are the currently approved specific reversal agents for oral factor (F)Xa inhibitors and dabigatran, respectively. Our prior guidance document was published in 2016, but with more information available on the utility and increased use of these reversal agents and other bleeding management strategies, we have updated this International Society on Thrombosis and Haemostasis guidance document on DOAC reversal. In this narrative review, we compare the mechanism of action of specific and nonspecific reversal agents, review the clinical data supporting their use, and provide guidance on when reversal is indicated. In addition, we briefly discuss the reversal of oral FXIa inhibitors, a new class of DOACs currently under clinical development.

Andexanet alpha versus four-factor prothrombin complex concentrate in DOACs anticoagulation reversal: an updated systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

There is currently a lack of evidence for the comparative effectiveness of Andexanet alpha and four-factor prothrombin complex concentrate (4F-PCC) in anticoagulation reversal of direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs). The primary aim of our systematic review was to verify which drug is more effective in reducing short-term all-cause mortality. The secondary aim was to determine which of the two reverting strategies is less affected by thromboembolic events.

METHODS

A systematic review and meta-analysis was performed.

RESULTS

Twenty-two studies were analysed in the systematic review and quantitative synthesis. In all-cause short-term mortality, Andexanet alpha showed a risk ratio (RR) of 0.71(95% CI 0.37-1.34) in RCTs and PSMs, compared to 4F-PCC (I2 = 81%). Considering the retrospective studies, the pooled RR resulted in 0.84 (95% CI 0.69-1.01) for the common effects model and 0.82 (95% CI 0.63-1.07) for the random effects model (I2 = 34.2%). Regarding the incidence of thromboembolic events, for RCTs and PSMs, the common and the random effects model exhibited a RR of 1.74 (95% CI 1.09-2.77), and 1.71 (95% CI 1.01-2.89), respectively, for Andexanet alpha compared to 4F-PCC (I2 = 0%). Considering the retrospective studies, the pooled RR resulted in 1.21 (95% CI 0.87-1.69) for the common effects model and 1.18 (95% CI 0.86-1.62) for the random effects model (I2 = 0%).

CONCLUSION

Considering a large group of both retrospective and controlled studies, Andexanet alpha did not show a statistically significant advantage over 4F-PCC in terms of mortality. In the analysis of the controlled studies alone, Andexanet alpha is associated with an increased risk of thromboembolic events.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

PROSPERO: International prospective register of systematic reviews, 2024, CRD42024548768.

Hemostatic Efficacy and Safety of 4-Factor Prothrombin Complex Concentrate in Doac-Associated Intracranial Hemorrhage

Background: Factor Xa (FXa) inhibitor use has increased over the last decade and though associated rates of major bleeding are lower compared to warfarin, outcomes from intracranial hemorrhage (ICH) are still significant. Targeted FXa inhibitor reversal agent became available in 2018, however use of 4-factor prothrombin complex concentrate (4F-PCC) for FXa inhibitor-associated ICH continues at many institutions. Objective: Evaluate the safety and hemostatic efficacy of 4F-PCC for FXa inhibitor-associated ICH. Methods: Single-center, retrospective study of patients who received 4F-PCC for FXa inhibitor-associated ICH. The primary efficacy endpoint was hemostasis and thrombosis was the main safety endpoint. Secondary endpoints included in-hospital mortality and discharge disposition. Results: 76 patients on apixaban or rivaroxaban were included. Good or excellent hemostasis was achieved in 80.3% of patients. Five patients experienced a thrombotic event. Favorable discharge disposition and lower in-hospital mortality was more likely in patients who achieved excellent hemostasis. Conclusion: 4F-PCC is safe and effective for FXa inhibitor associated ICH.

Andexanet Alfa versus Four-Factor Prothrombin Complex Concentrate for the Reversal of Factor Xa (FXa) Inhibitor-Associated Intracranial Hemorrhage: A Systematic Review of Retrospective Studies

Background/Objectives: There are limited data on the risks and benefits of using Andexanet alfa (AA) compared with four-factor prothrombin complex concentrate (4F-PCC) for the reversal of factor Xa inhibitor-associated intracranial hemorrhage (ICH). Our aim was to describe a compilation of the information available in the literature to date. Methods: PubMed, Embase, Web of Science (Clarivate Analytics) and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched until December 2023. Following the "Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA)" guidelines, our systematic literature review included studies that were retrospective in design and evaluated both drugs to control bleeding and complications (death and thromboembolic events). Two researchers re-examined the studies for relevance, extracted the data and assessed the risk of bias. No meta-analyses were performed for the results. Results: In this limited patient sample, we found no differences between published articles in terms of neuroimaging stability or thrombotic events. However, some studies show significant differences in mortality, suggesting that one of the AAs may be superior to 4F-PCC. Conclusions: Our qualitative analysis shows that AA has a better efficacy profile compared with 4F-PCC. However, further studies monitoring these patients and a multicenter collaborative network dedicated to this topic are needed.

Effect of low- versus high-dose 4-factor prothrombin complex concentrate in factor Xa inhibitor-associated bleeding: A qualitative systematic review

PURPOSE

The purpose of this review is to evaluate current literature on the treatment of factor Xa inhibitor-associated bleeds with 4-factor prothrombin complex concentrate (4F-PCC), with a focus on the effect of low versus high dosing of 4F-PCC on hemostatic efficacy and safety outcomes.

SUMMARY

A search of PubMed and EBSCOhost was performed to identify studies evaluating patients with a factor Xa inhibitor-bleed treated with 4F-PCC at either low or high doses. Studies of patients receiving alternative reversal agents such as fresh frozen plasma and andexanet alfa or where no comparator group was evaluated were excluded from the analysis. To assess the effect of these 4F-PCC dosing strategies, the primary outcome of interest was hemostatic efficacy. Four studies meeting inclusion criteria were included in this review. In each of the included studies, similar rates of hemostatic efficacy, hospital mortality, and venous thromboembolism were observed in the low- and high-dose cohorts.

CONCLUSION

These results suggest low- and high-dose 4F-PCC may confer similar clinical effectiveness and safety; however, these findings should be evaluated and confirmed with future prospective studies.

Andexanet alfa versus PCC products for factor Xa inhibitor bleeding: A systematic review with meta-analysis

Previous meta-analyses assessed andexanet alfa (AA) or prothrombin complex concentrate (PCC) products for the treatment of Factor Xa inhibitor (FXaI)-associated major bleeding. However, they did not include recent studies or assess the impact of the risk of bias. We conducted a systematic review with meta-analysis on the effectiveness of AA versus PCC products for FXaI-associated major bleeding, inclusive of the studies' risk of bias. PubMed and Embase were searched for comparative studies assessing major bleeding in patients using FXaI who received AA or PCC. We used the Methodological Index for NOn-Randomized Studies (MINORS) checklist and one question from the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) Critical Appraisal of Case Series tool to assess the risk of bias. Random-effects meta-analyses were performed to provide a pooled estimate for the effect of AA versus PCC products on hemostatic efficacy, in-hospital mortality, 30-day mortality, and thrombotic events. Low-moderate risk of bias studies were meta-analyzed separately, as well as combined with high risk of bias studies. Eighteen comparative evaluations of AA versus PCC were identified. Twenty-eight percent of the studies (n = 5) had low-moderate risk and 72% (n = 13) had a high risk of bias. Studies with low-moderate risk of bias suggested improvements in hemostatic efficacy [Odds Ratio (OR) 2.72 (95% Confidence Interval (CI): 1.15-6.44); one study], lower in-hospital mortality [OR 0.48 (95% CI: 0.38-0.61); three studies], and reduced 30-day mortality [OR 0.49 (95% CI: 0.30-0.80); two studies] when AA was used versus PCC products. When studies were included regardless of the risk of bias, pooled effects showed improvements in hemostatic efficacy [OR 1.36 (95% CI: 1.01-1.84); 12 studies] and reductions in 30-day mortality [OR 0.53 (95% CI: 0.37-0.76); six studies] for AA versus PCC. The difference in thrombotic events with AA versus PCC was not statistically significant in the low-moderate, high, or combined risk of bias groups. The evidence from low-moderate quality real-world studies suggests that AA is superior to PCC in enhancing hemostatic efficacy and reducing in-hospital and 30-day mortality. When studies are assessed regardless of the risk of bias, the pooled hemostatic efficacy and 30-day mortality risk remain significantly better with AA versus PCC.

Clinical guideline on reversal of direct oral anticoagulants in patients with life threatening bleeding

BACKGROUND

Anticoagulation is essential for the treatment and prevention of thromboembolic events. Current guidelines recommend direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) over vitamin K antagonists in DOAC-eligible patients. The major complication of anticoagulation is serious or life-threatening haemorrhage, which may necessitate prompt haemostatic intervention. Reversal of DOACs may also be required for patients in need of urgent invasive procedures. This guideline from the European Society of Anaesthesiology and Intensive Care (ESAIC) aims to provide evidence-based recommendations and suggestions on how to manage patients on DOACs undergoing urgent or emergency procedures including the treatment of DOAC-induced bleeding.

DESIGN

A systematic literature search was performed, examining four drug comparators (dabigatran, rivaroxaban, apixaban, edoxaban) and clinical scenarios ranging from planned to emergency surgery with the outcomes of mortality, haematoma growth and thromboembolic complications. The GRADE (Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation) methodology was used to assess the methodological quality of the included studies. Consensus on the wording of the recommendations was achieved by a Delphi process.

RESULTS

So far, no results from prospective randomised trials comparing two active comparators (e.g. a direct reversal agent and an unspecific haemostatic agent such as prothrombin complex concentrate: PCC) have been published yet and the majority of publications were uncontrolled and observational studies. Thus, the certainty of evidence was assessed to be either low or very low (GRADE C). Thirty-five recommendations and clinical practice statements were developed. During the Delphi process, strong consensus (>90% agreement) was achieved in 97.1% of recommendations and consensus (75 to 90% agreement) in 2.9%.

DISCUSSION

DOAC-specific coagulation monitoring may help in patients at risk for elevated DOAC levels, whereas global coagulation tests are not recommended to exclude clinically relevant DOAC levels. In urgent clinical situations, haemostatic treatment using either the direct reversal or nonspecific haemostatic agents should be started without waiting for DOAC level monitoring. DOAC levels above 50 ng ml-1 may be considered clinically relevant necessitating haemostatic treatment before urgent or emergency procedures. Before cardiac surgery under activated factor Xa (FXa) inhibitors, the use of andexanet alfa is not recommended because of inhibition of unfractionated heparin, which is needed for extracorporeal circulation. In the situation of DOAC overdose without bleeding, no haemostatic intervention is suggested, instead measures to eliminate the DOACs should be taken. Due to the lack of published results from comparative prospective, randomised studies, the superiority of reversal treatment strategy vs. a nonspecific haemostatic treatment is unclear for most urgent and emergency procedures and bleeding. Due to the paucity of clinical data, no recommendations for the use of recombinant activated factor VII as a nonspecific haemostatic agent can be given.

CONCLUSION

In the clinical scenarios of DOAC intake before urgent procedures and DOAC-induced bleeding, practitioners should evaluate the risk of bleeding of the procedure and the severity of the DOAC-induced bleeding before initiating treatment. Optimal reversal strategy remains to be determined in future trials for most clinical settings.

ANMCO/SIMEU consensus document on the use of reversal agents for antithrombotic therapies in patients with ongoing bleeding or at high risk of haemorrhagic events

In recent decades, an incredible evolution in antithrombotic therapies used for treating patients with atherosclerosis, atrial fibrillation, and venous thromboembolism has been observed, leading to the availability of increasingly safe drugs. Nonetheless, bleeding complications remain a significant concern, with considerable health, social, and economic implications. To improve the acute management of patients experiencing or at risk for major bleeding events, specific reversal agents for antithrombotic drugs have been recently developed. While these agents demonstrate effectiveness in small-scale pharmacodynamic studies and clinical trials, it is imperative to balance the benefits of reversing antiplatelet or anticoagulant therapy against the risk of prothrombotic effects. These risks include the potential loss of antithrombotic protection and the prothrombotic tendencies associated with bleeding, major surgery, or trauma. This joint document of the Italian Association of Hospital Cardiologists (Associazione Nazionale Medici Cardiologi Ospedalieri) and the Italian Society of Emergency Medicine (Società Italiana di Medicina d'Emergenza-Urgenza) delineates the key features and efficacy of available reversal agents. It also provides practical flowcharts to guide their use in patients with active bleeding or those at elevated risk of major bleeding events.

Code ICH: A Call to Action

Intracerebral hemorrhage is the most serious type of stroke, leading to high rates of severe disability and mortality. Hematoma expansion is an independent predictor of poor functional outcome and is a compelling target for intervention. For decades, randomized trials aimed at decreasing hematoma expansion through single interventions have failed to meet their primary outcomes of statistically significant improvement in neurological outcomes. A wide range of evidence suggests that ultra-early bundled care, with multiple simultaneous interventions in the acute phase, offers the best hope of limiting hematoma expansion and improving functional recovery. Patients with intracerebral hemorrhage who fail to receive early aggressive care have worse outcomes, suggesting that an important treatment opportunity exists. This consensus statement puts forth a call to action to establish a protocol for Code ICH, similar to current strategies used for the management of acute ischemic stroke, through which early intervention, bundled care, and time-based metrics have substantially improved neurological outcomes. Based on current evidence, we advocate for the widespread adoption of an early bundle of care for patients with intracerebral hemorrhage focused on time-based metrics for blood pressure control and emergency reversal of anticoagulation, with the goal of optimizing the benefit of these already widely used interventions. We hope Code ICH will endure as a structural platform for continued innovation, standardization of best practices, and ongoing quality improvement for years to come.

Oral Anticoagulants Beyond Warfarin

Direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) have largely replaced vitamin K antagonists, mostly warfarin, for the main indications for oral anticoagulation, prevention and treatment of venous thromboembolism, and prevention of embolic stroke in atrial fibrillation. While DOACs offer practical, fixed-dose anticoagulation in many patients, specific restrictions or contraindications may apply. DOACs are not sufficiently effective in high-thrombotic risk conditions such as antiphospholipid syndrome and mechanical heart valves. Patients with cancer-associated thrombosis may benefit from DOACs, but the bleeding risk, particularly in those with gastrointestinal or urogenital tumors, must be carefully weighed. In patients with frailty, excess body weight, and/or moderate-to-severe chronic kidney disease, DOACs must be cautiously administered and may require laboratory monitoring. Reversal agents have been developed and approved for life-threatening bleeding. In addition, the clinical testing of potentially safer anticoagulants such as factor XI(a) inhibitors is important to further optimize anticoagulant therapy in an increasingly elderly and frail population worldwide.

Prognostic variations between 'primary' and 'progressive' muscle-invasive bladder cancer following radical cystectomy: a novel propensity score-based multicenter cohort study

OBJECTIVE

To assess prognostic differences between primary and progressive muscle-invasive bladder cancer (MIBC) following radical cystectomy.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

The Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database was used to abstract MIBC data following radical cystectomy from 2000 to 2019. Patients were classified as either 'Primary' MIBC (defined as the presentation of muscle-invasive disease at initial diagnosis) or 'Progressive' MIBC (defined as a non-muscle invasive disease that later progressed to MIBC). Baseline characteristics for the two groups were balanced using a propensity score overlap weight (PSOW) technique. Survival differences between the two groups were analyzed using Kaplan-Meier's plots and log-rank tests. Cox's proportional hazard regression was used to assess risk factors associated with overall survival (OS) and cancer-specific survival (CSS).

RESULTS

Six thousand six hundred thirty-two MIBC patients were identified in the SEER database. Among them, 83.3% ( n =5658) were considered primary MIBC patients, and 16.7% ( n =974) were categorized as progressive MIBC patients. Distribution of baseline covariates, including age, sex, race, T stage, N stage, tumour grade, marital status, and chemotherapy, were well-balanced after PSOWs were applied. After stable PSOW adjustments, Kaplan-Meier survival analysis showed that the CSS for progressive MIBC [hazard ratio (HR)=1.25, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.12-1.38, P <0.001) was poorer than the primary MIBC group. However, the difference in OS (HR=1.08, 95% CI: 0.99-1.18) was not significant ( P =0.073). Multivariate analysis also suggested that patients with progressive MIBC have significantly poorer CSS (HR=1.24, 95% CI: 1.19-1.38, P <0.001) but not OS (HR=1.08, 95% CI: 0.99-1.18, P =0.089).

CONCLUSION

CSS for progressive MIBC patients appears worse than for those with primary MIBC. This highlights the need to direct more resources for this patient population and particularly for high-risk cases of non-MIBC, where timely radical surgery will improve patients prognoses.

Use of Andexanet Alfa for Factor Xa Inhibitor Reversal in US Verified Trauma Centers: A National Survey

Direct oral factor Xa inhibitors are replacing vitamin K-dependent antagonists as anticoagulation treatment in many clinical scenarios. Trauma centers are noting an increase in patients presenting on these medications. The 2018 Food and Drug Administration approval of andexanet alfa provides an alternative anticoagulation reversal. Barriers may limit utilization of new medications including a lack of grade 1A evidence supporting the use of prothrombin complex concentrate (PCC) versus andexanet alfa and cost. To evaluate barriers of andexanet alfa utilization by trauma surgeons, a 15-question survey was conducted. There was a 9% completion rate (n = 89). The results revealed 23.5% would choose andexanet alfa as first-line treatment in children, and 25.8% as first-line treatment in adults. The majority of respondents, 64.7% and 67.4%, would use PCC preferentially in children and adults, respectively. Respondents indicated that cost burden was an overriding factor (76.3%); 42.4% cited lack of high-level efficacy data of andexanet alfa for reversal of factor Xa inhibitors. Additional double-blinded multi-institutional randomized controlled trials comparing 4F-PCC and andexanet alfa for factor Xa inhibitor reversal are needed to support efficacy especially with the increased cost associated.

Optimal management of cardiac surgery patients using direct oral anticoagulants: recommendations for clinical practice

OBJECTIVES

Literature is scarce on the management of patients using direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) undergoing elective, urgent and emergency surgery. Therefore, we summarize the current evidence and provide literature-based recommendations for the management of patients on DOACs in the perioperative phase.

METHODS

A general literature review was conducted on the pharmacology of DOACs and for recommendations on the management of cardiac surgical patients on DOACs. Additionally, we performed a systematic review for studies on the use of direct DOAC reversal agents in the emergency cardiac surgical setting.

RESULTS

When surgery is elective, the DOAC cessation strategy is relatively straightforward and should be adapted to the renal function. The same approach applies to urgent cases, but additional DOAC activity drug level monitoring tests may be useful. In emergency cases, idarucizumab can be safely administered to patients on dabigatran in any of the perioperative phases. However, andexanet alfa, which is not registered for perioperative use, should not be administered in the preoperative phase to reverse the effect of factor Xa inhibitors, as it may induce temporary heparin resistance. Finally, the administration of (activated) prothrombin complex concentrate may be considered in all patients on DOACs, and such concentrates are generally readily available.

CONCLUSIONS

DOACs offer several advantages over vitamin K antagonists, but care must be taken in patients undergoing cardiac surgery. Although elective and urgent cases can be managed relatively straightforwardly, the management of emergency cases requires particular attention.

Concomitant andexanet alfa and 4 F-PCC for Factor Xa inhibitor associated intracranial hemorrhage

Andexanet alfa is the only FDA approved drug for acute reversal of life-threatening bleeding associated with oral factor Xa inhibitor agents. The case series investigates clinical outcomes of four patients receiving concomitant Andexanet alfa and Four Factor Prothrombin Concentrate Complex (4 F-PCC) for acute reversal of intracranial hemorrhage. Following administration, effective hemostasis was achieved in two patients (50%) and one patient (25%) experienced an acute ischemic stroke. Two patients (50%) expired prior to discharge without achieving hemostasis. This case series serves to further expand the limited data on the concomitant administration of Andexanet alfa and 4 F-PCC.

Management of major bleeding for anticoagulated patients in the Emergency Department: an European experts consensus statement

An increasing number of patients presenting to the emergency department (ED) with life-threatening bleeding are using oral anticoagulants, such as warfarin, Factor IIa and Factor Xa inhibitors. Achieving rapid and controlled haemostasis is critically important to save the patient's life. This multidisciplinary consensus paper provides a systematic and pragmatic approach to the management of anticoagulated patients with severe bleeding at the ED. Repletion and reversal management of the specific anticoagulants is described in detail. For patients on vitamin K antagonists, the administration of vitamin K and repletion of clotting factors with four-factor prothrombin complex concentrate provides real-time ability to stop the bleeding. For patients using a direct oral anticoagulant, specific antidotes are necessary to reverse the anticoagulative effect. For patients receiving the thrombin inhibitor dabigatran, treatment with idarucizamab has been demonstrated to reverse the hypocoagulable state. For patients receiving a factor Xa inhibitor (apixaban or rivaroxaban), andexanet alfa is the indicated antidote in patients with major bleeding. Lastly, specific treatment strategies are discussed in patients using anticoagulants with major traumatic bleeding, intracranial haemorrhage or gastrointestinal bleeding.

Clinical Relevance of Preclinical and Clinical Studies of Four-Factor Prothrombin Complex Concentrate for Treatment of Bleeding Related to Direct Oral Anticoagulants

Direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) are widely used for the prevention and treatment of venous thromboembolism and stroke. When emergency reversal of DOAC-related anticoagulation is required, specific DOAC reversal agents are recommended, including idarucizumab for dabigatran reversal and andexanet alfa for apixaban and rivaroxaban reversal. However, specific reversal agents are not always available, andexanet alfa has not been approved for urgent surgery, and clinicians need to know the patient's anticoagulant medication before administering these treatments. Four-factor prothrombin complex concentrates (4F-PCCs) are recognized as nonspecific, alternative hemostatic agents for treatment of DOAC-related bleeding. Evidence from preclinical and clinical studies shows that they may reduce the anticoagulant effects of DOACs and may help control DOAC-related bleeding. However, randomized controlled trials are lacking, and most data are from retrospective or single-arm prospective studies in bleeding associated with activated factor X inhibitors. There are no clinical data showing the efficacy of 4F-PCC for the treatment of bleeding in dabigatran-treated patients. This review focuses on the current evidence of 4F-PCC use in controlling bleeding associated with DOACs and provides an expert opinion on the relevance of these data for clinical practice. The current treatment landscape, unmet needs, and future directions are also discussed.

Treatment of Factor-Xa Inhibitor-associated Bleeding with Andexanet Alfa or 4 Factor PCC: A Multicenter Feasibility Retrospective Study

Background: There are no randomized trials comparing andexanet alfa and 4 factor prothrombin complex concentrate (4F-PCC) for the treatment of factor Xa inhibitor (FXa-I)-associated bleeds, and observational studies lack important patient characteristics. We pursued this study to demonstrate the feasibility of acquiring relevant patient characteristics from electronic health records. Secondarily, we explored outcomes in patients with life-threatening FXa-I associated bleeds after adjusting for these variables. Methods: We conducted a multicenter, chart review of 100 consecutive adult patients with FXa-I associated intracerebral hemorrhage (50) or gastrointestinal bleeding (50) treated with andexanet alfa or 4F-PCC. We collected demographic, clinical, laboratory, and imaging data including time from last factor FXa-I dose and bleed onset. Results: Mean (SD) age was 75 (12) years; 34% were female. Estimated time from last FXa-I dose to bleed onset was present in most cases (76%), and patients treated with andexanet alfa and 4F-PCC were similar in baseline characteristics. Hemostatic efficacy was excellent/good in 88% and 76% of patients treated with andexanet alfa and 4F-PCC, respectively (P = 0.29). Rates of thrombotic events within 90 days were 14% and 16% in andexanet alfa and 4F-PCC patients, respectively (P = 0.80). Survival to hospital discharge was 92% and 76% in andexanet alfa and 4F-PCC patients, respectively (P = 0.25). Inclusion of an exploratory propensity score and treatment in a logistic regression model resulted in an odds ratio in favor of andexanet alfa of 2.01 (95% confidence interval 0.67-6.06) for excellent/good hemostatic efficacy, although the difference was not statistically significant. Conclusion: Important patient characteristics are often documented supporting the feasibility of a large observational study comparing real-life outcomes in patients with FXa-I-associated bleeds treated with andexanet alfa or 4F-PCC. The small sample size in the current study precluded definitive conclusions regarding the safety and efficacy of andexanet alfa or 4F-PCC in FXa-I-associated bleeds.

Lower mortality with andexanet alfa vs 4-factor prothrombin complex concentrate for factor Xa inhibitor-related major bleeding in a U.S. hospital-based observational study

Background

Well-designed studies with sufficient sample size comparing andexanet alfa vs 4-factor prothrombin complex concentrate (4F-PCC) in routine clinical practice to evaluate clinical outcomes are limited.

Objectives

To compare in-hospital mortality in patients hospitalized with rivaroxaban- or apixaban-related major bleeding who were treated with andexanet alfa or 4F-PCC.

Methods

An observational cohort study (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT05548777) was conducted using electronic health records between May 2018 and September 2022 from 354 U.S. hospitals. Inclusion criteria were age ≥18 years, inpatient admission with diagnosis code D68.32 (bleeding due to extrinsic anticoagulation), a record of use of the factor Xa inhibitors rivaroxaban or apixaban, andexanet alfa or 4F-PCC treatment during index hospitalization, and a documented discharge disposition. Multivariable logistic regression on in-hospital mortality with andexanet alfa vs 4F-PCC was performed. The robustness of the results was assessed via a supportive propensity score-weighted logistic regression.

Results

The analysis included 4395 patients (andexanet alfa, n = 2122; 4F-PCC, n = 2273). There were 1328 patients with intracranial hemorrhage (ICH), 2567 with gastrointestinal (GI) bleeds, and 500 with critical compartment or other bleed types. In the multivariable analysis, odds of in-hospital mortality were 50% lower for andexanet alfa vs 4F-PCC (odds ratio [OR], 0.50; 95% CI, 0.39-0.65; P < .01) and were consistent for both ICH (OR, 0.55; [0.39-0.76]; P < .01) and GI bleeds (OR, 0.49 [0.29-0.81]; P = .01). Similar results were obtained from the supporting propensity score-weighted logistic regression analyses.

Conclusion

In this large observational study, treatment with andexanet alfa in patients hospitalized with rivaroxaban- or apixaban-related major bleeds was associated with 50% lower odds of in-hospital mortality than 4F-PCC. The magnitude of the risk reduction was similar in ICH and GI bleeds.

Recommendations for the use of andexanet alfa in the management of bleeding in patients on oral factor Xa inhibitors in Switzerland: Guideline from the Working Party Hemostasis of the Swiss Society of Hematology

Anticoagulants are essential in preventing and treating thrombosis. Unfortunately, their use is accompanied by an enhanced risk of bleeding. Since the introduction of direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs), the risk of major bleeding has been reduced but not eliminated. Major bleeding events related to the use of factor Xa inhibitors can be challenging to manage. In recent years, four-factor prothrombin complex concentrates have been used in patients with severe bleeding taking oral direct factor Xa inhibitors (apixaban, edoxaban and rivaroxaban). Andexanet alfa (OndexxyaTM, AstraZeneca AG) is a specially designed recombinant version of human factor Xa that acts as a decoy receptor to reverse the effects of factor Xa inhibitors. Since 2 December 2020, andexanet alfa has been used in Switzerland for adult patients receiving apixaban or rivaroxaban when reversal of anticoagulation is required because of life-threatening or uncontrolled bleeding. However, the use of andexanet alfa remains a challenge owing to its cost, the reported thrombotic complications and the fact that its efficacy mainly relates to intracranial haemorrhage. Moreover, the use of nonspecific reversal agents together with andexanet alfa is controversial. The present recommendations on the use of andexanet alfa in the management of bleeding in patients on factor Xa inhibitors in Switzerland were developed by a group of Swiss experts from the Working Party Hemostasis of the Swiss Society of Hematology. These recommendations aim to provide support to clinicians in their decision-making in the management of patients with major bleeding receiving factor Xa inhibitors.

Bleeding management in patients with direct oral anticoagulants

Bleeding events in patients under direct oral anticoagulation (DOAC) can be life-threating but are commonly not related to drug overdose. However, a relevant DOAC plasma concentration impairs the hemostasis and should therefore be ruled out immediately after hospital admission. The effect of DOAC is typically not visible in standard coagulation tests such as activated partial thrombin time or thromboplastin time. Specific anti-Xa or anti-IIa assays allow a specific drug monitoring, but they are too time-consuming in critical bleeding events and typically not available 24 h/7 d in routine care. Recent advantages in point-of-care (POC) testing might improve patient care by early exclusion of relevant DOAC levels, but sufficient validation is still lacking. POC urine analysis help to exclude DOAC in emergency patients, but does not provide a quantitative information about plasma concentration. POC viscoelastic testing (VET) can determine the DOAC effect on clotting time and helps further to reveal other concomitant bleeding disorders in emergency, e.g., factor deficiency or hyperfibrinolysis. If a relevant plasma concentration of the DOAC is assumed or was proven by either laboratory assays or POC testing, restoration of factor IIa or factor IIa activity is key for effective hemostasis. Limited evidence suggests that specific reversals for DOAC, e.g., idarucizumab for dabigatran and andexanet alfa for apixaban or rivaroxaban, might be superior to increasing thrombin generation by administration of prothrombin complex concentrates. To determinate, if DOAC reversal is indicated or not, time from last intake, anti-Xa/dTT values or results from POC tests can be considered. This experts' opinion provides a feasible decision algorithm for clinical practice.

Andexanet Alfa to Reverse the Effect of Factor Xa Inhibitors in Intracranial Hemorrhage

Andexanet alfa (AA) is a recombinant factor Xa competing for binding with factor Xa inhibitors, thereby reversing their anticoagulation effects. Since 2019, it has been approved for individuals under apixaban or rivaroxaban therapy suffering from life-threatening or uncontrolled bleeding. Apart from the pivotal trial, real-world data on the use of AA in daily clinics are scarce. We reviewed the current literature on patients with intracranial hemorrhage (ICH) and summarized the available evidence regarding several outcome parameters. On the basis of this evidence, we provide a standard operating procedure (SOP) for routine AA application. We searched PubMed and additional databases through 18 January 2023 for case reports, case series, studies, reviews, and guidelines. Data on hemostatic efficacy, in-hospital mortality, and thrombotic events were pooled and compared with the pivotal trial data. While hemostatic efficacy in world-wide clinical routine seems to be comparable to the pivotal trial, thrombotic events and in-hospital mortality appear to be substantially higher. Various confounding factors responsible for this finding such as exclusion and inclusion criteria resulting in a highly selected patient cohort within the controlled clinical trial have to be considered. The SOP provided should support physicians in patient selection for AA treatment as well as facilitate routine use and dosing. This review underlines the urgent need for more data from randomized trials to appreciate the benefit and safety profile of AA. Meanwhile, this SOP should help to improve frequency and quality of AA use in patients suffering from ICH while on apixaban or rivaroxaban treatment.

Management of bleeding in patients on direct oral anticoagulants in emergency department: where we are and where we are going

Many patients who access in the emergency department for acute bleeding are on anticoagulants; before specific reversal agents were developed, bleeding on anticoagulants was burdened with a substantial increase in morbidity and mortality. Clinical trials demonstrated favourable risk-benefit profiles of direct-acting oral anticoagulants compared with vitamin K antagonists in patients with atrial fibrillation and compared with low molecular weight heparin in patients treated and prevented from venous thromboembolism. Even if they drastically reduced some types of bleeding, particularly intracranial haemorrhage, they have not completely eliminated this risk. The arrival of a patient with active bleeding in the emergency department is always a critical scenario that involves resources and costs. In critical setting, the diagnosis and treatment of bleeding should occurred simultaneously. Understanding the pathophysiological mechanisms that occur during bleeding is essential for establish the most appropriate therapies and improve the standard of care of the haemorrhagic patients.

Multicenter experience with andexanet alfa for refractory pericardial bleeding during catheter ablation of atrial fibrillation

INTRODUCTION

Pericardial bleeding is a rare but life-threatening complication of atrial fibrillation (AF) ablation. Patients taking uninterrupted oral anticoagulation (AC) may be at increased risk for refractory bleeding despite pericardiocentesis and administration of protamine. In such cases, andexanet alfa can be given to reverse rivaroxaban or apixaban. In this study, we aim to describe the rate of acute hemostasis and thromboembolic complications with andexanet for refractory pericardial bleeding during AF ablation.

METHODS AND RESULTS

In this multicenter, case series, participating centers identified patients who received a dose of apixaban or rivaroxaban within 24 h of AF ablation, developed refractory pericardial bleeding during the procedure despite pericardiocentesis and administration of protamine and received andexanet. Eleven patients met inclusion criteria, with mean age of 73.5 ± 5.3 years and median CHA₂ DS₂ -VASc score 4 [3-5]. All patients received protamine and pericardiocentesis, and 9 (82%) received blood products. All patients received a bolus of andexanet followed, in all but one, by a 2-h infusion. Acute hemostasis was achieved in eight patients (73%) while three required emergent surgery. One patient (9%) experienced acute ST-elevation myocardial infarction after receiving andexanet. Therapeutic AC was restarted after a mean of 2.2 ± 1.9 days and oral AC was restarted after a mean of 2.9 ± 1.6 days, with no recurrent bleeding.

CONCLUSION

In patients on uninterrupted apixaban or rivaroxaban, who develop refractory pericardial bleeding during AF ablation, andexanet can achieve hemostasis thereby avoiding the need for emergent surgery. However, there is a risk of thromboembolism following administration.

Direct Oral Anticoagulants: Laboratory Challenges and Antidotes

The use of direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) is increasing in patients needing treatment of venous thromboembolism (VTE) and stroke prevention in atrial fibrillation (SPAF). This is due to the net clinical benefit in comparison to vitamin K antagonists (VKAs). The rise in DOAC use is accompanied by a remarkable reduction in heparin and VKA prescriptions. However, this rapid change in anticoagulation patterns brought new challenges to patients, prescribers, laboratories, and emergency physicians. Patients have new liberties concerning nutritional habits and comedication and no longer need frequent monitoring or dose adjustments. Still, they have to comprehend that DOACs are potent anticoagulants that may cause or contribute to bleeding. Challenges for the prescriber include decision pathways for choosing the right anticoagulant and dosage for a specific patient and to change bridging practice in case of invasive procedures. Laboratory personnel are challenged by DOAC due to limited 24/7 availability of specific DOAC quantification tests and by the impact of DOAC on routine coagulation assays and thrombophilia tests. Challenges for the emergency physician result from the increasing age of DOAC anticoagulated patients, the difficulties to establish last intake of DOAC type and dosage, to interpret coagulation test results in emergency situations, and to make decisions for or against DOAC reversal strategies in acute bleeding or urgent surgery. In conclusion, although DOACs make long-term anticoagulation safer and more convenient for patients, DOACs pose challenge to all healthcare providers involved in anticoagulation decisions. The key to correct patient management and optimal outcome therefore lies in education.

Comparison of 4-factor prothrombin complex concentrate and andexanet alfa for reversal of apixaban and rivaroxaban in the setting of intracranial hemorrhage

The purpose of this study was to evaluate and compare clinical outcomes in patients who experienced intracranial hemorrhage (ICH) while taking apixaban or rivaroxaban and were reversed with four-factor prothrombin complex concentrates (4F-PCC) or andexanet alfa (AA). This retrospective cohort included adult patients that received 4F-PCC or AA for the initial management of an apixaban- or rivaroxaban-associated ICH. A primary outcome of excellent or good hemostatic efficacy at 12 h post-reversal was assessed. Secondary outcomes evaluated were change in hematoma volume size at 12 h, functional status at discharge, need for surgical intervention or additional hemostatic agents post-reversal, new thrombotic event within 28 days, 28-day all-cause mortality, discharge disposition, and hospital and intensive care unit lengths of stay. A total of 70 patients were included (4F-PCC, n = 47; AA, n = 23). For the primary outcome analysis, 21 patients were included in the 4F-PCC group and 12 in the AA group. The rate of effective hemostasis was similar between the 4F-PCC and AA groups (66.7% vs 75%, p = 0.62). There were no statistically significant differences between the groups for secondary outcomes, including 28-day mortality (40.4% vs 39.1%, p = 0.92) and thrombotic complications within 28 days of reversal (17.0% vs 21.7%, p = 0.63). In patients who experienced an ICH while taking apixaban or rivaroxaban, 4F-PCC and AA were found to have similar rates of excellent or good hemostatic efficacy.