Key result
Switching from apixaban to rivaroxaban resulted in 1,498 (US) and 32,447 (Germany) additional clinical events and deaths over 1 year, increasing costs compared to continuing apixaban.
Why the study?
Evidence concerning the economic outcomes of DOAC switching remains limited in patients with NVAF.
Does switching from apixaban to rivaroxaban increase clinical events and healthcare costs compared to continuing apixaban in patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation?
Does switching from apixaban to rivaroxaban increase clinical events and healthcare costs compared to continuing apixaban in patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation?
Economic modeling suggests that switching patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation from apixaban to rivaroxaban increases the incidence of stroke, major bleeding, and overall healthcare costs.
Switching apixaban to rivaroxaban may increase events and costs in NVAF; modeling leaves open need for real-world economic confirmation.
AIMS: Direct-acting oral anticoagulants (DOACs) have emerged as the preferred treatment for nonvalvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF). However, evidence concerning the economic outcomes of DOAC switching remains limited. This study aimed to assess the economic outcomes of DOAC switching in the US and Germany, two countries with a high AF prevalence and DOAC utilization. METHODS: A decision model was developed to assess the incidence and cost of stroke/systemic embolism (SE) and major bleeding (MB) associated with switching from apixaban to rivaroxaban in patients with NVAF. The model compared two scenarios: continuers (patients continuing apixaban) and switchers (patients switching from apixaban to rivaroxaban). Model inputs on clinical event rates were sourced from a published real-world study, cost inputs were from a standard costing database and published literature. The analysis was conducted over a 1-year time horizon from US Medicare fee-for-service and German public healthcare payer perspectives. RESULTS: Over one year, 47,036 patients among a hypothetical plan size of 1,000,000 US Medicare fee-for-service members and 1,019,079 patients among the German adult population size of 70,107,122 were estimated to be treated for NVAF with apixaban. Switching all patients from apixaban to rivaroxaban resulted in 1,498 and 32,447 additional clinical events (stroke/SE and MB) and deaths in the US and Germany, respectively, compared to continuing with apixaban. This led to a total incremental cost of $17.3 million and €153 million from Medicare fee-for-service and German public healthcare perspectives, respectively. LIMITATIONS: The incidence and hazard ratios of clinical events informing this analysis were based on a US commercial and Medicare Advantage population and may not be generalizable to other populations. CONCLUSIONS: Switching from apixaban to rivaroxaban was associated with increased clinical events, deaths, and higher medical care costs, potentially representing a less favorable strategy economically compared to continuing apixaban among patients with NVAF.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Duan et al. (2025) studied non-valvular atrial fibrillation. Switching from apixaban to rivaroxaban vs. Continuing apixaban was evaluated on Incidence and cost of stroke/systemic embolism and major bleeding. Switching from apixaban to rivaroxaban resulted in 1,498 (US) and 32,447 (Germany) additional clinical events and deaths over 1 year, increasing costs compared to continuing apixaban.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: