Comparative Effectiveness and Safety Between Apixaban, Dabigatran, Edoxaban, and Rivaroxaban Among Patients With Atrial Fibrillation : A Multinational Population-Based Cohort Study.
Journal
Annals of internal medicine
ISSN: 1539-3704
Titre abrégé: Ann Intern Med
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 0372351
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
11 2022
11 2022
Historique:
pubmed:
1
11
2022
medline:
18
11
2022
entrez:
31
10
2022
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Current guidelines recommend using direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) over warfarin in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF), but head-to-head trial data do not exist to guide the choice of DOAC. To do a large-scale comparison between all DOACs (apixaban, dabigatran, edoxaban, and rivaroxaban) in routine clinical practice. Multinational population-based cohort study. Five standardized electronic health care databases, which covered 221 million people in France, Germany, the United Kingdom, and the United States. Patients who were newly diagnosed with AF from 2010 through 2019 and received a new DOAC prescription. Database-specific hazard ratios (HRs) of ischemic stroke or systemic embolism, intracranial hemorrhage (ICH), gastrointestinal bleeding (GIB), and all-cause mortality between DOACs were estimated using a Cox regression model stratified by propensity score and pooled using a random-effects model. A total of 527 226 new DOAC users met the inclusion criteria (apixaban, Residual confounding is possible. Among patients with AF, apixaban use was associated with lower risk for GIB and similar rates of ischemic stroke or systemic embolism, ICH, and all-cause mortality compared with dabigatran, edoxaban, and rivaroxaban. This finding was consistent for patients aged 80 years or older and those with chronic kidney disease, who are often underrepresented in clinical trials. None.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
Current guidelines recommend using direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) over warfarin in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF), but head-to-head trial data do not exist to guide the choice of DOAC.
OBJECTIVE
To do a large-scale comparison between all DOACs (apixaban, dabigatran, edoxaban, and rivaroxaban) in routine clinical practice.
DESIGN
Multinational population-based cohort study.
SETTING
Five standardized electronic health care databases, which covered 221 million people in France, Germany, the United Kingdom, and the United States.
PARTICIPANTS
Patients who were newly diagnosed with AF from 2010 through 2019 and received a new DOAC prescription.
MEASUREMENTS
Database-specific hazard ratios (HRs) of ischemic stroke or systemic embolism, intracranial hemorrhage (ICH), gastrointestinal bleeding (GIB), and all-cause mortality between DOACs were estimated using a Cox regression model stratified by propensity score and pooled using a random-effects model.
RESULTS
A total of 527 226 new DOAC users met the inclusion criteria (apixaban,
LIMITATION
Residual confounding is possible.
CONCLUSION
Among patients with AF, apixaban use was associated with lower risk for GIB and similar rates of ischemic stroke or systemic embolism, ICH, and all-cause mortality compared with dabigatran, edoxaban, and rivaroxaban. This finding was consistent for patients aged 80 years or older and those with chronic kidney disease, who are often underrepresented in clinical trials.
PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE
None.
Substances chimiques
Anticoagulants
0
apixaban
3Z9Y7UWC1J
Dabigatran
I0VM4M70GC
edoxaban
NDU3J18APO
Rivaroxaban
9NDF7JZ4M3
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
1515-1524Subventions
Organisme : Medical Research Council
ID : G106/1249
Pays : United Kingdom
Commentaires et corrections
Type : ErratumIn