Liverpool Centre for Cardiovascular Science, University of Liverpool, Liverpool John Moores University and Liverpool Heart and Chest Hospital, Liverpool, UK.
Danish Center for Clinical Health Services Research, Department of Clinical Medicine, Aalborg University, Aalborg, Denmark.
J Thromb Thrombolysis. 2024 Aug;57(6):1092-1102. doi: 10.1007/s11239-024-02976-1. Epub 2024 May 2.
There is a paucity of real-world studies examining the risks of stroke/systemic embolism (SE) and major bleeding (MB) among non-valvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF) patients switching from warfarin to a direct oral anticoagulant (DOAC). This retrospective study was conducted to compare the stroke/SE and MB risks between patients switched from warfarin to apixaban, dabigatran, or rivaroxaban in real-world clinical practice.
This study used data from four United States commercial claims databases from January 1, 2012 to June 30, 2019. The study population included NVAF patients initially treated with warfarin and switched to apixaban, dabigatran, or rivaroxaban within 90 days of their warfarin prescription ending. Patients were matched 1:1 between the DOACs in each database using propensity scores and then pooled for the final analysis. Cox proportional hazards models were used to calculate the risk of stroke/SE and MB.
The final population consisted of 2,611 apixaban-dabigatran, 12,165 apixaban-rivaroxaban, and 2,672 dabigatran-rivaroxaban pairs. Apixaban vs. dabigatran was associated with a lower risk of stroke/SE (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.61; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.39-0.96) and MB (HR: 0.67; 95% CI: 0.50-0.91). Apixaban vs. rivaroxaban was associated with a similar risk of stroke/SE (HR: 0.88; 95% CI: 0.73-1.07) and a lower risk of MB (HR: 0.60; 95% CI: 0.52-0.68). There was no significant difference in either risk between dabigatran and rivaroxaban. These results provide important insights into how the risks of stroke/SE and MB for NVAF patients vary when switching from warfarin to different DOACs.
在非瓣膜性心房颤动(NVAF)患者从华法林转换为直接口服抗凝剂(DOAC)的真实世界研究中,关于卒中/全身性栓塞(SE)和大出血(MB)风险的研究很少。本回顾性研究旨在比较 NVAF 患者从华法林转换为阿哌沙班、达比加群或利伐沙班后的卒中/SE 和 MB 风险。
本研究使用了 2012 年 1 月 1 日至 2019 年 6 月 30 日来自美国四个商业索赔数据库的数据。研究人群包括最初接受华法林治疗且在华法林处方结束后 90 天内转换为阿哌沙班、达比加群或利伐沙班的 NVAF 患者。在每个数据库中,通过倾向评分对 DOAC 进行 1:1 匹配,然后汇总进行最终分析。使用 Cox 比例风险模型计算卒中/SE 和 MB 的风险。
最终人群包括 2611 例阿哌沙班-达比加群、12165 例阿哌沙班-利伐沙班和 2672 例达比加群-利伐沙班配对。与达比加群相比,阿哌沙班降低了卒中/SE(风险比 [HR]:0.61;95%置信区间 [CI]:0.39-0.96)和 MB(HR:0.67;95%CI:0.50-0.91)的风险。与利伐沙班相比,阿哌沙班的卒中/SE 风险相似(HR:0.88;95%CI:0.73-1.07),MB 风险较低(HR:0.60;95%CI:0.52-0.68)。达比加群和利伐沙班之间的风险没有显著差异。这些结果为 NVAF 患者从华法林转换为不同 DOAC 时卒中/SE 和 MB 的风险差异提供了重要的见解。