Wallis C Y Lau1, Ching-Lung Cheung2, Kenneth K C Man1, Esther W Chan2, Chor Wing Sing2, Gregory Y H Lip3, Chung-Wah Siu4, Joanne K Y Lam5, Alan C H Lee5, Ian C K Wong6. 1. UCL School of Pharmacy, London, United Kingdom, and Centre for Safe Medication and Practice Research, The University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, China (W.C.L., K.K.M.). 2. Centre for Safe Medication and Practice Research, The University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, China (C.C., E.W.C., C.W.S.). 3. Liverpool Centre for Cardiovascular Science, University of Liverpool, and Liverpool Heart and Chest Hospital, Liverpool, United Kingdom, and Aalborg Thrombosis Research Unit, Aalborg University, Aalborg, Denmark (G.Y.L.). 4. Queen Mary Hospital, The University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, China (C.S.). 5. Osteoporosis Centre, Queen Mary Hospital, The University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, China (J.K.L., A.C.L.). 6. UCL School of Pharmacy, London, United Kingdom, Centre for Safe Medication and Practice Research, The University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, and The University of Hong Kong Shenzhen Hospital, Shenzhen, Guangdong, China (I.C.W.).
Abstract
BACKGROUND: It is unclear whether anticoagulant type is associated with the risk for osteoporotic fracture, a deleterious complication of anticoagulants among patients with atrial fibrillation (AF). OBJECTIVE: To compare the risk for osteoporotic fracture between anticoagulants. DESIGN: Population-based cohort study. SETTING: Territory-wide electronic health record database of the Hong Kong Hospital Authority. PARTICIPANTS: Patients newly diagnosed with AF between 2010 and 2017 who received a new prescription for warfarin or a direct oral anticoagulant (DOAC) (apixaban, dabigatran, or rivaroxaban). Follow-up ended on 31 December 2018. MEASUREMENTS: Osteoporotic hip and vertebral fractures in anticoagulant users were compared using propensity score-weighted cumulative incidence differences (CIDs). RESULTS: There were 23 515 patients identified (3241 apixaban users, 6867 dabigatran users, 3866 rivaroxaban users, and 9541 warfarin users). Overall mean age was 74.4 years (SD, 10.8), ranging from 73.1 years (warfarin) to 77.9 years (apixaban). Over a median follow-up of 423 days, 401 fractures were identified (crude event number [weighted rate per 100 patient-years]: apixaban, 53 [0.82]; dabigatran, 95 [0.76]; rivaroxaban, 57 [0.67]; and warfarin, 196 [1.11]). After 24-month follow-up, DOAC use was associated with a lower risk for fracture than warfarin use (apixaban CID, -0.88% [95% CI, -1.66% to -0.21%]; dabigatran CID, -0.81% [CI, -1.34% to -0.23%]; and rivaroxaban CID, -1.13% [CI, -1.67% to -0.53%]). No differences were seen in all head-to-head comparisons between DOACs at 24 months (apixaban vs. dabigatran CID, -0.06% [CI, -0.69% to 0.49%]; rivaroxaban vs. dabigatran CID, -0.32% [CI, -0.84% to 0.18%]; and rivaroxaban vs. apixaban CID, -0.25% [CI, -0.86% to 0.40%]). LIMITATION: Residual confounding is possible. CONCLUSION: Among patients with AF, DOAC use may result in a lower risk for osteoporotic fracture compared with warfarin use. Fracture risk does not seem to be altered by the choice of DOAC. These findings may help inform the benefit-risk assessment when choosing between anticoagulants. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: The University of Hong Kong and University College London Strategic Partnership Fund.
BACKGROUND: It is unclear whether anticoagulant type is associated with the risk for osteoporotic fracture, a deleterious complication of anticoagulants among patients with atrial fibrillation (AF). OBJECTIVE: To compare the risk for osteoporotic fracture between anticoagulants. DESIGN: Population-based cohort study. SETTING: Territory-wide electronic health record database of the Hong Kong Hospital Authority. PARTICIPANTS: Patients newly diagnosed with AF between 2010 and 2017 who received a new prescription for warfarin or a direct oral anticoagulant (DOAC) (apixaban, dabigatran, or rivaroxaban). Follow-up ended on 31 December 2018. MEASUREMENTS: Osteoporotic hip and vertebral fractures in anticoagulant users were compared using propensity score-weighted cumulative incidence differences (CIDs). RESULTS: There were 23 515 patients identified (3241 apixaban users, 6867 dabigatran users, 3866 rivaroxaban users, and 9541 warfarin users). Overall mean age was 74.4 years (SD, 10.8), ranging from 73.1 years (warfarin) to 77.9 years (apixaban). Over a median follow-up of 423 days, 401 fractures were identified (crude event number [weighted rate per 100 patient-years]: apixaban, 53 [0.82]; dabigatran, 95 [0.76]; rivaroxaban, 57 [0.67]; and warfarin, 196 [1.11]). After 24-month follow-up, DOAC use was associated with a lower risk for fracture than warfarin use (apixaban CID, -0.88% [95% CI, -1.66% to -0.21%]; dabigatran CID, -0.81% [CI, -1.34% to -0.23%]; and rivaroxaban CID, -1.13% [CI, -1.67% to -0.53%]). No differences were seen in all head-to-head comparisons between DOACs at 24 months (apixaban vs. dabigatran CID, -0.06% [CI, -0.69% to 0.49%]; rivaroxaban vs. dabigatran CID, -0.32% [CI, -0.84% to 0.18%]; and rivaroxaban vs. apixaban CID, -0.25% [CI, -0.86% to 0.40%]). LIMITATION: Residual confounding is possible. CONCLUSION: Among patients with AF, DOAC use may result in a lower risk for osteoporotic fracture compared with warfarin use. Fracture risk does not seem to be altered by the choice of DOAC. These findings may help inform the benefit-risk assessment when choosing between anticoagulants. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: The University of Hong Kong and University College London Strategic Partnership Fund.
Authors: Celine Sze Ling Chui; Min Fan; Eric Yuk Fai Wan; Miriam Tim Yin Leung; Edmund Cheung; Vincent Ka Chun Yan; Le Gao; Yonas Ghebremichael-Weldeselassie; Kenneth K C Man; Kui Kai Lau; Ivan Chun Hang Lam; Francisco Tsz Tsun Lai; Xue Li; Carlos King Ho Wong; Esther W Chan; Ching-Lung Cheung; Chor-Wing Sing; Cheuk Kwong Lee; Ivan Fan Ngai Hung; Chak Sing Lau; Joseph Yat Sun Chan; Michael Kang-Yin Lee; Vincent Chung Tong Mok; Chung-Wah Siu; Lot Sze Tao Chan; Terence Cheung; Frank Ling Fung Chan; Anskar Yu-Hung Leung; Benjamin John Cowling; Gabriel Matthew Leung; Ian Chi Kei Wong Journal: EClinicalMedicine Date: 2022-06-25
Authors: Carlos King Ho Wong; Kristy Tsz Kwan Lau; Xi Xiong; Ivan Chi Ho Au; Francisco Tsz Tsun Lai; Eric Yuk Fai Wan; Celine Sze Ling Chui; Xue Li; Esther Wai Yin Chan; Le Gao; Franco Wing Tak Cheng; Sydney Chi Wai Tang; Ian Chi Kei Wong Journal: PLoS Med Date: 2022-06-21 Impact factor: 11.613
Authors: Eric Yuk Fai Wan; Celine Sze Ling Chui; Francisco Tsz Tsun Lai; Esther Wai Yin Chan; Xue Li; Vincent Ka Chun Yan; Le Gao; Qiuyan Yu; Ivan Chun Hang Lam; Raccoon Ka Cheong Chun; Benjamin John Cowling; Wing Chi Fong; Alexander Yuk Lun Lau; Vincent Chung Tong Mok; Frank Ling Fung Chan; Cheuk Kwong Lee; Lot Sze Tao Chan; Dawin Lo; Kui Kai Lau; Ivan Fan Ngai Hung; Gabriel Matthew Leung; Ian Chi Kei Wong Journal: Lancet Infect Dis Date: 2021-08-16 Impact factor: 25.071
Authors: Ching-Lung Cheung; Chor-Wing Sing; Wallis C Y Lau; Gloria H Y Li; Gregory Y H Lip; Kathryn C B Tan; Bernard M Y Cheung; Esther W Y Chan; Ian C K Wong Journal: Cardiovasc Diabetol Date: 2021-03-25 Impact factor: 9.951
Authors: Shirley Chiu Wai Chan; Ho Yin Chung; Chak Sing Lau; Philip Hei Li Journal: Ann Clin Microbiol Antimicrob Date: 2021-11-11 Impact factor: 3.944
Authors: Vanessa W S Ng; Kenneth K C Man; Le Gao; Esther W Chan; Edwin H M Lee; Joseph F Hayes; Ian C K Wong Journal: Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf Date: 2021-07-08 Impact factor: 2.732