Geoffrey D Barnes1, Eleanor Lucas2, G Caleb Alexander2, Zachary D Goldberger3. 1. Frankel Cardiovascular Center and Institute for Healthcare Policy and Innovation, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor. Electronic address: gbarnes@umich.edu. 2. Department of Epidemiology and the Center for Drug Safety and Effectiveness, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, Md. 3. Division of Cardiology, University of Washington, Seattle.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Four direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) have been brought to market for the treatment of nonvalvular atrial fibrillation and venous thromboembolism. Many forces, including numerous positive trial results, emerging safety concerns, marketing, and promotion, may shape DOAC adoption by providers. However, relatively little is known regarding their ambulatory utilization compared with warfarin, as well as the degree to which they have decreased under-treatment of atrial fibrillation. METHODS: We used the IMS Health National Disease and Therapeutic Index, a nationally representative audit of outpatient office visits, to estimate the use of warfarin and DOACs between 2009 and 2014. RESULTS: Overall, visits with anticoagulation use increased from 2.05 (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.82-2.27) to 2.83 (95% CI, 2.49-3.17) million (M) quarterly visits (P < .001). Of these, DOAC use has grown to 4.21M (95% CI, 3.63M-4.79M; 38.2% of total) treatment visits in 2014 since their introduction in 2010. Use of all oral anticoagulants in treatment visits for atrial fibrillation has increased from 0.88M (95% CI, 0.74M-1.02M) to 1.72M (95% CI, 1.47M-1.97M; P < .001), with similar DOAC and warfarin use in 2014. Atrial fibrillation visits with anticoagulant use increased from 51.9% (95% CI, 50.4%-53.8%) to 66.9% (95% CI, 65.0%-69.3%) between 2009 and 2014 (P < .001). In 2014, rivaroxaban was the most commonly prescribed DOAC for atrial fibrillation (47.9% of office visits), followed by apixaban (26.5%) and dabigatran (25.5%). CONCLUSIONS: Direct oral anticoagulants have been adopted rapidly, matching the use of warfarin, and are associated with increased use of oral anticoagulation for patients with atrial fibrillation.
BACKGROUND: Four direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) have been brought to market for the treatment of nonvalvular atrial fibrillation and venous thromboembolism. Many forces, including numerous positive trial results, emerging safety concerns, marketing, and promotion, may shape DOAC adoption by providers. However, relatively little is known regarding their ambulatory utilization compared with warfarin, as well as the degree to which they have decreased under-treatment of atrial fibrillation. METHODS: We used the IMS Health National Disease and Therapeutic Index, a nationally representative audit of outpatient office visits, to estimate the use of warfarin and DOACs between 2009 and 2014. RESULTS: Overall, visits with anticoagulation use increased from 2.05 (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.82-2.27) to 2.83 (95% CI, 2.49-3.17) million (M) quarterly visits (P < .001). Of these, DOAC use has grown to 4.21M (95% CI, 3.63M-4.79M; 38.2% of total) treatment visits in 2014 since their introduction in 2010. Use of all oral anticoagulants in treatment visits for atrial fibrillation has increased from 0.88M (95% CI, 0.74M-1.02M) to 1.72M (95% CI, 1.47M-1.97M; P < .001), with similar DOAC and warfarin use in 2014. Atrial fibrillation visits with anticoagulant use increased from 51.9% (95% CI, 50.4%-53.8%) to 66.9% (95% CI, 65.0%-69.3%) between 2009 and 2014 (P < .001). In 2014, rivaroxaban was the most commonly prescribed DOAC for atrial fibrillation (47.9% of office visits), followed by apixaban (26.5%) and dabigatran (25.5%). CONCLUSIONS: Direct oral anticoagulants have been adopted rapidly, matching the use of warfarin, and are associated with increased use of oral anticoagulation for patients with atrial fibrillation.
Authors: Julie C Lauffenburger; Joel F Farley; Anil K Gehi; Denise H Rhoney; M Alan Brookhart; Gang Fang Journal: Am J Cardiol Date: 2015-02-02 Impact factor: 2.778
Authors: Craig T January; L Samuel Wann; Joseph S Alpert; Hugh Calkins; Joaquin E Cigarroa; Joseph C Cleveland; Jamie B Conti; Patrick T Ellinor; Michael D Ezekowitz; Michael E Field; Katherine T Murray; Ralph L Sacco; William G Stevenson; Patrick J Tchou; Cynthia M Tracy; Clyde W Yancy Journal: Circulation Date: 2014-03-28 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: John W Eikelboom; Lars Wallentin; Stuart J Connolly; Mike Ezekowitz; Jeff S Healey; Jonas Oldgren; Sean Yang; Marco Alings; Scott Kaatz; Stefan H Hohnloser; Hans-Christoph Diener; Maria Grazia Franzosi; Kurt Huber; Paul Reilly; Jeanne Varrone; Salim Yusuf Journal: Circulation Date: 2011-05-16 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: François Laliberté; Winnie W Nelson; Patrick Lefebvre; Jeff R Schein; Jonathan Rondeau-Leclaire; Mei Sheng Duh Journal: Adv Ther Date: 2012-08-15 Impact factor: 3.845
Authors: Benjamin A Steinberg; Dajuanicia N Holmes; Jonathan P Piccini; Jack Ansell; Paul Chang; Gregg C Fonarow; Bernard Gersh; Kenneth W Mahaffey; Peter R Kowey; Michael D Ezekowitz; Daniel E Singer; Laine Thomas; Eric D Peterson; Elaine M Hylek Journal: J Am Heart Assoc Date: 2013-11-25 Impact factor: 5.501
Authors: Akash Kataruka; Xiaowen Kong; Brian Haymart; Eva Kline-Rogers; Steve Almany; Jay Kozlowski; Gregory D Krol; Scott Kaatz; Michael W McNamara; James B Froehlich; Geoffrey D Barnes Journal: Vasc Med Date: 2017-02-01 Impact factor: 3.239
Authors: Konstantinos C Siontis; Xiaosong Zhang; Ashley Eckard; Nicole Bhave; Douglas E Schaubel; Kevin He; Anca Tilea; Austin G Stack; Rajesh Balkrishnan; Xiaoxi Yao; Peter A Noseworthy; Nilay D Shah; Rajiv Saran; Brahmajee K Nallamothu Journal: Circulation Date: 2018-10-09 Impact factor: 29.690