Cargando…

Comparative effectiveness of rivaroxaban versus warfarin or dabigatran for the treatment of patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation

BACKGROUND: Rivaroxaban is an oral anticoagulant approved in the US for prevention of stroke and systemic embolism in patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF). We determined the effectiveness and associated risks of rivaroxaban versus other oral anticoagulants in a large real-world popu...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Norby, Faye L., Bengtson, Lindsay G.S., Lutsey, Pamela L., Chen, Lin Y., MacLehose, Richard F., Chamberlain, Alanna M., Rapson, Ian, Alonso, Alvaro
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2017
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5585896/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28874129
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12872-017-0672-5
_version_ 1783261711706357760
author Norby, Faye L.
Bengtson, Lindsay G.S.
Lutsey, Pamela L.
Chen, Lin Y.
MacLehose, Richard F.
Chamberlain, Alanna M.
Rapson, Ian
Alonso, Alvaro
author_facet Norby, Faye L.
Bengtson, Lindsay G.S.
Lutsey, Pamela L.
Chen, Lin Y.
MacLehose, Richard F.
Chamberlain, Alanna M.
Rapson, Ian
Alonso, Alvaro
author_sort Norby, Faye L.
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Rivaroxaban is an oral anticoagulant approved in the US for prevention of stroke and systemic embolism in patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF). We determined the effectiveness and associated risks of rivaroxaban versus other oral anticoagulants in a large real-world population. METHODS: We selected NVAF patients initiating oral anticoagulant use in 2010–2014 enrolled in MarketScan databases. Rivaroxaban users were matched with warfarin and dabigatran users by age, sex, enrolment date, anticoagulant initiation date, and high-dimensional propensity score. Study endpoints, including ischemic stroke, intracranial bleeding (ICB), myocardial infarction (MI), and gastrointestinal (GI) bleeding, were identified from inpatient diagnostic codes. Multivariable Cox models were used to assess associations between type of anticoagulant and outcomes. RESULTS: The analysis included 44,340 rivaroxaban users matched to 89,400 warfarin and 16,957 dabigatran users (38% female, mean age 70) with 12 months of mean follow-up. Anticoagulant-naïve rivaroxaban initiators, but not those switching from warfarin, had lower risk of ischemic stroke [hazard ratio (HR) (95% confidence interval (CI)): 0.75 (0.62, 0.91)] and ICB [HR (95%CI): 0.55, (0.39, 0.78)] than warfarin users. In contrast, anticoagulant-experienced rivaroxaban initiators had higher risk of GI bleeding than warfarin users [HR (95%CI): 1.55 (1.32, 1.83)]. Endpoint rates were similar when comparing anticoagulant-naïve rivaroxaban and dabigatran initiators, with the exception of higher GI bleeding risk in rivaroxaban users [HR (95%CI) 1.28 (1.06, 1.54)]. There were no significant differences in the risk of MI among the comparison groups. CONCLUSION: In this large real-world sample of NVAF patients, effectiveness and risks of rivaroxaban versus warfarin differed by prior anticoagulant status, while effectiveness of rivaroxaban versus dabigatran differed in GI bleeding risk. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1186/s12872-017-0672-5) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5585896
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2017
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-55858962017-09-06 Comparative effectiveness of rivaroxaban versus warfarin or dabigatran for the treatment of patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation Norby, Faye L. Bengtson, Lindsay G.S. Lutsey, Pamela L. Chen, Lin Y. MacLehose, Richard F. Chamberlain, Alanna M. Rapson, Ian Alonso, Alvaro BMC Cardiovasc Disord Research Article BACKGROUND: Rivaroxaban is an oral anticoagulant approved in the US for prevention of stroke and systemic embolism in patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF). We determined the effectiveness and associated risks of rivaroxaban versus other oral anticoagulants in a large real-world population. METHODS: We selected NVAF patients initiating oral anticoagulant use in 2010–2014 enrolled in MarketScan databases. Rivaroxaban users were matched with warfarin and dabigatran users by age, sex, enrolment date, anticoagulant initiation date, and high-dimensional propensity score. Study endpoints, including ischemic stroke, intracranial bleeding (ICB), myocardial infarction (MI), and gastrointestinal (GI) bleeding, were identified from inpatient diagnostic codes. Multivariable Cox models were used to assess associations between type of anticoagulant and outcomes. RESULTS: The analysis included 44,340 rivaroxaban users matched to 89,400 warfarin and 16,957 dabigatran users (38% female, mean age 70) with 12 months of mean follow-up. Anticoagulant-naïve rivaroxaban initiators, but not those switching from warfarin, had lower risk of ischemic stroke [hazard ratio (HR) (95% confidence interval (CI)): 0.75 (0.62, 0.91)] and ICB [HR (95%CI): 0.55, (0.39, 0.78)] than warfarin users. In contrast, anticoagulant-experienced rivaroxaban initiators had higher risk of GI bleeding than warfarin users [HR (95%CI): 1.55 (1.32, 1.83)]. Endpoint rates were similar when comparing anticoagulant-naïve rivaroxaban and dabigatran initiators, with the exception of higher GI bleeding risk in rivaroxaban users [HR (95%CI) 1.28 (1.06, 1.54)]. There were no significant differences in the risk of MI among the comparison groups. CONCLUSION: In this large real-world sample of NVAF patients, effectiveness and risks of rivaroxaban versus warfarin differed by prior anticoagulant status, while effectiveness of rivaroxaban versus dabigatran differed in GI bleeding risk. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1186/s12872-017-0672-5) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. BioMed Central 2017-09-06 /pmc/articles/PMC5585896/ /pubmed/28874129 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12872-017-0672-5 Text en © The Author(s). 2017 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
spellingShingle Research Article
Norby, Faye L.
Bengtson, Lindsay G.S.
Lutsey, Pamela L.
Chen, Lin Y.
MacLehose, Richard F.
Chamberlain, Alanna M.
Rapson, Ian
Alonso, Alvaro
Comparative effectiveness of rivaroxaban versus warfarin or dabigatran for the treatment of patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation
title Comparative effectiveness of rivaroxaban versus warfarin or dabigatran for the treatment of patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation
title_full Comparative effectiveness of rivaroxaban versus warfarin or dabigatran for the treatment of patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation
title_fullStr Comparative effectiveness of rivaroxaban versus warfarin or dabigatran for the treatment of patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation
title_full_unstemmed Comparative effectiveness of rivaroxaban versus warfarin or dabigatran for the treatment of patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation
title_short Comparative effectiveness of rivaroxaban versus warfarin or dabigatran for the treatment of patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation
title_sort comparative effectiveness of rivaroxaban versus warfarin or dabigatran for the treatment of patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5585896/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28874129
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12872-017-0672-5
work_keys_str_mv AT norbyfayel comparativeeffectivenessofrivaroxabanversuswarfarinordabigatranforthetreatmentofpatientswithnonvalvularatrialfibrillation
AT bengtsonlindsaygs comparativeeffectivenessofrivaroxabanversuswarfarinordabigatranforthetreatmentofpatientswithnonvalvularatrialfibrillation
AT lutseypamelal comparativeeffectivenessofrivaroxabanversuswarfarinordabigatranforthetreatmentofpatientswithnonvalvularatrialfibrillation
AT chenliny comparativeeffectivenessofrivaroxabanversuswarfarinordabigatranforthetreatmentofpatientswithnonvalvularatrialfibrillation
AT maclehoserichardf comparativeeffectivenessofrivaroxabanversuswarfarinordabigatranforthetreatmentofpatientswithnonvalvularatrialfibrillation
AT chamberlainalannam comparativeeffectivenessofrivaroxabanversuswarfarinordabigatranforthetreatmentofpatientswithnonvalvularatrialfibrillation
AT rapsonian comparativeeffectivenessofrivaroxabanversuswarfarinordabigatranforthetreatmentofpatientswithnonvalvularatrialfibrillation
AT alonsoalvaro comparativeeffectivenessofrivaroxabanversuswarfarinordabigatranforthetreatmentofpatientswithnonvalvularatrialfibrillation