Standard-dose direct oral anticoagulants compared to warfarin in frail, elderly, VKA-experienced patients with atrial fibrillation resulted in a similar rate of stroke or systemic embolic events (HR 0.83).
Meta-Analysis (n=58,634)
Double-blind and Open-label
Randomized
Yes
Hazard Ratio: 0.83 (95% CI 0.65–1.07)
Absolute Event Rate: 1.99% vs 2.39%
BACKGROUND Whether frail, elderly patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) on a vitamin K antagonist (VKA) should switch to a direct-acting oral anticoagulant (DOAC) was studied in the FRAIL-AF trial and remains controversial. OBJECTIVES The purpose of this study was to evaluate, in the COMBINE-AF data set, the impact on clinical outcomes of switching frail, elderly AF patients from VKA to DOAC. METHODS COMBINE-AF consists of individual patient-level data from 71,683 patients with AF in 4 randomized clinical trials comparing DOAC vs warfarin. Frailty was evaluated using a frailty index derived from a modified Rockwood's Accumulation Model including 18 age-related conditions. Patients with a frailty index score above the median were considered frail. Prespecified outcomes were stroke or systemic embolic events, bleeding events, death, and a net clinical outcome combining these events. RESULTS We identified 5,913 patients who were frail, elderly (age ≥75 years), and VKA-experienced and 52,721 patients who did not meet all 3 of these criteria. Patients were randomized to a standard-dose (SD) DOAC or warfarin. After 27 months median follow-up, there was no heterogeneity in treatment effect with SD-DOAC vs warfarin among those who met all 3 criteria vs those who did not for the endpoints of stroke or systemic embolic events (HR: 0.83 vs 0.81; Pint = 0.75) or for death (HR: 0.95 vs 0.91; Pint = 0.54). Major bleeding was similar with SD-DOAC vs warfarin in frail, elderly, VKA-experienced patients (HR: 1.06 95% CI: 0.90-1.25), while it was significantly reduced with SD-DOAC in patients without all 3 criteria (HR: 0.82 95% CI: 0.76-0.89; Pint = 0.007). Likewise, the net clinical outcome was similar in the frail, elderly, VKA-experienced patients with SD-DOAC vs warfarin (HR: 1.01 95% CI: 0.91-1.13), while significantly reduced with SD-DOAC patients without all 3 criteria (HR: 0.89 95% CI: 0.85-0.93; Pint = 0.028). Fatal and intracranial bleeding were significantly reduced with SD-DOAC in both subgroups to a similar degree (both Pint > 0.05), while gastrointestinal bleeding with SD-DOAC was increased to a greater degree in frail, elderly, VKA-experienced patients (HR: 1.83 95% CI: 1.42-2.36) compared with those without all 3 criteria (HR: 1.23 95% CI: 1.09-1.39; Pint = 0.006). CONCLUSIONS Frail, elderly, VKA-experienced patients with AF switched to SD-DOAC experienced significant reductions in stroke or systemic embolism, fatal and intracranial bleeding, and death. Gastrointestinal bleeding was increased with SD-DOAC, while major bleeding and the primary net clinical outcome were similar. Based on these findings, SD-DOAC is a reasonable choice for frail, elderly, VKA-experienced patients to reduce stroke and systemic embolism, death, and the most serious types of bleeding.
“We felt we had a public service obligation here. We didn't want the wider community to just be leaving elderly patients on a vitamin K antagonist when we think we have a better alternative. At a minimum, doctors should be having the discussion with elderly patients who are frail and say, 'Look, there is a new class of drugs available. Here are the advantages. Here are the disadvantages. They are more costly. And so let's think about what's best for you.'”
Nicolau et al. (Fri,) conducted a meta-analysis in Atrial fibrillation (n=58,634). Standard-dose direct oral anticoagulant (SD-DOAC) vs. Warfarin was evaluated on Stroke or systemic embolic events (HR 0.83, 95% CI 0.65-1.07). Standard-dose direct oral anticoagulants compared to warfarin in frail, elderly, VKA-experienced patients with atrial fibrillation resulted in a similar rate of stroke or systemic embolic events (HR 0.83).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: