Division of Pharmacoepidemiology and Pharmacoeconomics, Department of Medicine, Brigham and Women's Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts, United States.
Department of Medicine, Massachusetts General Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts, United States.
Thromb Haemost. 2022 Mar;122(3):386-393. doi: 10.1055/a-1508-8187. Epub 2021 Jul 2.
Warfarin remains widely used and a key comparator in studies of other direct oral anticoagulants. As longer-than-needed warfarin prescriptions are often provided to allow for dosing adjustments according to international normalized ratios (INRs), the common practice of using a short allowable gap between dispensings to define warfarin discontinuation may lead to substantial misclassification of warfarin exposure. We aimed to quantify such misclassification and determine the optimal algorithm to define warfarin discontinuation.
We linked Medicare claims data from 2007 to 2014 with a multicenter electronic health records system. The study cohort comprised patients ≥65 years with atrial fibrillation and venous thromboembolism initiating warfarin. We compared results when defining warfarin discontinuation by (1) different gaps (3, 7, 14, 30, and 60 days) between dispensings and (2) having a gap ≤60 days or bridging larger gaps if there was INR ordering at least every 42 days (60_INR). Discontinuation was considered misclassified if there was an INR ≥2 within 7 days after the discontinuation date.
Among 3,229 patients, a shorter gap resulted in a shorter mean follow-up time (82, 95, 117, 159, 196, and 259 days for gaps of 3, 7, 14, 30, 60, and 60_INR, respectively; < 0.001). Incorporating INR (60_INR) can reduce misclassification of warfarin discontinuation from 68 to 4% ( < 0.001). The on-treatment risk estimation of clinical endpoints varied significantly by discontinuation definitions.
Using a short gap between warfarin dispensings to define discontinuation may lead to substantial misclassification, which can be improved by incorporating intervening INR codes.
华法林在其他直接口服抗凝剂的研究中仍被广泛使用和作为关键对照药物。由于通常会开出超出实际需要的华法林处方,以便根据国际标准化比值(INR)进行剂量调整,因此使用较短的允许配药间隔来定义华法林停药可能会导致华法林暴露的大量错误分类。我们旨在量化这种错误分类,并确定定义华法林停药的最佳算法。
我们将 2007 年至 2014 年的医疗保险索赔数据与多中心电子健康记录系统进行了链接。研究队列包括年龄≥65 岁、患有心房颤动和静脉血栓栓塞症并开始使用华法林的患者。我们比较了通过以下两种方法定义华法林停药的结果:(1)不同的配药间隔(3、7、14、30 和 60 天);(2)如果在至少每 42 天进行一次 INR 检测的情况下存在间隙≤60 天或桥接更大的间隙,则将间隙定义为≤60 天(60_INR)。如果停药日期后 7 天内 INR≥2,则认为停药被错误分类。
在 3229 名患者中,较短的间隔导致平均随访时间更短(分别为 3、7、14、30、60 和 60_INR 间隔的 82、95、117、159、196 和 259 天; < 0.001)。纳入 INR(60_INR)可将华法林停药的错误分类率从 68%降至 4%( < 0.001)。不同停药定义的治疗中临床终点的风险估计差异显著。
使用华法林配药之间的较短间隔来定义停药可能会导致大量错误分类,通过纳入中间的 INR 代码可以改善这种错误分类。