Why the study?
The study was conducted to compare the risk of stroke/systemic embolism and major bleeding between NOACs in patients with atrial fibrillation using nationwide claims data.
Do different NOACs have varying effectiveness for preventing stroke/systemic embolism and safety regarding major bleeding in Korean patients with atrial fibrillation?
Cohort (n=39,783)
Yes
Do different NOACs have varying effectiveness for preventing stroke/systemic embolism and safety regarding major bleeding in Korean patients with atrial fibrillation?
This large Korean nationwide cohort extends real-world evidence confirming similar stroke prevention efficacy among NOACs, but highlights a lower bleeding risk for apixaban and dabigatran compared to rivaroxaban in an Asian population.
BACKGROUND: To compare the risk of stroke/systemic embolism (S/SE) and major bleeding (MB) between non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants (NOACs) in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF), this retrospective study was conducted using the Korean Health Insurance Review & Assessment Service (HIRA) claims database. METHODS: Patients with AF who initiated NOACs (apixaban, dabigatran, and rivaroxaban) from July 1, 2015 to November 30, 2016 were included. We applied inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) method using propensity score to make weighted populations having similar characteristics between groups. Hazard ratio (HR) of S/SE and MB were estimated by Cox proportional hazard model. For S/SE, there were no significant differences between NOACs (HR [95% confidence interval (CI)]): apixaban vs dabigatran (0.99 [0.87-1.13]), apixaban vs rivaroxaban (0.95 [0.84-1.07]), and dabigatran vs rivaroxaban (0.96 [0.85-1.08]). For MB (HR [95% CI]), both apixaban (0.77 [0.68-0.86]) and dabigatran (0.88 [0.79-0.98]) had a significantly lower risk compared with rivaroxaban. Apixaban also had a significantly lower risk of MB compared with dabigatran (0.87 [0.76-0.99]). CONCLUSIONS: In real-world practice among Korean AF patients with relatively high risk of stroke and bleeding, there were no significant differences in the risk of S/SE between all NOAC comparisons. Apixaban was associated with lower risk of MB than dabigatran and rivaroxaban.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Han et al. (2021) conducted a cohort in Non-valvular atrial fibrillation (n=39,783). Non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants (apixaban, dabigatran, rivaroxaban) vs. Direct active comparisons among the three NOACs was evaluated on Stroke/systemic embolism (apixaban vs rivaroxaban comparison) (HR 0.95, 95% CI 0.84-1.07).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: