Key result
NOAC prescriptions for AF in China surged to ~84% of all oral anticoagulants by 2021.
Why the study?
NOACs are recommended over warfarin for non-valvular AF, but data regarding their usage in mainland China are limited.
What are the real-world trends and influencing factors for the prescription of NOACs versus warfarin in patients with atrial fibrillation in China?
Cross-Sectional (n=220,083)
Yes
What are the real-world trends and influencing factors for the prescription of NOACs versus warfarin in patients with atrial fibrillation in China?
Absolute Event Rate: 83.53% vs 16.47%
NOACs have become the preferred oral anticoagulant for AF in China, though the high prevalence of low-dose NOAC prescriptions, particularly for rivaroxaban, warrants further investigation into effectiveness and appropriateness.
NOAC prescriptions now predominate for AF in China; leaves open low-dose appropriateness and outcomes for prospective study.
Backgrounds: Non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants (NOACs) have been recommended as the first choice over warfarin for non-valvular atrial fibrillation (AF). However, there is limited data about their usage in mainland China. Methods: Prescriptions of patients diagnosed with AF and containing OACs were extracted from Hospital Prescription Cooperation Project from January 2016 to March 2021. The primary outcome was the changing percentage of different OACs. The secondary outcomes were frequencies as well as factors with the choice of different OACs and dosage of NOACs. Univariate and Multivariate logistic regressions were conducted to explore possible factors. All statistical analyses were performed using SAS software (Version 9.4). Results: Among the 220,083 distinct prescriptions diagnosed with AF and prescribed with OACs, the percentage of NOACs increased over years, exceeding warfarin in 2018. Until March 2021, 83.53% of included patients were prescribed with NOACs. Rivaroxaban (62.25%) and dabigatran (37.65%) were the most commonly prescribed NOACs. Low dosage was common for NOACs (44.54%), this was mainly driven by rivaroxaban, 67.98% of which were low dosage. Multivariate logistic regression indicated that several factors were positively associated with the preference of low dosage, including outpatients (OR 1.32, 95% CI 1.26-1.39), patients with hypertension (OR 1.49, 95% CI 1.40-1.58), acute coronary syndrome (OR 1.17, 95% CI 1.12-1.22), stroke (OR 1.42, 95% CI 1.33-1.52), and kidney disease (OR 1.63, 95% CI 1.34-1.97), as well as concomitantly using antiplatelet agents (OR 1.52, 95% CI 1.40-1.66), and steroids (OR 1.76, 95% CI 1.50-2.07). On the contrary, they were less common in health insurance holder (OR 0.79, 95% CI 0.75-0.84), patients taking apixaban (vs. rivaroxaban, OR 0.39, 95% CI 0.18-0.81), dabigatran (vs. rivaroxaban, OR 0.01, 95% CI 0.01-0.01), edoxaban (vs. rivaroxaban, OR 0.36, 95% CI 0.23-0.55), diagnosed with heart failure (OR 0.87, 95% CI 0.81-0.93), deep vein thrombosis (OR 0.36, 95% CI 0.29-0.46), pulmonary embolism (OR 0.35, 95% CI 0.28-0.43), and peripheral artery disease (OR 0.68, 95% CI 0.55-0.85). Conclusion: The usage of OACs for AF was overall complying with updated guidelines. Low dosage was common for NOACs, further studies were warranted to verify its effectiveness and explore the underlying mechanism.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Zhu et al. (2023) conducted a cross-sectional in Atrial fibrillation (n=220,083). NOACs vs. Warfarin was evaluated on Changing percentage of different OACs. The prescription of NOACs for atrial fibrillation in China increased significantly over time, accounting for 83.53% of all oral anticoagulant prescriptions by March 2021.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: