Tags

Type your tag names separated by a space and hit enter

Effectiveness and Safety of Non-vitamin K Antagonist Oral Anticoagulants for Atrial Fibrillation and Venous Thromboembolism: A Systematic Review and Meta-analyses.
Clin Ther. 2017 Jul; 39(7):1456-1478.e36.CT

Abstract

PURPOSE

The findings from the observational studies comparing the effectiveness and safety of non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants (NOACs) versus vitamin K antagonists (VKAs) for atrial fibrillation (AF) and venous thromboembolism (VTE) are inconsistent. We conducted separate meta-analyses examining the efficacy/effectiveness and safety of NOACs versus VKAs by disease (AF vs VTE), study design (randomized controlled trials [RCTs] vs observational studies), and NOAC (dabigatran, rivaroxaban, apixaban, and edoxaban).

METHODS

The main data sources included PubMed/MEDLINE, EMBASE, Web of Science, CINAHL, and Scopus from January 1, 2005, to February 15, 2016. We searched for Phase III RCTs and observational studies comparing NOACs versus VKAs. The primary outcomes were stroke/systemic embolism (SE) for AF; recurrent VTE/fatal pulmonary embolism (PE) for VTE; and major bleeding for both conditions. Secondary outcomes included stroke and myocardial infarction (MI) for AF, recurrent deep vein thrombosis (DVT)/PE for VTE, and mortality, intracranial hemorrhage (ICH), and gastrointestinal bleeding for both conditions. Pooled hazard ratios (HRs) were reported by using inverse variance-weighted random effects models.

FINDINGS

A total of 13 RCTs and 27 observational studies (AF, n = 32; VTE, n = 8) were included. For AF, dabigatran and VKAs were comparable for stroke/SE risk in 1 RCT (HR, 0.77 [95% CI, 0.57-1.03]) and 6 observational studies (HR, 1.03 [95% CI, 0.83-1.27]). Rivaroxaban had a 20% decreased risk of stroke/SE in 3 RCTs (HR, 0.80 [95% CI, 0.67-0.95]) compared with VKA, but the effect was nonsignificant in 3 observational studies (HR, 0.78 [95% CI, 0.59-1.04]). Apixaban decreased stroke/systemic embolism risk (HR, 0.79 [95% CI, 0.66-0.95]) compared with VKA in 1 RCT, but edoxaban was comparable to VKA (HR, 0.99 [95% CI, 0.77-1.28]) in 1 RCT (no observational studies available for apixaban/edoxaban). Dabigatran, apixaban, and edoxaban decreased the risk of hemorrhagic stroke, mortality, major bleeding, and ICH by 10% to 71% compared with VKAs but not rivaroxaban. For VTE, NOACs and VKAs were comparable for recurrent VTE/fatal PE/DVT/PE risk in 7 RCTs and 1 observational study. The 7 RCTs demonstrated a 32% to 69% decreased risk of major bleeding for dabigatran, rivaroxaban, and apixaban compared with VKAs. No difference was shown in 1 rivaroxaban observational study (HR, 0.77 [95% CI, 0.40-1.49]) and 1 edoxaban RCT (HR, 0.84 [95% CI, 0.59-1.20]). Except for dabigatran, the NOACs had a 61% to 86% decreased risk of ICH and gastrointestinal bleeding.

IMPLICATIONS

Overall, NOACs were comparable or superior to VKAs. Although no observational studies are currently available for apixaban/edoxaban, a few notable inconsistencies exist for dabigatran (ischemic stroke, MI) and rivaroxaban (stroke/SE, major bleeding in VTE) between RCTs and observational studies. Individualizing NOAC/VKA therapy based on benefit/safety profiles and patient characteristics is suggested.

Authors+Show Affiliations

Department of Pharmacy Practice and Science, College of Pharmacy, University of Arizona, Tucson, Arizona.Department of Pharmacy Practice and Science, College of Pharmacy, University of Arizona, Tucson, Arizona.Department of Medicine, School of Medicine, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania; Center for Health Equity Research Promotion, Veterans Affairs Pittsburgh Healthcare System, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania.Department of Pharmacy Practice and Science, College of Pharmacy, University of Arizona, Tucson, Arizona.Department of Pharmacy Practice and Science, College of Pharmacy, University of Arizona, Tucson, Arizona.Department of Pharmacy Practice and Science, College of Pharmacy, University of Arizona, Tucson, Arizona; Arizona Health Sciences Library, University Libraries, University of Arizona, Tucson, Arizona.Department of Pharmacy Practice and Science, College of Pharmacy, University of Arizona, Tucson, Arizona. Electronic address: lociganic@pharmacy.arizona.edu.

Pub Type(s)

Journal Article
Meta-Analysis
Review
Systematic Review

Language

eng

PubMed ID

28668628

Citation

Almutairi, Abdulaali R., et al. "Effectiveness and Safety of Non-vitamin K Antagonist Oral Anticoagulants for Atrial Fibrillation and Venous Thromboembolism: a Systematic Review and Meta-analyses." Clinical Therapeutics, vol. 39, no. 7, 2017, pp. 1456-1478.e36.
Almutairi AR, Zhou L, Gellad WF, et al. Effectiveness and Safety of Non-vitamin K Antagonist Oral Anticoagulants for Atrial Fibrillation and Venous Thromboembolism: A Systematic Review and Meta-analyses. Clin Ther. 2017;39(7):1456-1478.e36.
Almutairi, A. R., Zhou, L., Gellad, W. F., Lee, J. K., Slack, M. K., Martin, J. R., & Lo-Ciganic, W. H. (2017). Effectiveness and Safety of Non-vitamin K Antagonist Oral Anticoagulants for Atrial Fibrillation and Venous Thromboembolism: A Systematic Review and Meta-analyses. Clinical Therapeutics, 39(7), 1456-e36. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clinthera.2017.05.358
Almutairi AR, et al. Effectiveness and Safety of Non-vitamin K Antagonist Oral Anticoagulants for Atrial Fibrillation and Venous Thromboembolism: a Systematic Review and Meta-analyses. Clin Ther. 2017;39(7):1456-1478.e36. PubMed PMID: 28668628.
* Article titles in AMA citation format should be in sentence-case
TY - JOUR T1 - Effectiveness and Safety of Non-vitamin K Antagonist Oral Anticoagulants for Atrial Fibrillation and Venous Thromboembolism: A Systematic Review and Meta-analyses. AU - Almutairi,Abdulaali R, AU - Zhou,Lili, AU - Gellad,Walid F, AU - Lee,Jeannie K, AU - Slack,Marion K, AU - Martin,Jennifer R, AU - Lo-Ciganic,Wei-Hsuan, Y1 - 2017/06/28/ PY - 2017/02/14/received PY - 2017/05/16/revised PY - 2017/05/30/accepted PY - 2017/7/3/pubmed PY - 2017/12/27/medline PY - 2017/7/3/entrez KW - atrial fibrillation KW - bleeding KW - meta-analysis KW - non–vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants KW - venous thromboembolism KW - warfarin SP - 1456 EP - 1478.e36 JF - Clinical therapeutics JO - Clin Ther VL - 39 IS - 7 N2 - PURPOSE: The findings from the observational studies comparing the effectiveness and safety of non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants (NOACs) versus vitamin K antagonists (VKAs) for atrial fibrillation (AF) and venous thromboembolism (VTE) are inconsistent. We conducted separate meta-analyses examining the efficacy/effectiveness and safety of NOACs versus VKAs by disease (AF vs VTE), study design (randomized controlled trials [RCTs] vs observational studies), and NOAC (dabigatran, rivaroxaban, apixaban, and edoxaban). METHODS: The main data sources included PubMed/MEDLINE, EMBASE, Web of Science, CINAHL, and Scopus from January 1, 2005, to February 15, 2016. We searched for Phase III RCTs and observational studies comparing NOACs versus VKAs. The primary outcomes were stroke/systemic embolism (SE) for AF; recurrent VTE/fatal pulmonary embolism (PE) for VTE; and major bleeding for both conditions. Secondary outcomes included stroke and myocardial infarction (MI) for AF, recurrent deep vein thrombosis (DVT)/PE for VTE, and mortality, intracranial hemorrhage (ICH), and gastrointestinal bleeding for both conditions. Pooled hazard ratios (HRs) were reported by using inverse variance-weighted random effects models. FINDINGS: A total of 13 RCTs and 27 observational studies (AF, n = 32; VTE, n = 8) were included. For AF, dabigatran and VKAs were comparable for stroke/SE risk in 1 RCT (HR, 0.77 [95% CI, 0.57-1.03]) and 6 observational studies (HR, 1.03 [95% CI, 0.83-1.27]). Rivaroxaban had a 20% decreased risk of stroke/SE in 3 RCTs (HR, 0.80 [95% CI, 0.67-0.95]) compared with VKA, but the effect was nonsignificant in 3 observational studies (HR, 0.78 [95% CI, 0.59-1.04]). Apixaban decreased stroke/systemic embolism risk (HR, 0.79 [95% CI, 0.66-0.95]) compared with VKA in 1 RCT, but edoxaban was comparable to VKA (HR, 0.99 [95% CI, 0.77-1.28]) in 1 RCT (no observational studies available for apixaban/edoxaban). Dabigatran, apixaban, and edoxaban decreased the risk of hemorrhagic stroke, mortality, major bleeding, and ICH by 10% to 71% compared with VKAs but not rivaroxaban. For VTE, NOACs and VKAs were comparable for recurrent VTE/fatal PE/DVT/PE risk in 7 RCTs and 1 observational study. The 7 RCTs demonstrated a 32% to 69% decreased risk of major bleeding for dabigatran, rivaroxaban, and apixaban compared with VKAs. No difference was shown in 1 rivaroxaban observational study (HR, 0.77 [95% CI, 0.40-1.49]) and 1 edoxaban RCT (HR, 0.84 [95% CI, 0.59-1.20]). Except for dabigatran, the NOACs had a 61% to 86% decreased risk of ICH and gastrointestinal bleeding. IMPLICATIONS: Overall, NOACs were comparable or superior to VKAs. Although no observational studies are currently available for apixaban/edoxaban, a few notable inconsistencies exist for dabigatran (ischemic stroke, MI) and rivaroxaban (stroke/SE, major bleeding in VTE) between RCTs and observational studies. Individualizing NOAC/VKA therapy based on benefit/safety profiles and patient characteristics is suggested. SN - 1879-114X UR - https://www.unboundmedicine.com/medline/citation/28668628/Effectiveness_and_Safety_of_Non_vitamin_K_Antagonist_Oral_Anticoagulants_for_Atrial_Fibrillation_and_Venous_Thromboembolism:_A_Systematic_Review_and_Meta_analyses_ L2 - https://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0149-2918(17)30699-9 DB - PRIME DP - Unbound Medicine ER -