Safety Of Non-vitamin Research Articles

Efficacy and Safety of Non-Vitamin K Antagonist Oral Anticoagulants in Asians With Nonvalvular Atrial Fibrillation: A Network Meta-Analysis.

There are few head-to-head trials directly comparing non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants (NOACs) against one other. A network meta-analysis (NMA) was performed to examine the indirect comparisons among NOACs in Asians with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF). STATA 15.0 and ADDIS 1.16.8 softwares were used to perform the statistical analysis. Odds ratios with 95% credible intervals were applied to evaluate the end points. The probabilities of treatment rank were used to understand which interventions are more effective and safe, and the total rank probability was 1. In our NMA, the rank probabilities of apixaban in the case of stroke or systemic embolism, death from any cause, major bleeding, and intracranial hemorrhage (ICH) were 0.47, 0.49, 0.42, and 0.51, respectively. For cases of myocardial infarction, the rank probabilities of rivaroxaban were 0.40. This NMA indirectly compares the main efficacy and safety end points among NOACs in Asians with NVAF, and the rank probability analysis showed that apixaban likely performs best in cases of stroke or systemic embolism, death from any cause, and ICH; rivaroxaban may have the best performance for myocardial infarction.

Effectiveness and Safety of Non-Vitamin K Antagonist Oral Anticoagulants in Patients With Atrial Fibrillation With Hypertrophic Cardiomyopathy: A Nationwide Cohort Study

Chronic anticoagulation is recommended in patients with hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (HCM) and atrial fibrillation (AF). Non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants (NOACs) are an alternative to warfarin, but there are limited data to support their use in patients with HCM and AF. We sought to compare thromboembolic events, bleeding, and mortality between NOAC and warfarin in patients with HCM and AF. From the Korean National Health Insurance Service database during the period from January 1, 2011, to December 31, 2016, we identified a warfarin-treated group of patients with HCM and AF (n= 955) who were compared with a 1:2 propensity-matched NOAC treated group (n= 1,504). After a median follow-up of 16months, the incidence rates of ischemic stroke and major bleeding were similar between NOAC- and warfarin-treated patients with HCM and AF. NOAC-treated patients had lower incidence rates for all-cause mortality (5.11 and 10.13 events per 100 person-years for NOAC and warfarin groups) and the composite of fatal cardiovascular events (0.77 and 1.80 events per 100 person-years). Compared with warfarin, use of NOACs was associated with a significantly lower risk of all cause-mortality (hazard ratio, 0.43; 95%CI, 0.32-0.57) and composite fatal cardiovascular events (hazard ratio, 0.39; 95%CI, 0.18-0.82). Compared with warfarin, patients with HCM and AF on NOACs had similar stroke and major bleeding risks, but lower all-cause mortality and composite fatal cardiovascular events. Our data suggest that patients with HCM and AF can be safely and effectively treated with NOACs.

Efficacy and Safety of Non-Vitamin K Antagonist Oral Anticoagulants in Atrial Fibrillation Patients With Impaired Liver Function: ARetrospective Cohort Study.

BackgroundPatients with impaired liver function (ILF) were excluded from clinical trials that investigated non–vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants (NOACs) for stroke prevention in patients with atrial fibrillation. The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of NOACs in atrial fibrillation patients with ILF.Methods and ResultsA cohort study based on electronic medical records was conducted from 2009 to 2016 at a multicenter healthcare provider in Taiwan and included 6451 anticoagulated atrial fibrillation patients (aged 76.7±7.0 years, 52.5% male). Patients were classified into 2 subgroups: patients with normal liver function (n=5818) and patients with ILF (n=633, 9.8%). Cox regression analysis was performed to investigate the risks of thromboembolism, bleeding, and death associated with use of NOACs and warfarin in patients with normal liver function and ILF, respectively. In patients with normal liver function, compared with warfarin therapy (n=2928), NOAC therapy (n=4048) was associated with significantly lower risks of stroke or systemic embolism (adjusted hazard ratio: 0.75; 95% confidence interval, 0.65–0.88; P<0.001) and death (adjusted hazard ratio: 0.69; 95% confidence interval, 0.60–0.80; P<0.001) with no difference in major bleeding or gastrointestinal bleeding. In patients with ILF, compared with warfarin therapy (n=394), NOAC therapy (n=342) was associated with significantly lower risk of death (adjusted hazard ratio: 0.64; 95% confidence interval, 0.49–0.83; P<0.001), but no difference in stroke or systemic embolism, major bleeding, or gastrointestinal bleeding.ConclusionsIn atrial fibrillation patients with ILF, NOAC therapy and warfarin therapy were associated with similar risks of stroke or systemic embolism, major bleeding, and gastrointestinal bleeding.

Estimated Effectiveness and Safety of Nonvitamin K Antagonist Oral Anticoagulants Compared With Optimally Acenocoumarol Anticoagulated “Real-World” in Patients With Atrial Fibrillation

Nonvitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants (NOACs) have been proposed as an alternative to vitamin K antagonists in atrial fibrillation (AF) patients but the comparative benefits between NOACs and optimally anticoagulated patients is unknown. We estimated the absolute benefit in clinical outcomes rates of real-world effect of NOACs in optimally anticoagulated AF patients with acenocoumarol. We included 1,361 patients stable on acenocoumarol with time in therapeutic range of 100% and 6.5years of follow-up. Estimation of clinical events avoided was calculated applying hazard ratio, absolute and relative risk reduction from the real-world meta-analysis. Compared with an optimally anticoagulated population, dabigatran 110mg had the highest estimated stroke reduction (0.97%/year vs 1.47%/year; p = 0.002), and the benefit was higher than in RE-LY trial. For major bleeding, apixaban showed the highest estimated reduction (1.81%/year vs 2.83%/year; p <0.001). For mortality, the largest estimated reduction was with apixaban (2.68%/year). For gastrointestinal bleeding, only apixaban had a significant reduction compared with acenocoumarol (0.69%/year vs 1.10%/year; p = 0.004), and the reduction was significantly higher than in ARISTOTLE trial. All NOACs showed significantly lower rates for intracranial hemorrhage and had a positive Net Clinical Benefit compared with acenocoumarol. Apixaban showed the highest extended estimated Net Clinical Benefit 2.64 (95%CI 2.34 to 2.96). In conclusion, in optimally acenocoumarol anticoagulated AF patients, estimated reductions in all clinical outcomes with various NOACs are evident, with the best effectiveness and safety profile with apixaban. Indeed, the estimated effect with "real world" NOACs would probably be higher than that seen in phase-III clinical trials.

Effectiveness and Safety of Non-Vitamin K Oral Anticoagulants in Comparison to Phenprocoumon: Data from 61,000 Patients with Atrial Fibrillation.

All pivotal trials have evaluated non-vitamin K oral antagonists (NOACs) against warfarin. However, in some regions of the world, phenprocoumon is the most widely used vitamin K antagonist (VKA). There is little evidence documenting effectiveness and safety of NOACs compared with phenprocoumon in atrial fibrillation (AF). A retrospective cohort study using a German claims database was conducted to assess effectiveness (stroke, systemic embolism [SE]) and safety (bleeding leading to hospitalization) during therapy with NOACs and phenprocoumon in 61,205 AF patients. Hazard ratios (HRs) for effectiveness and safety outcomes were derived from Cox proportional hazard models, adjusting for baseline characteristics. Propensity score matching was performed as a sensitivity analysis. As a prespecified subgroup analysis, the effects of reduced NOAC dosing were compared with phenprocoumon. A total of 61,205 patients were identified in whom phenprocoumon (n = 23,823, 38.9%), apixaban (n = 10,117, 16.5%), dabigatran (n = 5,122, 8.4%), or rivaroxaban (n = 22,143, 36.2%) was initiated. After adjusting for baseline confounders, all three NOACs tested had significantly lower risks of stroke/SE compared with phenprocoumon (apixaban-HR: 0.77, 95% CI: 0.66-0.90; dabigatran-HR: 0.74, 95% CI: 0.60-0.91; rivaroxaban-HR: 0.86, 95% CI: 0.76-0.97). Apixaban (HR: 0.58, 95% CI: 0.49-0.69) and dabigatran (HR: 0.64, 95% CI: 0.50-0.80) were associated with lower bleeding risks than phenprocoumon, whereas the risk was similar for rivaroxaban and phenprocoumon. All three NOACs showed reduced risk of intracranial bleeding compared with phenprocoumon. Reduced doses of NOACs were predominantly used in patients with advanced age and comorbidities with generally similar effectiveness and safety benefits compared with phenprocumon as standard-dose NOACs.

Safety of Non-Vitamin K Antagonist Oral Anticoagulants in Clinical Practice: Focus on Rivaroxaban in Stroke Prevention in Patients With Atrial Fibrillation.

Despite direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) have overcome the most relevant limitations of vitamin K antagonists, many patients with atrial fibrillation are not receiving the appropriate anticoagulant therapy. In addition, when patients are anticoagulated with DOACs, some of them are not taking the dose recommended in the summary of product characteristics. This may be related, at least in part, to the concern about the applicability of findings from randomized clinical trials to real-life patients. In this context, performing studies in daily clinical practice to assess the efficacy and safety of DOACs in real-world setting is mandatory. The aim of this review is to update the current evidence regarding safety of rivaroxaban in clinical practice. The Rivaroxaban Once Daily Oral Direct Factor Xa Inhibition Compared with Vitamin K Antagonism for Prevention of Stroke and Embolism Trial in Atrial Fibrillation (ROCKET-AF) showed that rivaroxaban was at least as effective as warfarin for preventing stroke or systemic embolism, with similar rates of major bleeding but with lesser risk of intracranial and fatal bleedings. Data from noninterventional studies and registries have confirmed the good results of ROCKET-AF. Even more, rates of bleeding may be inferior in real-life patients, since they have a lower risk profile than those included in ROCKET-AF.

Efficacy and Safety of Non-Vitamin K Antagonist Oral Anticoagulants After Cardioversion for Nonvalvular Atrial Fibrillation

BackgroundNon-vitamin K oral anticoagulants (NOACs) are proven alternatives to vitamin K antagonists (VKAs) for the prevention of thromboembolism in patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation. However, there are few data on the efficacy and safety of NOAC therapy after cardioversion, where the risk of thromboembolic events is heightened. MethodsWe performed a random-effects meta-analysis of patients who underwent both electrical and pharmacologic cardioversion for atrial fibrillation in the RE-LY, ROCKET-AF, ARISTOTLE, ENGAGE AF–TIMI 48, and X-VeRT trials. We assessed Mantel-Haenszel pooled estimates of risk ratio (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for stroke/systemic embolism and major bleeding at ≤42 days of follow-up. ResultsThe analysis pooled 3949 patients in whom a total of 4900 cardioversions for atrial fibrillation were performed. Compared with VKAs, NOAC therapy was associated with a similar risk of stroke/systemic embolism (RR 0.84; 95% CI, 0.34-2.04) and major bleeding (RR 1.12; 95% CI, 0.52-2.42); no significant statistical heterogeneity was found among studies (Cochrane Q P = .59, I2 = 0% for stroke/systemic embolism; P = .47; I2 = 0% for major bleeding). ConclusionsThe short-term incidences of thromboembolic and major hemorrhagic events after cardioversion on NOACs were low and comparable to those observed on dose-adjusted VKA therapy. Non-vitamin K oral anticoagulants are a reasonable alternative to VKAs in patients undergoing cardioversion.

Gender Difference in Efficacy and Safety of Nonvitamin K Antagonist Oral Anticoagulants in Patients with Nonvalvular Atrial Fibrillation or Venous Thromboembolism: A Systematic Review and a Meta-Analysis of the Literature.

Limited information exists on gender-related differences in the safety and efficacy of non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants (NOACs). To assess the safety and efficacy of direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs)/NOACs in men and women pooling data from randomized controlled trials on the prevention of stroke and systemic embolism in patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation (AF) and on the acute and extended treatment of venous thromboembolism (VTE). MEDLINE and EMBASE databases were searched up to June 2014. The efficacy outcome was defined as the prevention of stroke and systemic embolism (AF studies), or as the prevention of recurrent VTE or VTE-related death (VTE studies). The safety outcome was defined as the occurrence of major and/or clinically relevant non-major bleeding. Differences in the efficacy and safety outcomes were expressed as risk ratio (RR) with pertinent 95% confidence intervals (95% CI). A total of 13 studies (> 100,000 patients) were included. DOACs appeared to have a similar efficacy and safety compared with vitamin K antagonists in female and male patients treated for nonvalvular AF and acute VTE. In the extended treatment of VTE NOACs had a RR of bleeding of 4.97 (95% CI 1.06, 23.41) in males and 1.33 (95% CI 0.63, 2.83) in females compared with placebo (subgroup difference chi-square test: 2.25, p = 0.13). No gender-related difference in the efficacy and safety of NOACs in patients with AF or acute VTE was found. A trend toward an increased risk of bleeding in male patients as compared with female patients was detected in the extended treatment of VTE.

Efficacy and Safety of Non-Vitamin K Antagonist Oral Anticoagulants versus Vitamin K Antagonist Oral Anticoagulants in Patients Undergoing Radiofrequency Catheter Ablation of Atrial Fibrillation: A Meta-Analysis.

BackgroundUse of the non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants (NOACs) is endorsed by current guidelines for stroke prevention in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF). However efficacy and safety of NOACs in patients undergoing catheter ablation (RFCA) of AF has not been well established yet.ObjectivesTo perform a meta-analysis of all studies comparing NOACs and vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants (VKAs) in patients undergoing RFCA.Data SourcesStudies were searched for in PubMed and Google Scholar databases.Study Eligibility CriteriaStudies were considered eligible if: they evaluated the clinical impact of NOACs versus VKAs; they specifically analyzed the use of anticoagulants during periprocedural phase of RFCA; they reported clinical outcome data.Study Appraisal and Synthesis Methods25 studies were selected, including 9881 cases. The summary measure used was the risk ratio (RR) with 95% confidence interval (CI). The random-effects or the fixed effect model were used to synthesize results from the selected studies.ResultsThere was no significant difference in thromboembolic complications (RR 1.39; p=0.13). Bleeding complications were significantly lower in the NOACs-treated arm as compared to VKAs (RR=0.67, p<0.001). Interestingly, a larger number of thromboembolic events was found in the VKAs-treated arm in those studies where VKAs had been interrupted during the periprocedural phase (RR=0.68; p=ns). In this same subgroup a significantly higher incidence of both minor (RR=0.54; p=0.002) and major bleeding (RR=0.41; p=0.01) events was recorded. Conversely, the incidence of thromboembolic events in the VKAs-treated arm was significantly lower in those studies with uninterrupted periprocedural anticoagulation treatment (RR=1.89; p=0.02).LimitationsAs with every meta-analysis, no patients-level data were available.Conclusions and ImplicationsThe use of NOACs in patients undergoing RFCA is safe, given the lower incidence of bleedings observed with NOACs. On the other side, periprocedural interruption of VKAs and bridging with heparin is associated with a higher bleeding rate with no significant benefit on onset of thromboembolic events.