18
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Comparison of the Novel Oral Anticoagulants Apixaban, Dabigatran, Edoxaban, and Rivaroxaban in the Initial and Long-Term Treatment and Prevention of Venous Thromboembolism: Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis

      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

          Anticoagulation with low molecular weight heparin and vitamin K antagonists is the current standard of care (SOC) for venous thromboembolism (VTE) treatment and prevention. Although novel oral anti-coagulants (NOACs) have been compared with SOC in this indication, no head-to-head randomised controlled trials (RCTs) have directly compared NOACs. A systematic review and network meta-analysis (NMA) were conducted to compare the efficacy and safety of NOACs for the initial and long-term treatment of VTE.

          Methods

          Electronic databases (accessed July 2014) were systematically searched to identify RCTs evaluating apixaban, dabigatran, edoxaban, and rivaroxaban versus SOC. Eligible patients included adults with an objectively confirmed deep vein thrombosis (DVT), pulmonary embolism (PE) or both. A fixed-effect Bayesian NMA was conducted for outcomes of interest, and results were presented as relative risks (RR) and 95% credible intervals (Crl).

          Results

          Six Phase III RCTs met criteria for inclusion: apixaban (one RCT; n = 5,395); rivaroxaban (two RCTs; n = 3,423/4,832); dabigatran (two RCTs; n = 2,539/2,568); edoxaban (one RCT; n = 8,240). There were no statistically significant differences between the NOACs with regard to the risk of ‘VTE and VTE-related death. Apixaban treatment was associated with the most favourable safety profile of the NOACs, showing a statistically significantly reduced risk of ‘major or clinically relevant non-major (CRNM) bleed’ compared with rivaroxaban (0.47 [0.36, 0.61]), dabigatran (0.69 [0.51, 0.94]), and edoxaban (0.54 [0.41, 0.69]). Dabigatran was also associated with a significantly lower risk of ‘major or CRNM bleed’ compared with rivaroxaban (0.68 [0.53, 0.87]) and edoxaban (0.77 [0.60, 0.99]).

          Conclusions

          Indirect comparisons showed statistically similar reductions in the risk of ‘VTE or VTE-related death for all NOACs. In contrast, reductions in ‘major or CRNM bleed’ for initial/long-term treatment were significantly better with apixaban compared with all other NOACs, and with dabigatran compared with rivaroxaban and edoxaban. Results from the current analysis indicate that the NOACs offer clinical benefit over conventional therapy while highlighting relative differences in their bleeding profile.

          Related collections

          Most cited references25

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

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

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

            The risk of recurrent venous thromboembolism after discontinuing anticoagulation in patients with acute proximal deep vein thrombosis or pulmonary embolism. A prospective cohort study in 1,626 patients.

            While it has long been recognized that patients with acute unprovoked deep vein thrombosis (DVT) or pulmonary embolism (PE) have a higher risk of recurrent venous thromboembolism (VTE) than that of patients with secondary thrombosis, whether other clinical parameters can help predict the development of recurrent events is controversial. The aim of this investigation was to assess the rate of recurrent VTE after withdrawal of vitamin K antagonists, and to identify clinical parameters associated with a higher likelihood of recurrence. We followed, up to a maximum of 10 years, 1626 consecutive patients who had discontinued anticoagulation after a first episode of clinically symptomatic proximal DVT and/or PE. All patients with clinically suspected recurrent VTE underwent objective tests to confirm or rule out the clinical suspicion. After a median follow-up of 50 months, 373 patients (22.9%) had had recurrent episodes of VTE. The cumulative incidence of recurrent VTE was 11.0% (95% CI, 9.5-12.5) after 1 year, 19.6% (17.5-21.7) after 3 years, 29.1% (26.3-31.9) after 5 years, and 39.9% (35.4-44.4) after 10 years. The adjusted hazard ratio for recurrent VTE was 2.30 (95% CI, 1.82-2.90) in patients whose first VTE was unprovoked, 2.02 (1.52-2.69) in those with thrombophilia, 1.44 (1.03-2.03) in those presenting with primary DVT, 1.39 (1.08-1.80) for patients who received a shorter (up to 6 months) duration of anticoagulation, and 1.14 (1.06-1.12) for every 10-year increase of age. When the analysis was confined to patients with unprovoked VTE the results did not change. Besides unprovoked presentation, other factors independently associated with a statistically significant increased risk of recurrent VTE are thrombophilia, clinical presentation with primary DVT, shorter duration of anticoagulation, and increasing age.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Effectiveness and safety of novel oral anticoagulants as compared with vitamin K antagonists in the treatment of acute symptomatic venous thromboembolism: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

              New direct oral anticoagulants (NOACs) constitute a novel treatment option for acute venous thromboembolism (VTE), with practical advantages. Individual studies have demonstrated comparable efficacy to that of vitamin K antagonists (VKAs) and have suggested a more favorable safety profile . We performed a meta-analysis to determine the efficacy and safety of NOACs as compared with those of VKAs in patients with acute VTE. We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews and the Clinical Trials Registry up to October 2013. Eligible studies included phase 3 trials comparing NOACs with VKAs in patients with acute VTE. Relative risks (RRs), absolute risk differences and numbers needed to treat (NNTs) to prevent one event were calculated for recurrent VTE, fatal pulmonary embolism (PE), overall mortality, major bleeding, and other bleeding complications, with random-effects models. Five studies were included, investigating four NOACs (rivaroxaban, dabigatran, apixaban, and edoxaban) in 24 455 patients with acute VTE. RRs for recurrent VTE, fatal PE and overall mortality for NOACs vs. VKAs were 0.88 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.74-1.05), 1.02 (95% CI 0.39-5.96), and 0.97 (95% CI 0.83-1.14), respectively. The RR for major bleeding was 0.60 (95% CI 0.41-0.88). The NNT with NOACs instead of VKA to prevent one major bleed was 149. The RR and NNT for fatal bleeding were 0.36 (95% CI 0.15-0.87) and 1111. A fixed-effect network analysis did not demonstrate significant differences between individual NOACs and rivaroxaban. NOACs have comparable efficacy to that of VKAs, and are associated with a significantly lower risk of bleeding complications, although the NNT to prevent one major bleed was relatively high. © 2013 International Society on Thrombosis and Haemostasis.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Role: Editor
                Journal
                PLoS One
                PLoS ONE
                plos
                plosone
                PLoS ONE
                Public Library of Science (San Francisco, CA USA )
                1932-6203
                30 December 2015
                2015
                : 10
                : 12
                : e0144856
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Guy’s and St Thomas’ Hospitals, King’s College, London, United Kingdom
                [2 ]BMS, Princeton, United States of America
                [3 ]Abacus International, Bicester, United Kingdom
                [4 ]Pfizer, New York, United States of America
                [5 ]Pfizer, Walton Oaks, United Kingdom
                [6 ]TUSH-D UK LTD, Birmingham, United Kingdom
                Maastricht University Medical Center, NETHERLANDS
                Author notes

                Competing Interests: The authors have the following interests. This study was funded by Bristol Myers Squibb and Pfizer. Hamilton M. and Phatak H. are employed by Bristol Myers Squibb., Liu X. and Bird A. by Pfizer Ltd, Batson S. by Abacus International and Tushabe D. by TUSH-D UK LTD. At the time of this study, Claflin A. was a paid contractor of Pfizer Ltd. Cohen A. is a paid clinical consultant to Bristol Myers Squibb and Pfizer. Fowler H., Mitchell S.A., and Batson S. are paid consultants to Bristol Myers Squibb and Pfizer Ltd. There are no patents, products in development or marketed products to declare. This does not alter the authors' adherence to all the PLOS ONE policies on sharing data and materials, as detailed online in the guide for authors.

                Analyzed the data: SB SAM MH. Wrote the paper: AC MH HP AB DT XL SAM SB. Defined the scope of the project: MH HP AB DT XL ATC SAM SB. Conducted the systematic review: SAM.

                Article
                PONE-D-15-27664
                10.1371/journal.pone.0144856
                4696796
                26716830
                b3ae3cde-d4b6-47e9-a8e8-c8c7235fe2b4
                © 2015 Cohen et al

                This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited

                History
                : 29 June 2015
                : 24 November 2015
                Page count
                Figures: 2, Tables: 3, Pages: 14
                Funding
                This study was funded by Bristol Myers Squibb and Pfizer. Bristol Myers Squibb provided support in the form of salaries for authors Melissa Hamilton and Hemant Phatak, but did not have any additional role in the study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript. Pfizer provided support in the form of salaries for authors Xianchen Liu, Doreen Tushabe, and Alex Bird, but did not have any additional role in the study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript. Abacus International provided support in the form of salaries for authors Stephen Mitchell and Sarah Batson, but did not have any additional role in the study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.
                Categories
                Research Article
                Custom metadata
                All relevant data are within the paper and its Supporting Information files.

                Uncategorized
                Uncategorized

                Comments

                Comment on this article