Key result
NOACs are linked to significantly lower ischemic stroke risk vs. warfarin over two years.
Why the study?
Conventional drug surveillance systems lack a seamless workflow, necessitating an active system to proactively assess adverse drug events.
Do NOACs reduce ischemic stroke and intracranial hemorrhage in patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation compared to warfarin?
Cohort (n=2,357)
No
Do NOACs reduce ischemic stroke and intracranial hemorrhage in patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation compared to warfarin?
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
A web-based clinical surveillance system successfully demonstrated that NOACs are associated with a lower risk of ischemic stroke compared to warfarin in an ITT analysis of patients with nonvalvular AF, with no difference in ICH risk.
BACKGROUND: Conventional systems of drug surveillance lack a seamless workflow, which makes it crucial to have an active drug surveillance system that proactively assesses adverse drug events. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to develop a seamless, Web-based workflow for comparing the safety and effectiveness of drugs in a database of electronic medical records. METHODS: We proposed a comprehensive integration process for cohort surveillance using the National Taiwan University Hospital Clinical Surveillance System (NCSS). We studied a practical application of the NCSS that evaluates the drug safety and effectiveness of novel oral anticoagulants (NOACs) and warfarin by cohort tree analysis in an efficient and interoperable platform. RESULTS: We demonstrated a practical example of investigating the differences in effectiveness and safety between NOACs and warfarin in patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation (AF) using the NCSS. We efficiently identified 2357 patients with nonvalvular AF with newly prescribed oral anticoagulants between 2010 and 2015 and further developed 1 main cohort and 2 subcohorts for separately measuring ischemic stroke as the clinical effectiveness outcome and intracranial hemorrhage (ICH) as the safety outcome. In the subcohort of ischemic stroke, NOAC users exhibited a significantly lower risk of ischemic stroke than warfarin users after adjusting for age, sex, comorbidity, and comedication in an intention-to-treat (ITT) analysis (P=.01) but did not exhibit a significantly distinct risk in an as-treated (AT) analysis (P=.12) after the 2-year follow-up. In the subcohort of ICH, NOAC users did not exhibit a different risk of ICH both in ITT (P=.68) and AT analyses (P=.15). CONCLUSIONS: With a seamless and Web-based workflow, the NCSS can serve the critical role of forming associations between evidence and the real world at a medical center in Taiwan.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Lin et al. (2019) conducted a cohort in nonvalvular atrial fibrillation (AF) (n=2,357). Novel oral anticoagulants (NOACs) vs. Warfarin was evaluated on Ischemic stroke (p=.01). Novel oral anticoagulants were associated with a significantly lower risk of ischemic stroke compared to warfarin in an intention-to-treat analysis (P=.01) over a 2-year follow-up.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: