Comparative Effects Between Direct Oral Anticoagulants for Acute Venous Thromboembolism: Indirect Comparison From Randomized Controlled Trials

Head-to-head ex vivo comparison of clinically used direct anticoagulant drugs

An imbalance in coagulation is associated with cardiovascular events. For prevention and treatment, anticoagulants, currently mainly xabans and gatrans, are used. The purpose of the present study was to provide a head-to-head comparison since there are no studies directly evaluating these novel anticoagulants. An additional aim was to find whether selected anthropological and biochemical factors can affect their anticoagulant properties as they are used in fixed doses. In this cross-sectional study, blood from 50 generally healthy donors was collected, and coagulation responses to dabigatran, argatroban, rivaroxaban, and apixaban, at a concentration of 1 μM, were analyzed. Heparin was used as a positive control. Prothrombin time (PT) expressed as international normalized ratio (INR) and activated partial thromboplastin time (aPTT) were measured and compared. Rivaroxaban was the most active according to PT/INR while argatroban according to aPTT. The ex vivo anticoagulant effect measured by INR correlated inversely with body mass index (BMI) in all four anticoagulants tested. Shortening of aPTT was associated with higher cholesterol and triglyceride levels. No sex-related differences were observed in response to the anticoagulant treatments. As this was an ex vivo study and pharmacokinetic factors were not included, the influence of BMI is of high therapeutic importance.

How do network meta-analyses address intransitivity when assessing certainty of evidence: a systematic survey

OBJECTIVES

To describe how systematic reviews with network meta-analyses (NMAs) that used the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) NMA approach addressed intransitivity when assessing certainty of evidence.

DESIGN

Systematic survey.

DATA SOURCES

Medline, Embase and Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews from September 2014 to October 2022.

ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA

Systematic reviews of randomised controlled trials with aggregate data NMAs that used the GRADE NMA approach for assessing certainty of evidence.

DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS

We documented how reviewers described methods for addressing intransitivity when assessing certainty of evidence, how often they rated down for intransitivity and their explanations for rating down.

RESULTS

Of the 268 eligible systematic reviews, 44.8% (120/268) mentioned intransitivity when describing methods for assessing the certainty of evidence. Of these, 28.3% (34/120) considered effect modifiers and from this subset, 67.6% (23/34) specified the effect modifiers; however, no systematic review noted how they chose the effect modifiers. 15.0% (18/120) mentioned looking for differences between the direct comparisons that inform the indirect estimate. No review specified a threshold for difference in effect modifiers between the direct comparisons that would lead to rating down for intransitivity. Reviewers noted rating down indirect evidence for intransitivity in 33.1% of systematic reviews, and noted intransitivity for network estimates in 23.0% of reviews. Authors provided an explanation for rating down for intransitivity in 59.6% (31/52) of the cases in which they rated down. Of the 31 in which they provided an explanation, 74.2% (23/31) noted they detected differences in effect modifiers and 67.7% (21/31) specified in what effect modifiers they detected differences.

CONCLUSIONS

A third of systematic reviews with NMAs using the GRADE approach rated down for intransitivity. Limitations in reporting of methods to address intransitivity proved considerable. Whether the problem is that reviewers neglected to address rating down for transitivity at all, or whether they did consider but not report, is not clear. At minimum systematic reviews with NMAs need to improve their reporting practices regarding intransitivity; it may well be that they need to improve their practice in transitivity assessment. How to best address intransitivity may remain unclear for many reviewers thus additional GRADE guidance providing practical instructions for addressing intransitivity may be desirable.

Comparison of Effectiveness and Safety Among 3 Direct Oral Anticoagulants in Patients With Venous Thromboembolism - A Single-Center Retrospective Study

Background: Direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs), including edoxaban, rivaroxaban, and apixaban, are administered for the treatment of venous thromboembolism (VTE) in Japan. However, only a few reports have compared the effectiveness and safety of these DOACs. Methods and Results: We retrospectively enrolled 702 patients who received DOACs for VTE treatment between September 2014 and March 2020. We investigated patient demographics, VTE recurrence, major bleeding, and mortality until March 2021, and compared them among the 3 DOACs. Most patients (~70%; n=496) were prescribed edoxaban, followed by apixaban (n=107) and rivaroxaban (n=99). Age, body mass index, renal function, and the proportion of cancer patients did not differ significantly among the DOACs. Edoxaban was administered relatively more in women with low body weight and anemia. The rate of pulmonary embolism was significantly lower among patients receiving edoxaban than apixaban or rivaroxaban (24.4% vs. 41.1% and 53.5%, respectively). VTE reoccurred in 2 patients administered apixaban and 1 patient administered edoxaban. The cumulative incidence of major bleeding at 1 year was 11.7%, 18.5%, and 9.0% in the edoxaban, apixaban, and rivaroxaban groups, respectively. There were no significant differences in the cumulative incidence of major bleeding and all-cause death, estimated by Kaplan-Meier analysis, among the DOACs (log-rank P=0.316 and 0.722, respectively). Conclusions: The safety of the 3 DOACs did not differ significantly in clinical settings, despite differences in patient demographics.

Differential effect of direct oral anticoagulants on thrombin generation and fibrinolysis in patients with atrial fibrillation and venous thromboembolism

BACKGROUND

Recent reports suggest that direct oral anticoagulants (DOAC) may induce different anticoagulant and profibrinolytic responses. We performed a head-to-head comparison of the changes in thrombin generation (TG) parameters and tissue plasminogen activator (t-PA)-induced clot lysis produced by different DOAC.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

We tested 137 plasma samples from patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation (n=72) and venous thromboembolism (n=65) under treatment with apixaban (n=38), edoxaban (n=29), rivaroxaban (n=39), or dabigatran (n=31). TG was evaluated by a fluorometric assay and fibrinolysis by measuring the lysis time of clots exposed to 40 ng/mL t-PA.

RESULTS

Trough-to-peak changes of TG parameters, along with correlation analysis, showed that all DOAC prolonged the lag-time in a concentration-dependent fashion. As for the other parameters, anti-factor Xa drugs markedly reduced the thrombin peak and velocity index but had little (rivaroxaban) or no effect on endogenous thrombin potential (ETP); dabigatran, instead, reduced ETP, weakly decreased thrombin peak and did not influence the velocity index, as also inferred from the changes in TG values after neutralisation of dabigatran with idarucizumab. Concerning the profibrinolytic effect of DOAC, intergroup comparison showed that the clot lysis time of dabigatran samples was significantly shorter than that of the apixaban and rivaroxaban samples, at both C-Trough and C-Peak. Moreover, a significant correlation between trough-to-peak changes in drug level and clot lysis time was only observed in the dabigatran group (rho=0.53). Finally, after DOAC removal by DOAC-stop, only dabigatran samples showed a significant increase in lysis time.

DISCUSSION

Our data show that dabigatran inhibits TG in a different way than anti-Xa DOAC; moreover, under our conditions, only dabigatran displayed profibrinolytic activity, most likely because of its distinctive effect on the TG curve.

The current place of direct oral anticoagulants in the prevention/treatment of venous thromboembolism

Venous thromboembolism (VTE; includes deep venous thrombosis, DVT, and pulmonary embolism, PE) represents the third most common acute cardiovascular syndrome. Contemporary VTE management comprises primary prevention in high-risk patients, treatment of established VTE, and prevention of its recurrence (secondary prevention). Anticoagulants are the basis of VTE pharmacological prophylaxis and treatment. For several decades, parenteral (heparin and low-molecular-weight heparins, LMWHs) and oral anticoagulants (vitamin K antagonists, VKAs) have been the cornerstone of VTE prevention/treatment. The introduction of direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs: thrombin inhibitor dabigatran and Xa inhibitors rivaroxaban, apixaban, edoxaban, and betrixaban) markedly improved the management of VTE by overcoming many disadvantages of conventional anticoagulants. For primary VTE prevention in patients after total hip/knee arthroplasty, rivaroxaban, apixaban, and dabigatran are preferred over LMWHs, due to comparable efficacy and safety, but favourable acceptability (avoided everyday injections). In other high-risk populations (other surgical patients, acutely ill medical patients), LMWHs are still the recommended option. Betrixaban is currently the only DOAC approved for VTE prophylaxis in medically ill patients during and after hospitalization. For acute VTE treatment and secondary prevention, DOACs (rivaroxaban, apixaban, edoxaban, and dabigatran) are recommended as the first-line therapy in the general population. DOACs proved to be similarly effective but safer than VKAs. In some specific populations, DOACs also seem to be advantageous over conventional treatment (patients with renal impairment, elderly, long-term secondary prevention in cancer patients). Currently, there is no data from randomized head-to-head comparative studies between the DOAC classes or representatives so the choice is made mainly according to patient characteristics and pharmacokinetic properties of the drug.