Niklas W Andersson1, Henrik Svanström2, Marie Lund2, Björn Pasternak3, Mads Melbye4. 1. Department of Epidemiology Research, Statens Serum Institut, Copenhagen, Denmark. Electronic address: nwandersson@gmail.com. 2. Department of Epidemiology Research, Statens Serum Institut, Copenhagen, Denmark. 3. Department of Epidemiology Research, Statens Serum Institut, Copenhagen, Denmark; Clinical Epidemiology Unit, Department of Medicine Solna, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden. 4. Department of Epidemiology Research, Statens Serum Institut, Copenhagen, Denmark; Department of Clinical Medicine, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark; Department of Medicine, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, California, USA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The comparative effectiveness and safety of individual direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) in clinical practice is largely unknown. The study objectives were to compare effectiveness and safety of DOACs in patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF). METHODS: Based on nationwide registers we established a population-based historical cohort study of 12,638 new users of standard dose DOACs (apixaban 5 mg twice daily, dabigatran 150 mg twice daily and rivaroxaban 20 mg once daily) with NVAF in Denmark, July 2013 to March 2016. Patients were matched on propensity scores in a 1:1 ratio comparing apixaban vs. dabigatran (for a total of 6470 patients), apixaban vs. rivaroxaban (7352 patients), and rivaroxaban vs. dabigatran (5440 patients). Hazard ratios (HRs) for stroke or systemic embolism (effectiveness outcome) and major bleeding (safety outcome) were estimated. RESULTS: In propensity-matched comparisons of the risk of stroke or systemic embolism, the HRs were 1.27 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.82-1.96) for apixaban vs. dabigatran, 1.25 (95% CI, 0.87-1.79) for apixaban vs. rivaroxaban, and 1.17 (95% CI, 0.69-1.96) for rivaroxaban vs. dabigatran. For the risk of major bleeding, the HRs were 0.94 (95% CI, 0.62-1.41) for apixaban vs. dabigatran, 0.88 (95% CI, 0.64-1.22) for apixaban vs. rivaroxaban, and 1.35 (95% CI, 0.91-2.00) for rivaroxaban vs. dabigatran. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with NVAF in routine clinical practice, there were no statistically significant differences in risk of stroke or systemic embolism or major bleeding in propensity-matched comparisons between apixaban, dabigatran, and rivaroxaban used in standard doses. While analyses indicate that more than moderate differences can be excluded, smaller differences cannot be ruled out.
BACKGROUND: The comparative effectiveness and safety of individual direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) in clinical practice is largely unknown. The study objectives were to compare effectiveness and safety of DOACs in patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF). METHODS: Based on nationwide registers we established a population-based historical cohort study of 12,638 new users of standard dose DOACs (apixaban 5 mg twice daily, dabigatran 150 mg twice daily and rivaroxaban 20 mg once daily) with NVAF in Denmark, July 2013 to March 2016. Patients were matched on propensity scores in a 1:1 ratio comparing apixaban vs. dabigatran (for a total of 6470 patients), apixaban vs. rivaroxaban (7352 patients), and rivaroxaban vs. dabigatran (5440 patients). Hazard ratios (HRs) for stroke or systemic embolism (effectiveness outcome) and major bleeding (safety outcome) were estimated. RESULTS: In propensity-matched comparisons of the risk of stroke or systemic embolism, the HRs were 1.27 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.82-1.96) for apixaban vs. dabigatran, 1.25 (95% CI, 0.87-1.79) for apixaban vs. rivaroxaban, and 1.17 (95% CI, 0.69-1.96) for rivaroxaban vs. dabigatran. For the risk of major bleeding, the HRs were 0.94 (95% CI, 0.62-1.41) for apixaban vs. dabigatran, 0.88 (95% CI, 0.64-1.22) for apixaban vs. rivaroxaban, and 1.35 (95% CI, 0.91-2.00) for rivaroxaban vs. dabigatran. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with NVAF in routine clinical practice, there were no statistically significant differences in risk of stroke or systemic embolism or major bleeding in propensity-matched comparisons between apixaban, dabigatran, and rivaroxaban used in standard doses. While analyses indicate that more than moderate differences can be excluded, smaller differences cannot be ruled out.
Authors: Antonios Douros; Madeleine Durand; Carla M Doyle; Sarah Yoon; Pauline Reynier; Kristian B Filion Journal: Drug Saf Date: 2019-10 Impact factor: 5.606
Authors: Benjamin J R Buckley; Deirdre A Lane; Peter Calvert; Juqian Zhang; David Gent; C Daniel Mullins; Paul Dorian; Shun Kohsaka; Stefan H Hohnloser; Gregory Y H Lip Journal: J Clin Med Date: 2022-06-30 Impact factor: 4.964
Authors: Yumao Zhang; Patrick C Souverein; Helga Gardarsdottir; Hendrika A van den Ham; Anke-Hilse Maitland-van der Zee; Anthonius de Boer Journal: Br J Clin Pharmacol Date: 2020-02-21 Impact factor: 4.335