Aim: To analyse the effectiveness and safety of DOAC (direct oral anticoagulants) in non-valvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF) patients attending clinical practice. Methods: Retrospective study of AF patients who started treatment with DOAC from January 1, 2013 to December 31, 2016 in three Spanish hospitals. Mean follow-up was 1.6 years. The primary outcomes were rates of all-cause death, ischaemic stroke, and bleeding. These outcomes were also studied depending on correct dosage adjustment and standard/adjusted dose. Results: The study included 2494 patients (age = 76.0 ± 9.5 years, CHA2DS2-VASc = 4.0 ± 1.6). The most prescribed DOAC was rivaroxaban (41.1%). Patients taking dabigatran were the youngest (mean age = 73.1 ± 10.3 years), with better kidney function (mean CrCl = 80.6 ± 35.8 ml/min) and lower CHA2DS2-VASc (3.7 ± 1.4) and HAS-BLED (2.1 ± 0.9) scores. Patients taking apixaban were the oldest, and had the highest CHA2DS2-VASc and HAS-BLED scores (4.3 ± 1.6 and 2.6 ± 0.9, respectively). Rates of stroke/major bleeding/intracranial bleeding were 1.8/3.0/0.3 events per 100 patient-years, respectively, with no differences among DOAC. Based on dose adjustment according to technical data, it was observed that 517 patients (23.5%) received DOAC doses inconsistent with labelling (p < .001) and, within this group, under-dosed patients had a higher death rate although it did not reach a significant result after multivariate adjustment.Conclusions: The results of safety and efficacy are very similar to those of other previously published national registries. There were no differences among the different types of DOAC regarding outcomes. However, it was found that people taking the adjusted dose of the drug seemed to have a higher risk of death. A non-negligible proportion of patients received DOAC doses inconsistent with labelling (mostly underdose).
Aim: To analyse the effectiveness and safety of DOAC (direct oral anticoagulants) in non-valvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF) patients attending clinical practice. Methods: Retrospective study of AFpatients who started treatment with DOAC from January 1, 2013 to December 31, 2016 in three Spanish hospitals. Mean follow-up was 1.6 years. The primary outcomes were rates of all-cause death, ischaemic stroke, and bleeding. These outcomes were also studied depending on correct dosage adjustment and standard/adjusted dose. Results: The study included 2494 patients (age = 76.0 ± 9.5 years, CHA2DS2-VASc = 4.0 ± 1.6). The most prescribed DOAC was rivaroxaban (41.1%). Patients taking dabigatran were the youngest (mean age = 73.1 ± 10.3 years), with better kidney function (mean CrCl = 80.6 ± 35.8 ml/min) and lower CHA2DS2-VASc (3.7 ± 1.4) and HAS-BLED (2.1 ± 0.9) scores. Patients taking apixaban were the oldest, and had the highest CHA2DS2-VASc and HAS-BLED scores (4.3 ± 1.6 and 2.6 ± 0.9, respectively). Rates of stroke/major bleeding/intracranial bleeding were 1.8/3.0/0.3 events per 100 patient-years, respectively, with no differences among DOAC. Based on dose adjustment according to technical data, it was observed that 517 patients (23.5%) received DOAC doses inconsistent with labelling (p < .001) and, within this group, under-dosed patients had a higher death rate although it did not reach a significant result after multivariate adjustment.Conclusions: The results of safety and efficacy are very similar to those of other previously published national registries. There were no differences among the different types of DOAC regarding outcomes. However, it was found that people taking the adjusted dose of the drug seemed to have a higher risk of death. A non-negligible proportion of patients received DOAC doses inconsistent with labelling (mostly underdose).