PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
May 27, 2016Pharmacoepidemiology and Drug Safety77 citations

Rivaroxaban versus warfarin and dabigatran in atrial fibrillation: comparative effectiveness and safety in Danish routine care

View Full Paper
AGAnders Gorst‐RasmussenGLGregory Y.H. LipTLTorben Bjerregaard Larsen

Structured PICO

Does rivaroxaban improve stroke, bleeding, and mortality outcomes compared to warfarin or dabigatran in patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation?

P
Population
22,358 patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation (AF) who were new-users of oral anticoagulants in routine care
I
Intervention
Rivaroxaban 15 mg or 20 mg
C
Comparator
Warfarin or dabigatran 110 mg or 150 mg
O
Outcome
Stroke rates, bleeding rates, and mortality rateshard clinical

In a Danish nationwide cohort, rivaroxaban showed similar or lower stroke rates compared to warfarin and dabigatran, but higher bleeding and mortality rates compared to dabigatran, which may be driven by residual confounding from prescribing patterns.

Limitations

  • Channeling of rivaroxaban towards elderly and less healthy patients may have generated residual confounding

Abstract

PURPOSE: To evaluate effectiveness and safety of rivaroxaban versus warfarin or dabigatran etexilate in a prospective cohort of routine care non-valvular atrial fibrillation (AF) patients during February 2012 to August 2014. METHODS: We identified in nationwide health registries a cohort of AF patients who were new-users of rivaroxaban 15 mg (R15) or 20 mg (R20); dabigatran 110 mg (D110) or 150 mg (D150); or warfarin. Propensity-adjusted Cox regression was used to compare outcome rates in four settings: 'R15 vs. warfarin'; 'R15 vs. D110'; 'R20 vs. warfarin'; and 'R20 vs. D150'. RESULTS: Rivaroxaban users (R15: n = 776; R20: n = 1629) were older and with more comorbidities than warfarin (n = 11 045) and dabigatran users (D110: n = 3588; D150: n = 5320). Rivaroxaban 15-mg users had the overall highest crude mortality rate. After propensity adjustment, rivaroxaban had lower stroke rates vs. warfarin (R15: hazard ratio HR 0.46, 95% confidence interval CI: 0.26-0.82; R20 HR: 0.72, 95%CI: 0.51-1.01), and similar stroke rates vs. dabigatran. The bleeding rate was similar to warfarin and moderately higher vs. dabigatran (R15 vs. D110 HR: 1.28, 95%CI: 0.82-2.01; R20 vs. D150 HR: 1.81, 95%CI: 1.25-2.62). The mortality rate was higher vs. dabigatran (R15 vs. D110 HR: 1.43, 95%CI: 1.13-1.81; R20 vs. D150 HR: 1.52, 95%CI: 1.06-2.19). CONCLUSIONS: Rivaroxaban was associated with similar or lower stroke rates, but higher bleeding and mortality rates. Channeling of rivaroxaban towards elderly and less healthy patients may have generated residual confounding. In particular, our findings cannot stand alone when deciding which oral anticoagulant to prescribe. Copyright © 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

Gorst‐Rasmussen et al. (2016) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/6a1e339c5f53549f6d406b80https://doi.org/10.1002/pds.4034
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper