Key result
Women with NVAF and diabetes show ~14-point lower on-label edoxaban dosing compared to men.
Why the study?
Gender differences exist in baseline characteristics and DOAC prescription patterns in patients with NVAF and T2DM, but real-world data on edoxaban dosing and safety by gender are limited.
Do edoxaban dosing patterns and outcomes differ by gender in patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation and type 2 diabetes mellitus?
Observational (n=204)
Yes
Do edoxaban dosing patterns and outcomes differ by gender in patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation and type 2 diabetes mellitus?
Absolute Event Rate: 73.6% vs 87.3%
p-value: p=0.01
While edoxaban appears safe for both genders with NVAF and T2DM, women are significantly more likely to receive an overdose, highlighting the critical need for accurate dose estimation in this vulnerable population.
Similar bleeding and thromboembolic rates despite sex differences in edoxaban dosing; leaves open optimal strategies for women with NVAF and T2DM.
Background and aim Patients diagnosed with non-valvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF) often present with concomitant type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM), both conditions are associated with an increased risk of mortality due to cardiovascular complications such as stroke and heart failure. Given the observed gender differences not only in baseline characteristics but also in direct oral anticoagulant (DOACs) prescription patterns, the aim of the present study was to evaluate edoxaban dosing patterns and safety in men and women with both NVAF and T2DM in a real-world setting. Methods Patients with NVAF and T2DM undergoing treatment with edoxaban for 3–6 months prior to inclusion were enrolled in the FADIA study. This was an observational, real-world, prospective, single-cohort, multicentric study with a 12-month follow-up period after inclusion. Results Data from 204 patients were analysed: 92 women (45.1%) and 112 men (54.9%). Women were older, had worse renal function compared to men and received on-label prescriptions for edoxaban less frequently (73.6% vs. 87.3%, p = 0.01) while being more often overdosed (16.5% vs. 5.5%, p < 0.01). Rates of major and clinically relevant non-major (CRNM) bleeding, stroke or systemic embolism, and one-year all-cause mortality were statistically similar between the two groups. Conclusions Edoxaban appears to be safe in NVAF and T2DM patients, regardless of gender. However, the higher prevalence of inadequate dosing in women, coupled with their worse baseline clinical characteristics, underscores the importance of accurately estimating the appropriate edoxaban dose to maximize its benefits and minimize bleeding risk.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Rodriguez et al. (2026) conducted an observational in Non-valvular atrial fibrillation and type 2 diabetes mellitus (n=204). Female gender vs. Male gender was evaluated on On-label edoxaban prescription (p=0.01). Women with NVAF and T2DM treated with edoxaban had fewer on-label prescriptions (73.6% vs 87.3%, p=0.01) and more overdosing (16.5% vs 5.5%, p<0.01) compared to men, with similar safety outcomes.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: