Direct oral anticoagulants (apixaban, rivaroxaban, dabigatran, and edoxaban) offer favorable safety and efficacy profiles compared to vitamin K antagonists across multiple clinical settings.
Are direct oral anticoagulants safe and effective compared to vitamin K antagonists in patients requiring oral anticoagulation?
Direct oral anticoagulants offer favorable safety and efficacy profiles over vitamin K antagonists across various clinical settings, though further research is needed to optimize their use.
INTRODUCTION: The landscape of oral anticoagulant (OAC) treatment dramatically changed with the introduction into clinical practice of the direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs), which have been able to overcome major limitations of vitamin K antagonists. AREAS COVERED: This review summarizes the pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic profiles of commercially available DOACs (apixaban, rivaroxaban, dabigatran, and edoxaban), as well as their efficacy and safety in the settings of atrial fibrillation, venous thromboembolism, prevention of cancer-associated thrombotic events, and atherosclerotic disease. Limitations of commercially available DOACs are also reviewed. EXPERT OPINION: The introduction into clinical practice of DOACs has significantly changed the landscape of OAC, given their favorable safety and efficacy profiles. However, there are still several unmet needs for patients requiring treatment with OAC, underscoring the need for further research in the field to optimize the safety and efficacy of these agents across different clinical settings.
Laudani et al. (Mon,) conducted a review in Atrial fibrillation, venous thromboembolism, cancer-associated thrombotic events, and atherosclerotic disease. Direct oral anticoagulants (apixaban, rivaroxaban, dabigatran, and edoxaban) vs. Vitamin K antagonists was evaluated. Direct oral anticoagulants (apixaban, rivaroxaban, dabigatran, and edoxaban) offer favorable safety and efficacy profiles compared to vitamin K antagonists across multiple clinical settings.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: