Cargando…

Differences In Gastrointestinal Safety Profiles Among Novel Oral Anticoagulants: Evidence From A Network Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND: There is no consensus at present regarding the differences in the risk of GI bleeding across various NOAC regimens. Therefore, we performed a network meta-analysis to compare the risk of gastrointestinal bleeding after different NOAC regimens. METHODS: PubMed, Cochrane, Web of Science, C...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Guo, Wen-Qin, Chen, Xie-Hui, Tian, Xiao-Yuan, Li, Lang
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Dove 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6778450/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31632152
http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/CLEP.S219335
_version_ 1783456767727894528
author Guo, Wen-Qin
Chen, Xie-Hui
Tian, Xiao-Yuan
Li, Lang
author_facet Guo, Wen-Qin
Chen, Xie-Hui
Tian, Xiao-Yuan
Li, Lang
author_sort Guo, Wen-Qin
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: There is no consensus at present regarding the differences in the risk of GI bleeding across various NOAC regimens. Therefore, we performed a network meta-analysis to compare the risk of gastrointestinal bleeding after different NOAC regimens. METHODS: PubMed, Cochrane, Web of Science, Clinicaltrial.gov and Clinicaltrialresults.org were searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) assessing gastrointestinal bleeding of all NOAC regimens from inception to January 2018. The primary endpoint was major gastrointestinal (MGI) bleeding. The meta-regression was performed to access the association between the MGI bleeding events and mortality. The network meta-analysis was carried out with the Bayesian random-effect model. RESULTS: A total of 25 RCTs, including 139,392 patients, were identified. Meta-regression analysis showed that MGI bleeding was correlated with fatal bleeding events (odds ratios [OR], 1.76; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.13–2.77], P=0.015). The network meta-analysis results showed that compared to the conventional regimens, rivaroxaban was associated with increased risk of MGI bleeding (OR, 1.37; 95% credible interval [CrI], 1.00–1.85), but not the apixaban (OR, 0.77; 95% CrI, 0.53–1.07]), edoxaban (OR, 0.86; 95%CrI, 0.52–1.18) and dabigatran etexilate (OR, 1.22; 95% CrI, 0.82–1.69). Compared to rivaroxaban, apixaban (OR, 0.56; 95% CrI, 0.35–0.88) and edoxaban (OR, 0.62; 95% CrI, 0.35–0.96) showed a significantly lower risk of MGI bleeding. Apixaban had the highest probability of being the safest option with regard to the risk of MGI bleeding (89.1%), followed by edoxaban (77.4%), conventional therapy (51.4%), dabigatran etexilate (23.8%) and rivaroxaban (8.3%). CONCLUSION: The risk of GI bleeding significantly varies among different NOAC regimens, and evidence shows that apixaban and edoxaban had the most favorable MGI bleeding safety profile, while rivaroxaban and dabigatran etexilate were the least safe.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6778450
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2019
publisher Dove
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-67784502019-10-18 Differences In Gastrointestinal Safety Profiles Among Novel Oral Anticoagulants: Evidence From A Network Meta-Analysis Guo, Wen-Qin Chen, Xie-Hui Tian, Xiao-Yuan Li, Lang Clin Epidemiol Original Research BACKGROUND: There is no consensus at present regarding the differences in the risk of GI bleeding across various NOAC regimens. Therefore, we performed a network meta-analysis to compare the risk of gastrointestinal bleeding after different NOAC regimens. METHODS: PubMed, Cochrane, Web of Science, Clinicaltrial.gov and Clinicaltrialresults.org were searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) assessing gastrointestinal bleeding of all NOAC regimens from inception to January 2018. The primary endpoint was major gastrointestinal (MGI) bleeding. The meta-regression was performed to access the association between the MGI bleeding events and mortality. The network meta-analysis was carried out with the Bayesian random-effect model. RESULTS: A total of 25 RCTs, including 139,392 patients, were identified. Meta-regression analysis showed that MGI bleeding was correlated with fatal bleeding events (odds ratios [OR], 1.76; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.13–2.77], P=0.015). The network meta-analysis results showed that compared to the conventional regimens, rivaroxaban was associated with increased risk of MGI bleeding (OR, 1.37; 95% credible interval [CrI], 1.00–1.85), but not the apixaban (OR, 0.77; 95% CrI, 0.53–1.07]), edoxaban (OR, 0.86; 95%CrI, 0.52–1.18) and dabigatran etexilate (OR, 1.22; 95% CrI, 0.82–1.69). Compared to rivaroxaban, apixaban (OR, 0.56; 95% CrI, 0.35–0.88) and edoxaban (OR, 0.62; 95% CrI, 0.35–0.96) showed a significantly lower risk of MGI bleeding. Apixaban had the highest probability of being the safest option with regard to the risk of MGI bleeding (89.1%), followed by edoxaban (77.4%), conventional therapy (51.4%), dabigatran etexilate (23.8%) and rivaroxaban (8.3%). CONCLUSION: The risk of GI bleeding significantly varies among different NOAC regimens, and evidence shows that apixaban and edoxaban had the most favorable MGI bleeding safety profile, while rivaroxaban and dabigatran etexilate were the least safe. Dove 2019-10-01 /pmc/articles/PMC6778450/ /pubmed/31632152 http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/CLEP.S219335 Text en © 2019 Guo et al. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/ This work is published and licensed by Dove Medical Press Limited. The full terms of this license are available at https://www.dovepress.com/terms.php and incorporate the Creative Commons Attribution – Non Commercial (unported, v3.0) License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/). By accessing the work you hereby accept the Terms. Non-commercial uses of the work are permitted without any further permission from Dove Medical Press Limited, provided the work is properly attributed. For permission for commercial use of this work, please see paragraphs 4.2 and 5 of our Terms (https://www.dovepress.com/terms.php).
spellingShingle Original Research
Guo, Wen-Qin
Chen, Xie-Hui
Tian, Xiao-Yuan
Li, Lang
Differences In Gastrointestinal Safety Profiles Among Novel Oral Anticoagulants: Evidence From A Network Meta-Analysis
title Differences In Gastrointestinal Safety Profiles Among Novel Oral Anticoagulants: Evidence From A Network Meta-Analysis
title_full Differences In Gastrointestinal Safety Profiles Among Novel Oral Anticoagulants: Evidence From A Network Meta-Analysis
title_fullStr Differences In Gastrointestinal Safety Profiles Among Novel Oral Anticoagulants: Evidence From A Network Meta-Analysis
title_full_unstemmed Differences In Gastrointestinal Safety Profiles Among Novel Oral Anticoagulants: Evidence From A Network Meta-Analysis
title_short Differences In Gastrointestinal Safety Profiles Among Novel Oral Anticoagulants: Evidence From A Network Meta-Analysis
title_sort differences in gastrointestinal safety profiles among novel oral anticoagulants: evidence from a network meta-analysis
topic Original Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6778450/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31632152
http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/CLEP.S219335
work_keys_str_mv AT guowenqin differencesingastrointestinalsafetyprofilesamongnoveloralanticoagulantsevidencefromanetworkmetaanalysis
AT chenxiehui differencesingastrointestinalsafetyprofilesamongnoveloralanticoagulantsevidencefromanetworkmetaanalysis
AT tianxiaoyuan differencesingastrointestinalsafetyprofilesamongnoveloralanticoagulantsevidencefromanetworkmetaanalysis
AT lilang differencesingastrointestinalsafetyprofilesamongnoveloralanticoagulantsevidencefromanetworkmetaanalysis