+1 Recommend
1 collections
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Using non-vitamin K oral anticoagulants in specific patient populations: a study of Korean cases

      Read this article at

          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.


          Non-vitamin K oral anticoagulants (NOACs) are increasingly used as alternatives to conventional therapies and have considerable accumulated real-world clinical data in patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF) or venous thromboembolism (VTE). However, it is not easy to make a complete changeover to NOACs in real-world clinical practice because NOACs still have challenges in specific patient populations (eg, Asian patients, NVAF patients presenting with acute coronary syndrome [ACS], dialysis patients with NVAF, patients with cancer-associated VTE, etc.). Clinical data on the optimal dose of NOACs in Asian patients with NVAF are not sufficient. The intensity of NOAC and antiplatelet treatment and the duration of antiplatelet treatment should be adjusted according to the bleeding and thrombotic risk profiles of the individual NVAF patient presenting with ACS. Increased bleeding risk and unclear efficacy of NOACs in dialysis patients with NVAF should be considered when making decisions on whether to give NOACs for these patients. If dialysis patients with NVAF require anticoagulant for stroke prevention, then apixaban could be considered while awaiting more clinical efficacy and safety data. Additional studies are needed to determine the utility of continuing treatment with reduced-dose NOACs for long-term therapy after VTE. We have enough experiences in using NOACs in cancer patients showing the benefit of antithrombotic treatment counterbalanced the bleeding risk; however, some challenges of cancer-associated VTE management exist due to differences in cancer types or chemotherapy regimens and comorbidities. Different dosing regimens among NOACs may impact on medication adherence; thus, individual patient preference should be considered in choosing a particular NOAC. A significant proportion of patients remain on warfarin because of the high price of NOACs and variability in reimbursement coverage. To compensate clinical-evidence and achieve optimal use of NOACs, we should pay attention to the outcomes of ongoing studies and evaluate more real-world data.

          Related collections

          Most cited references 53

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

          2014 ESC guidelines on the diagnosis and management of acute pulmonary embolism.

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

            Management of antithrombotic therapy in atrial fibrillation patients presenting with acute coronary syndrome and/or undergoing percutaneous coronary or valve interventions: a joint consensus document of the European Society of Cardiology Working Group on Thrombosis, European Heart Rhythm Association (EHRA), European Association of Percutaneous Cardiovascular Interventions (EAPCI) and European Association of Acute Cardiac Care (ACCA) endorsed by the Heart Rhythm Society (HRS) and Asia-Pacific Heart Rhythm Society (APHRS).

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

              Concomitant use of antiplatelet therapy with dabigatran or warfarin in the Randomized Evaluation of Long-Term Anticoagulation Therapy (RE-LY) trial.

              The Randomized Evaluation of Long-term Anticoagulation Therapy (RE-LY) trial showed that dabigatran etexilate 150 mg BID was superior and dabigatran etexilate 110 mg BID was noninferior to warfarin in preventing stroke and systemic embolism in patients with atrial fibrillation. In this subgroup analysis, we assess the efficacy and safety of dabigatran in patients who did and did not receive concomitant antiplatelets. All comparisons used a Cox proportional hazards model with adjustments made for risk factors for bleeding. A time-dependent analysis was performed when comparing patients with concomitant antiplatelets with those without. Of 18 113 patients, 6952 (38.4%) received concomitant aspirin or clopidogrel at some time during the study. Dabigatran etexilate 110 mg BID was noninferior to warfarin in reducing stroke and systemic embolism, whether patients received antiplatelets (hazard ratio [HR], 0.93; 95% confidence interval [95% CI], 0.70-1.25) or not (HR, 0.87; 95% CI, 0.66-1.15; interaction P=0.738). There were fewer major bleeds than warfarin in both subgroups (HR, 0.82; 95% CI, 0.67-1.00 for patients who used antiplatelets; HR, 0.79; 95% CI, 0.64-0.96 for patients who did not; interaction P=0.794). Dabigatran etexilate 150 mg BID reduced the primary outcome of stroke and systemic embolism in comparison with warfarin. This effect seemed attenuated among patients who used antiplatelets (HR, 0.80; 95% CI, 0.59-1.08) in comparison with those who did not (HR, 0.52; 95% CI, 0.38-0.72; P for interaction=0.058). Major bleeding was similar to warfarin regardless of antiplatelet use (HR, 0.93; 95% CI, 0.76-1.12 for patients who used antiplatelets; HR, 0.94; 95% CI, 0.78-1.15 for patients who did not; P for interaction=0.875). In the time-dependent analysis, concomitant use of a single antiplatelet seemed to increase the risk of major bleeding (HR, 1.60; 95% CI, 1.42-1.82). Dual antiplatelet seemed to increased this even more (HR, 2.31; 95% CI, 1.79-2.98). The absolute risks were lowest on dabigatran etexilate 110 mg BID in comparison with dabigatran etexilate 150 mg BID or warfarin. Concomitant antiplatelet drugs appeared to increase the risk for major bleeding in RE-LY without affecting the advantages of dabigatran over warfarin. Choosing between dabigatran etexilate 110 mg BID and dabigatran etexilate 150 mg BID requires a careful assessment of characteristics that influence the balance between benefit and harm. URL: http://clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT00262600.

                Author and article information

                Ther Clin Risk Manag
                Ther Clin Risk Manag
                Therapeutics and Clinical Risk Management
                08 October 2019
                : 15
                : 1183-1206
                [1 ]College of Pharmacy, Ewhawomans University , Seoul, Republic of Korea
                [2 ]Pharmaceutical Safety Bureau, Ministry of Food and Drug Safety , Cheongju-si, Republic of Korea
                Author notes
                Correspondence: Il Young ChoPharmaceutical Safety Bureau, Ministry of Food and Drug Safety , 187, Osongsaengmyeong 2-ro, Osong-eup, Heungdeok-gu, Cheongju-si, Chungcheongbuk-do28159, Republic of KoreaTel +82 43 719 2709Fax +82 43 719 2700Email iycho10@korea.kr
                © 2019 Cho.

                This work is published and licensed by Dove Medical Press Limited. The full terms of this license are available at https://www.dovepress.com/terms.php and incorporate the Creative Commons Attribution – Non Commercial (unported, v3.0) License ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/). By accessing the work you hereby accept the Terms. Non-commercial uses of the work are permitted without any further permission from Dove Medical Press Limited, provided the work is properly attributed. For permission for commercial use of this work, please see paragraphs 4.2 and 5 of our Terms ( https://www.dovepress.com/terms.php).

                Page count
                Figures: 1, Tables: 7, References: 126, Pages: 24


                Comment on this article