Bleeding Risk of Add-On Anti-Platelet Agents to Direct Oral Anticoagulants in Patients With Nonvalvular Atrial Fibrillation (From 2216 Patients in the DIRECT Registry).

Clinical outcomes of the real-world Asian nonvalvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF) patients treated with DOAC and the incremental bleeding risk of add-on antiplatelet therapy to direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) are still to be investigated. We conducted a single-center prospective observational registry of NVAF patients treated with DOACs: the DIRECT registry (UMIN000033283). All patients with NVAF (N = 2216) who were users of dabigatran (N = 648), rivaroxaban (N = 538), apixaban (N = 599), or edoxaban (N = 431) from June 2011 to November 2017 were enrolled (71.6 ± 10.8 years, 36.4% female, follow-up duration: 407.2 ± 388.3 days). No add-on antiplatelet agent was prescribed to 1,739 patients, while single and dual antiplatelet therapy (SAPT and DAPT) in combination with DOAC were prescribed to 411 and 66 patients, respectively. The primary safety endpoint was any bleeding which was defined as a composite of major bleeding according to the International Society on Thrombosis and Hemostasis criteria and clinically relevant non-major bleeding. Patients treated with add-on antiplatelet agents irrespective of SAPT or DAPT had a higher any-bleeding risk than those without (hazard ratio: 1.42; 95% confidence interval 1.16-1.74, p = 0.001). Multivariate adjusted hazard of add-on antiplatelet therapy was not statistically significant (hazard ratio: 1.20; 95% confidence interval 0.94-1.53, p = 0.147). In conclusion, NVAF patients treated with antiplatelet agents and DOAC had a significantly higher bleeding risk than those using DOAC only. However, after adjustment of patients' background, add-on antiplatelet therapy to DOAC itself did not influence to a bleeding risk.

Sotomi Y ，Hirata A ，Amiya R ，Kobayashi T ，Hirayama A ，Sakata Y ，Higuchi Y ... -  《-》

Comparison of the Safety and Effectiveness of Four Direct Oral Anticoagulants in Japanese Patients with Nonvalvular Atrial Fibrillation Using Real-World Data.

Enomoto A ，Mano Y ，Kawano Y ，Nishikawa T ，Aoyama T ，Sasaki Y ，Nagata M ，Takahashi H ... -  《-》

Comparative safety and effectiveness of dabigatran vs. rivaroxaban and apixaban in patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation: a retrospective study from a large healthcare system.

We used the US Department of Defense Military Health System database to compare the safety and effectiveness of direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) in patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF) initiating dabigatran vs. rivaroxaban or apixaban. Two cohorts of adults with NVAF, newly initiated on standard-dose DOAC, were identified based on clinical approval dates: July 2011-June 2016 for dabigatran (150 mg b.i.d.) or rivaroxaban (20 mg QD) and January 2013-June 2016 for dabigatran (150 mg b.i.d.) or apixaban (5 mg b.i.d.). Propensity score matching (1:1) identified two well-balanced cohorts (dabigatran vs. rivaroxaban n = 12 763 per treatment group; dabigatran vs. apixaban n = 4802 per treatment group). In both cohorts, baseline characteristics and follow-up duration were similar between treatment groups. Patients newly initiating dabigatran had significantly lower risk of major bleeding vs. rivaroxaban [2.08% vs. 2.53%; hazard ratio (HR) 0.82, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.70-0.97; P = 0.018], while stroke risk was similar (0.60% vs. 0.78%; HR 0.77, 95% CI 0.57-1.04; P = 0.084). The dabigatran vs. apixaban cohort analysis found no differences in risk of major bleeding (1.60% vs. 1.21%; HR 1.37, 95% CI 0.97-1.94; P = 0.070) or stroke (0.44% vs. 0.35%; HR 1.26, 95% CI 0.66-2.39; P = 0.489). Among NVAF patients newly initiated on standard-dose DOAC therapy in this study, dabigatran was associated with significantly lower major bleeding risk vs. rivaroxaban, and no significant difference in stroke risk. For dabigatran vs. apixaban, the reduced sample size limited the ability to draw definitive conclusions.

Villines TC ，Ahmad A ，Petrini M ，Tang W ，Evans A ，Rush T ，Thompson D ，Oh K ，Schwartzman E ... -  《-》

Effectiveness and Safety of Dabigatran, Rivaroxaban, and Apixaban Versus Warfarin in Nonvalvular Atrial Fibrillation.

The introduction of non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants has been a major advance for stroke prevention in atrial fibrillation; however, outcomes achieved in clinical trials may not translate to routine practice. We aimed to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of dabigatran, rivaroxaban, and apixaban by comparing each agent with warfarin. Using a large US insurance database, we identified privately insured and Medicare Advantage patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation who were users of apixaban, dabigatran, rivaroxaban, or warfarin between October 1, 2010, and June 30, 2015. We created 3 matched cohorts using 1:1 propensity score matching: apixaban versus warfarin (n=15 390), dabigatran versus warfarin (n=28 614), and rivaroxaban versus warfarin (n=32 350). Using Cox proportional hazards regression, we found that for stroke or systemic embolism, apixaban was associated with lower risk (hazard ratio [HR] 0.67, 95% CI 0.46-0.98, P=0.04), but dabigatran and rivaroxaban were associated with a similar risk (dabigatran: HR 0.98, 95% CI 0.76-1.26, P=0.98; rivaroxaban: HR 0.93, 95% CI 0.72-1.19, P=0.56). For major bleeding, apixaban and dabigatran were associated with lower risk (apixaban: HR 0.45, 95% CI 0.34-0.59, P<0.001; dabigatran: HR 0.79, 95% CI 0.67-0.94, P<0.01), and rivaroxaban was associated with a similar risk (HR 1.04, 95% CI 0.90-1.20], P=0.60). All non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants were associated with a lower risk of intracranial bleeding. In patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation, apixaban was associated with lower risks of both stroke and major bleeding, dabigatran was associated with similar risk of stroke but lower risk of major bleeding, and rivaroxaban was associated with similar risks of both stroke and major bleeding in comparison to warfarin.

Yao X ，Abraham NS ，Sangaralingham LR ，Bellolio MF ，McBane RD ，Shah ND ，Noseworthy PA ... -  《Journal of the American Heart Association》

A systematic review and Bayesian network meta-analysis of risk of intracranial hemorrhage with direct oral anticoagulants.

Essentials Risk of intracranial hemorrhage (ICH) may differ between direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs). We compared the risk of ICH between DOACs using network meta-analysis. Dabigatran 110 mg and 150 mg were safer than rivaroxaban on Bayesian analysis. Dabigatran 110 mg ranked as the safest DOAC while rivaroxaban ranked last. Background The comparative risk of intracranial hemorrhage (ICH) among direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) (dabigatran, rivaroxaban, apixaban and edoxaban) remains unclear. Objective To determine the difference in risk of ICH between DOACs Methods Seventeen randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were selected using PubMed/MEDLINE, EMBASE and CENTRAL (Inception, 31 December 2017). Estimates were reported as odds ratio (OR) with 95% credible interval (CR.I) in Bayesian network meta-analysis (NMA), and OR with 95% confidence interval (CI) in traditional meta-analyses. Relative ranking probability of each group was generated based on surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA). Results In NMA of 116 618 patients from 17 RCTs (apixaban = 19 495 patients, rivaroxaban = 14 157 patients, dabigatran = 16 074 patients, edoxaban = 11 652 patients, and comparator = 55 315 patients), all DOACs were safer than warfarin for risk of ICH. Dabigatran 110 mg ranked as the safest drug (SUCRA, 0.85) and reduced the risk of ICH by 56% compared to rivaroxaban (OR, 0.44; 95% Cr.I, 0.22-0.82). Pairwise meta-analysis validated these findings, showing that DOACs were safer than warfarin (OR, 0.46; 95% CI, 0.35-0.59). Subgroup analysis showed that the benefit was present when DOACs were used in non-valvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF) (OR, 0.51; 95% CI, 0.38-0.68) or venous thromboembolism (VTE) (OR, 0.32; 95% CI, 0.18-0.58). Conclusion Dabigatran 110 mg may be the safest choice among any anticoagulant regarding risk of ICH. Both dabigatran 110 mg and 150 mg were safer than rivaroxaban.

Wolfe Z ，Khan SU ，Nasir F ，Raghu Subramanian C ，Lash B ... -  《-》