Key result
OAC non-persistence linked to ~79% higher risk of ischaemic stroke and related death in NVAF.
Why the study?
Persistence with DOACs has become a concern in non-valvular atrial fibrillation patients, but whether non-persistence affects prognosis has been rarely studied.
Does non-persistence with oral anticoagulants increase the risk of ischemic stroke and ischemic stroke-related death in patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation?
Cohort (n=93,048)
Yes
Does non-persistence with oral anticoagulants increase the risk of ischemic stroke and ischemic stroke-related death in patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation?
Non-persistence with oral anticoagulants in NVAF patients is common and significantly increases the risk of ischemic stroke and stroke-related death.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Warrants adherence monitoring in NVAF; extends observational data on DOAC non-persistence but leaves causal effects open.
Aims Persistence with direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) has become a concern in non-valvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF) patients, but whether this affects prognosis is rarely studied. We investigated the persistence with oral anticoagulants (OACs) and its association with prognosis among a nationwide cohort of NVAF patients. Methods and results DOAC-naive NVAF patients who started to use DOACs for ischaemic stroke prevention between 2013 and 2018 were included using Dutch national statistics. Persistence with OACs was determined based on the presence of a 100-day gap between the last prescription and the end of study period. In 93 048 patients, 75.7% had a baseline CHA2DS2-VASc score of ≥2. The cumulative incidence of persistence with OACs was 88.1% [95% confidence interval (CI) 87.9–88.3%], 82.6% (95% CI 82.3–82.9%), 77.7% (95% CI 77.3–78.1%), and 72.0% (95% CI 71.5–72.5%) at 1, 2, 3, and 4 years after receiving DOACs, respectively. Baseline characteristics associated with better persistence with OACs included female sex, age range 65–74 years, permanent atrial fibrillation, previous exposure to vitamin K antagonists, stroke history (including transient ischaemic attack), and a CHA2DS2-VASc score ≥2. Non-persistence with OACs was associated with an increased risk of the composite outcome of ischaemic stroke and ischaemic stroke-related death [adjusted hazard ratio (aHR) 1.79, 95% CI 1.49–2.15] and ischaemic stroke (aHR 1.58, 95% CI 1.29–1.93) compared with being persistent with OACs. Conclusion At least a quarter of NVAF patients were non-persistent with OACs within 4 years, which was associated with poor efficacy of ischaemic stroke prevention. The identified baseline characteristics may help identify patients at risk of non-persistence.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Toorop et al. (2021) conducted a cohort in Non-valvular atrial fibrillation (n=93,048). Non-persistence with oral anticoagulants (100-day prescription gap) vs. Persistence with oral anticoagulants was evaluated on Composite outcome of ischaemic stroke and ischaemic stroke-related death (HR 1.79, 95% CI 1.49-2.15). Non-persistence with oral anticoagulants was associated with an increased risk of ischaemic stroke and ischaemic stroke-related death in NVAF patients.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: