Key result
Rivaroxaban shows ~2% lower adherence than apixaban overall but higher adherence in chronic users.
Why the study?
Medication adherence comparisons often do not account for differences in follow-up time or patient selection criteria, which may impact validity and comparability.
Does rivaroxaban compared to apixaban have different medication adherence rates in adults with non-valvular atrial fibrillation when accounting for follow-up time and patient selection?
Cohort
Does rivaroxaban compared to apixaban have different medication adherence rates in adults with non-valvular atrial fibrillation when accounting for follow-up time and patient selection?
Effect estimate: Difference -2.2 pp
p-value: p=< .05
Comparisons of medication adherence between oral anticoagulants are highly sensitive to differences in follow-up time and the inclusion of non-chronic users, which can significantly alter or reverse apparent adherence advantages.
Adherence comparisons in AF require follow-up adjustment and careful selection; leaves open valid inferences from unadjusted observational data.
OBJECTIVE: Studies comparing medications adherence have become common yet they often do not account for differences in relative follow-up. Patient selection criteria may impact validity and comparability of these studies as well. METHODS: Adults with non-valvular atrial fibrillation, ≥1 rivaroxaban or apixaban dispensing (index date), and ≥1 year of pre-index eligibility were selected from IMS Health Real World Data Adjudicated Claims (IMS RWD Adjudicated Claims) and Truven Health MarketScan Research (Truven MarketScan) databases. Adherence was evaluated using proportion of days covered (PDC) ≥ 0.8 for treatment cohorts: (1) unmatched, with different follow-up, (2) propensity-score matched with similar follow-up, (3) matched, with similar follow-up and ≥2 rivaroxaban or apixaban dispensings, and (4) matched, with similar follow-up and chronic medication users only. Robustness was verified with PDC ≥0.9. RESULTS: In the IMS RWD Adjudicated Claims database, rivaroxaban users had a longer mean follow-up than apixaban users (408 versus 254 days, respectively; p < .01). While crude comparisons demonstrated lower adherence rates for rivaroxaban than apixaban (-12.4 percentage points [pp]; p < .05), these difference attenuated after matching and (1) balancing follow-up (-2.2 pp; p < .05), (2) excluding single-time medication users (0.2 pp; p > .05), and reversed after (3) excluding non-chronic medication users (5.0 pp; p < .05). Results obtained were consistent when these analyses were repeated within the Truven MarketScan databases and when using a PDC ≥0.9. CONCLUSION: Medication adherence comparisons need to account for differences in follow-up. Selection of chronic medication users may impact comparative adherence advantage between medications.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Coleman et al. (2017) conducted a cohort in non-valvular atrial fibrillation. Rivaroxaban vs. Apixaban was evaluated on Medication adherence (proportion of days covered ≥ 0.8) (Difference -2.2 pp, p=< .05). Rivaroxaban showed lower crude adherence than apixaban (-12.4 percentage points), but this difference attenuated after balancing follow-up (-2.2 pp; p<0.05) and reversed among chronic users (5.0 pp).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: