• Home
  • December Liberty Chapter Journal Club

December Liberty Chapter Journal Club

  • 12/07/2022
  • 2:00 PM - 3:00 PM
  • Online, link will be sent via email one day before the session

Registration


Registration is closed

Registration is free and open only to members of the Liberty Chapter
Please log in to your member account before registering

Facilitator:

Helen-Ann Brown Epstein

Article:

Effectiveness and safety among direct oral anticoagulants in nonvalvular atrial fibrillation: A multi-database cohort study with meta-analysis

Durand M, Schnitzer ME, Pang M, et al. Br J Clin Pharmacol. 2021;87(6):2589-2601. doi:10.1111/bcp.14669

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33242339/

Abstract:

Aims: There are conflicting signals in the literature about comparative safety and effectiveness of direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) for nonvalvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF).
Methods: We conducted multicentre matched cohort studies with secondary meta-analysis to assess safety and effectiveness of dabigatran, rivaroxaban and apixaban across 9 administrative healthcare databases. We included adults with NVAF initiating anticoagulation therapy (dabigatran, rivaroxaban or apixaban), and constructed 3 cohorts to compare DOACs pairwise. The primary outcome was pooled hazard ratio (pHR) of ischaemic stroke or systemic thromboembolism. Secondary outcomes included pHR of major bleeding, and a composite of stroke, major bleeding, or all-cause mortality. We used proportional hazard Cox regressions models, and pooled estimates were obtained with random effect meta-analyses.
Results: The cohorts included 73 414 new users of dabigatran, 92 881 of rivaroxaban, and 61 284 of apixaban. After matching, the pHRs (95% confidence intervals) comparing rivaroxaban initiation to dabigatran were: 1.11 (0.93, 1.32) for ischaemic stroke or systemic thromboembolism, 1.26 (1.09, 1.46) for major bleeding, and 1.17 (1.05, 1.30) for the composite endpoint. For apixaban vs dabigatran, they were: 0.91 (0.74, 1.12) for ischaemic stroke or systemic thromboembolism, 0.89 (0.75, 1.05) for major bleeding, and 0.94 (0.78 to 1.14) for the composite endpoint. For apixaban vs rivaroxaban, they were: 0.85 (0.74, 0.99) for ischaemic stroke or systemic thromboembolism, 0.61 (0.53, 0.70) for major bleeding, and 0.82 (0.76, 0.88) for the composite endpoint.
Conclusion: We found that apixaban use is associated with lower risks of stroke and bleeding compared with rivaroxaban, and similar risks compared with dabigatran.

© 2021 Liberty Chapter of the Medical Library Association
Powered by Wild Apricot Membership Software