Key result
Compared to apixaban, elderly patients with NVAF prescribed rivaroxaban (HR 2.08) or dabigatran (HR 3.74) had a significantly higher risk of switching to another oral anticoagulant.
Why the study?
Does rivaroxaban or dabigatran increase the risk of switching or discontinuation compared to apixaban in elderly patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation?
Cohort (n=38,250)
Does rivaroxaban or dabigatran increase the risk of switching or discontinuation compared to apixaban in elderly patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation?
Elderly patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation prescribed rivaroxaban or dabigatran have a significantly higher risk of switching to another oral anticoagulant or discontinuing therapy compared to those prescribed apixaban.
May warrant caution selecting OACs in elderly NVAF; leaves open effects on persistence and outcomes.
We compared the risks of switching to another oral anticoagulant (OAC) and discontinuation of direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) among elderly patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF) who were prescribed rivaroxaban or dabigatran versus apixaban. Patients (≥65 years of age) with NVAF prescribed DOACs (January 1, 2013 to September 30, 2017) were identified from the Humana research database and grouped into DOAC cohorts. Cox regression analyses were used to evaluate whether the risk for switching to another OAC or discontinuing index DOACs differed among cohorts. Of the study population (N = 38 250), 55.9% were prescribed apixaban (mean age: 78.6 years; 49.8% female), 37.3% rivaroxaban (mean age: 77.4 years; 46.7% female), and 6.8% dabigatran (mean age: 77.0 years; 44.0% female). Compared to patients prescribed apixaban, patients prescribed rivaroxaban (hazard ratio [HR]: 2.08; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.92-2.25; P < .001) or dabigatran (HR: 3.74; 95% CI, 3.35-4.18, P < .001) had a significantly higher risk of switching to another OAC during the follow-up; compared to patients prescribed apixaban, the risks of discontinuation were also higher for patients treated with rivaroxaban (HR: 1.10; 95% CI, 1.07-1.13, P < .001) or dabigatran (HR: 1.29; 95% CI, 1.23-1.35, P < .001).
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Baker et al. (2019) conducted a cohort in Nonvalvular atrial fibrillation (n=38,250). Rivaroxaban or dabigatran vs. Apixaban was evaluated on Switching to another oral anticoagulant (HR 2.08, 95% CI 1.92-2.25, p=<0.001). Compared to apixaban, elderly patients with NVAF prescribed rivaroxaban (HR 2.08) or dabigatran (HR 3.74) had a significantly higher risk of switching to another oral anticoagulant.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: