65
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Effectiveness and Safety of Dabigatran, Rivaroxaban, and Apixaban Versus Warfarin in Nonvalvular Atrial Fibrillation

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Background

          The introduction of non–vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants has been a major advance for stroke prevention in atrial fibrillation; however, outcomes achieved in clinical trials may not translate to routine practice. We aimed to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of dabigatran, rivaroxaban, and apixaban by comparing each agent with warfarin.

          Methods and Results

          Using a large US insurance database, we identified privately insured and Medicare Advantage patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation who were users of apixaban, dabigatran, rivaroxaban, or warfarin between October 1, 2010, and June 30, 2015. We created 3 matched cohorts using 1:1 propensity score matching: apixaban versus warfarin (n=15 390), dabigatran versus warfarin (n=28 614), and rivaroxaban versus warfarin (n=32 350). Using Cox proportional hazards regression, we found that for stroke or systemic embolism, apixaban was associated with lower risk (hazard ratio [ HR] 0.67, 95% CI 0.46–0.98, P=0.04), but dabigatran and rivaroxaban were associated with a similar risk (dabigatran: HR 0.98, 95% CI 0.76–1.26, P=0.98; rivaroxaban: HR 0.93, 95% CI 0.72–1.19, P=0.56). For major bleeding, apixaban and dabigatran were associated with lower risk (apixaban: HR 0.45, 95% CI 0.34–0.59, P<0.001; dabigatran: HR 0.79, 95% CI 0.67–0.94, P<0.01), and rivaroxaban was associated with a similar risk ( HR 1.04, 95% CI 0.90–1.20], P=0.60). All non–vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants were associated with a lower risk of intracranial bleeding.

          Conclusions

          In patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation, apixaban was associated with lower risks of both stroke and major bleeding, dabigatran was associated with similar risk of stroke but lower risk of major bleeding, and rivaroxaban was associated with similar risks of both stroke and major bleeding in comparison to warfarin.

          Related collections

          Most cited references68

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: not found
          • Article: not found

          A Proportional Hazards Model for the Subdistribution of a Competing Risk

            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: found
            Is Open Access

            Balance diagnostics for comparing the distribution of baseline covariates between treatment groups in propensity-score matched samples

            The propensity score is a subject's probability of treatment, conditional on observed baseline covariates. Conditional on the true propensity score, treated and untreated subjects have similar distributions of observed baseline covariates. Propensity-score matching is a popular method of using the propensity score in the medical literature. Using this approach, matched sets of treated and untreated subjects with similar values of the propensity score are formed. Inferences about treatment effect made using propensity-score matching are valid only if, in the matched sample, treated and untreated subjects have similar distributions of measured baseline covariates. In this paper we discuss the following methods for assessing whether the propensity score model has been correctly specified: comparing means and prevalences of baseline characteristics using standardized differences; ratios comparing the variance of continuous covariates between treated and untreated subjects; comparison of higher order moments and interactions; five-number summaries; and graphical methods such as quantile–quantile plots, side-by-side boxplots, and non-parametric density plots for comparing the distribution of baseline covariates between treatment groups. We describe methods to determine the sampling distribution of the standardized difference when the true standardized difference is equal to zero, thereby allowing one to determine the range of standardized differences that are plausible with the propensity score model having been correctly specified. We highlight the limitations of some previously used methods for assessing the adequacy of the specification of the propensity-score model. In particular, methods based on comparing the distribution of the estimated propensity score between treated and untreated subjects are uninformative. Copyright © 2009 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Rivaroxaban versus warfarin in nonvalvular atrial fibrillation.

              The use of warfarin reduces the rate of ischemic stroke in patients with atrial fibrillation but requires frequent monitoring and dose adjustment. Rivaroxaban, an oral factor Xa inhibitor, may provide more consistent and predictable anticoagulation than warfarin. In a double-blind trial, we randomly assigned 14,264 patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation who were at increased risk for stroke to receive either rivaroxaban (at a daily dose of 20 mg) or dose-adjusted warfarin. The per-protocol, as-treated primary analysis was designed to determine whether rivaroxaban was noninferior to warfarin for the primary end point of stroke or systemic embolism. In the primary analysis, the primary end point occurred in 188 patients in the rivaroxaban group (1.7% per year) and in 241 in the warfarin group (2.2% per year) (hazard ratio in the rivaroxaban group, 0.79; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.66 to 0.96; P<0.001 for noninferiority). In the intention-to-treat analysis, the primary end point occurred in 269 patients in the rivaroxaban group (2.1% per year) and in 306 patients in the warfarin group (2.4% per year) (hazard ratio, 0.88; 95% CI, 0.74 to 1.03; P<0.001 for noninferiority; P=0.12 for superiority). Major and nonmajor clinically relevant bleeding occurred in 1475 patients in the rivaroxaban group (14.9% per year) and in 1449 in the warfarin group (14.5% per year) (hazard ratio, 1.03; 95% CI, 0.96 to 1.11; P=0.44), with significant reductions in intracranial hemorrhage (0.5% vs. 0.7%, P=0.02) and fatal bleeding (0.2% vs. 0.5%, P=0.003) in the rivaroxaban group. In patients with atrial fibrillation, rivaroxaban was noninferior to warfarin for the prevention of stroke or systemic embolism. There was no significant between-group difference in the risk of major bleeding, although intracranial and fatal bleeding occurred less frequently in the rivaroxaban group. (Funded by Johnson & Johnson and Bayer; ROCKET AF ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00403767.).
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                J Am Heart Assoc
                J Am Heart Assoc
                10.1002/(ISSN)2047-9980
                JAH3
                ahaoa
                Journal of the American Heart Association: Cardiovascular and Cerebrovascular Disease
                John Wiley and Sons Inc. (Hoboken )
                2047-9980
                13 June 2016
                June 2016
                : 5
                : 6 ( doiID: 10.1002/jah3.2016.5.issue-6 )
                : e003725
                Affiliations
                [ 1 ] Robert D. and Patricia E. Kern Center for the Science of Health Care DeliveryMayo Clinic Rochester MN
                [ 2 ] Division of Health Care Policy and Research Department of Health Sciences ResearchMayo Clinic Rochester MN
                [ 3 ] Department of Emergency MedicineMayo Clinic Rochester MN
                [ 4 ] Division of Cardiovascular DiseasesMayo Clinic Rochester MN
                [ 5 ] Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology Department of MedicineMayo Clinic Scottsdale AZ
                [ 6 ]Optum Labs Cambridge MA
                Author notes
                [*] [* ] Correspondence to: Xiaoxi Yao, PhD, Robert D. and Patricia E. Kern Center for the Science of Health Care Delivery, Mayo Clinic, 200 First Street SW, Rochester, MN 55905. E‐mail: yao.xiaoxi@ 123456mayo.edu
                Article
                JAH31563
                10.1161/JAHA.116.003725
                4937291
                27412905
                2a8eb8cd-2e4d-4497-9188-332773036713
                © 2016 The Authors. Published on behalf of the American Heart Association, Inc., by Wiley Blackwell.

                This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution‐NonCommercial‐NoDerivs License, which permits use and distribution in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited, the use is non‐commercial and no modifications or adaptations are made.

                History
                : 13 April 2016
                : 13 May 2016
                Page count
                Pages: 18
                Funding
                Funded by: Mayo Clinic Robert D. and Patricia E. Kern Center for the Science of Health Care Delivery
                Categories
                Original Research
                Original Research
                Health Services and Outcomes Research
                Custom metadata
                2.0
                jah31563
                June 2016
                Converter:WILEY_ML3GV2_TO_NLMPMC version:4.9.1 mode:remove_FC converted:28.06.2016

                Cardiovascular Medicine
                atrial fibrillation,bleeding,non–vitamin k antagonist oral anticoagulants,stroke,warfarin,secondary prevention,transplantation,anticoagulants,cerebrovascular disease/stroke

                Comments

                Comment on this article