Benjamin A Steinberg1, Peter Shrader2, Laine Thomas2, Jack Ansell3, Gregg C Fonarow4, Bernard J Gersh5, Elaine Hylek6, Peter R Kowey7, Kenneth W Mahaffey8, Emily C O'Brien9, Daniel E Singer10, Eric D Peterson11, Jonathan P Piccini11. 1. Division of Cardiovascular Medicine, University of Utah Health Sciences Center, Salt Lake City, UT; Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC; Duke Clinical Research Institute, Durham, NC. Electronic address: benjamin.steinberg@hsc.utah.edu. 2. Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC. 3. Hofstra Northwell School of Medicine, Hempstead, NY. Electronic address: ansellje@gmail.com. 4. UCLA Division of Cardiology, Los Angeles, CA. Electronic address: GFonarow@mednet.ucla.edu. 5. Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN. Electronic address: gersh.bernard@mayo.edu. 6. Boston University School of Medicine, Boston, MA. Electronic address: Elaine.Hylek@bmc.org. 7. Lankenau Institute for Medical Research, Wynnewood, PA. Electronic address: KoweyP@mlhs.org. 8. Stanford University School of Medicine, Palo Alto, CA. Electronic address: Kenneth.mahaffey@stanford.edu. 9. Duke Clinical Research Institute, Durham, NC. 10. Harvard Medical School and Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA. Electronic address: desinger@partners.org. 11. Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC; Duke Clinical Research Institute, Durham, NC.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Several non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulant (NOAC) alternatives to warfarin are available for stroke prevention in atrial fibrillation (AF). We aimed to describe the factors associated with selection of NOACs versus warfarin in patients with new onset AF. METHODS: The ORBIT-AF II study is a national, US, prospective, observational, cohort study of anticoagulation treatment in patients with AF receiving NOACs or warfarin in the United States from 2013 to 2016. We measured factors associated with oral anticoagulant selection in 4,670 patients recently diagnosed with AF. RESULTS: At baseline, 1,169 (25%) patients were started on warfarin and 3,501 (75%) on NOACs: of these latter, 259 (6%) were started on dabigatran, 1858 (40%) on rivaroxaban, and 1384 (30%) on apixaban. Those receiving NOACs were slightly younger patients (median age 71 vs 72, P<.0001); were less likely to have prior stroke (5.3% vs 8.6%; P<.0001) or prior bleeding (2.7% vs 4.4%; P=.005); had better kidney function (mean estimated glomerular filtration rate 91 mL/min vs 80 mL/min, P<.0001); and had fewer patients at high stroke risk (CHA2DS2-VASc score [Congestive heart failure, Hypertension, Age ≥75years, Diabetes mellitus, Prior stroke, transient ischemic attack {TIA}, or thromboembolism,Vascular disease, Age 65-74years, Sex category {female}] ≥2 in 86% vs 93%; P<.0001). In multivariable analysis, factors associated with NOAC selection versus warfarin included renal function, prior stroke or valve replacement, rhythm control AF management strategy, treatment by a cardiologist, and higher patient education level. CONCLUSIONS: In contemporary clinical practice, up to three-fourths of patients with new-onset AF are now initially treated with a NOAC for stroke prevention. Those selected for NOAC treatment had lower stroke and bleeding risk profiles, were more likely treated by cardiologists, and had higher socioeconomic status. TRIAL REGISTRATION: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT01701817.
BACKGROUND: Several non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulant (NOAC) alternatives to warfarin are available for stroke prevention in atrial fibrillation (AF). We aimed to describe the factors associated with selection of NOACs versus warfarin in patients with new onset AF. METHODS: The ORBIT-AF II study is a national, US, prospective, observational, cohort study of anticoagulation treatment in patients with AF receiving NOACs or warfarin in the United States from 2013 to 2016. We measured factors associated with oral anticoagulant selection in 4,670 patients recently diagnosed with AF. RESULTS: At baseline, 1,169 (25%) patients were started on warfarin and 3,501 (75%) on NOACs: of these latter, 259 (6%) were started on dabigatran, 1858 (40%) on rivaroxaban, and 1384 (30%) on apixaban. Those receiving NOACs were slightly younger patients (median age 71 vs 72, P<.0001); were less likely to have prior stroke (5.3% vs 8.6%; P<.0001) or prior bleeding (2.7% vs 4.4%; P=.005); had better kidney function (mean estimated glomerular filtration rate 91 mL/min vs 80 mL/min, P<.0001); and had fewer patients at high stroke risk (CHA2DS2-VASc score [Congestive heart failure, Hypertension, Age ≥75years, Diabetes mellitus, Prior stroke, transient ischemic attack {TIA}, or thromboembolism,Vascular disease, Age 65-74years, Sex category {female}] ≥2 in 86% vs 93%; P<.0001). In multivariable analysis, factors associated with NOAC selection versus warfarin included renal function, prior stroke or valve replacement, rhythm control AF management strategy, treatment by a cardiologist, and higher patient education level. CONCLUSIONS: In contemporary clinical practice, up to three-fourths of patients with new-onset AF are now initially treated with a NOAC for stroke prevention. Those selected for NOAC treatment had lower stroke and bleeding risk profiles, were more likely treated by cardiologists, and had higher socioeconomic status. TRIAL REGISTRATION: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT01701817.
Authors: Matthew Alcusky; Anne L Hume; Marc Fisher; Jennifer Tjia; Robert J Goldberg; David D McManus; Kate L Lapane Journal: Drugs Aging Date: 2018-12 Impact factor: 3.923
Authors: Matthew Alcusky; Jennifer Tjia; David D McManus; Anne L Hume; Marc Fisher; Kate L Lapane Journal: J Gen Intern Med Date: 2020-04-06 Impact factor: 5.128
Authors: Todd A Miano; Wei Yang; Michael G S Shashaty; Athena Zuppa; Jeremiah R Brown; Sean Hennessy Journal: Clin Pharmacol Ther Date: 2020-03-26 Impact factor: 6.875
Authors: Walter Bialkowski; Sylvia Tan; Alan E Mast; Joseph E Kiss; Daryl Kor; Jerome Gottschall; Yanyun Wu; Nareg Roubinian; Darrell Triulzi; Steve Kleinman; Young Choi; Donald Brambilla; Ann Zimrin Journal: Thromb Res Date: 2019-11-25 Impact factor: 3.944
Authors: Jung Myung Lee; Tae Hoon Kim; Myung Jin Cha; Junbeom Park; Jin Kyu Park; Ki Woon Kang; Jaemin Shim; Jae Sun Uhm; Jun Kim; Hyung Wook Park; Young Soo Lee; Eue Keun Choi; Chang Soo Kim; Boyoung Joung; Jin Bae Kim Journal: Korean Circ J Date: 2018-06 Impact factor: 3.243