Comparative effectiveness and safety of non-vitamin K antagonists for atrial fibrillation in clinical practice: GLORIA-AF Registry

Gregory Y H Lip, Agnieszka Kotalczyk, Christine Teutsch, Hans-Christoph Diener, Sergio J Dubner, Jonathan L Halperin, Chang-Sheng Ma, Kenneth J Rothman, Sabrina Marler, Venkatesh Kumar Gurusamy, Menno V Huisman, GLORIA-AF Investigators

Abstract

Background and purpose: Prospectively collected data comparing the safety and effectiveness of individual non-vitamin K antagonists (NOACs) are lacking. Our objective was to directly compare the effectiveness and safety of NOACs in patients with newly diagnosed atrial fibrillation (AF).

Methods: In GLORIA-AF, a large, prospective, global registry program, consecutive patients with newly diagnosed AF were followed for 3 years. The comparative analyses for (1) dabigatran vs rivaroxaban or apixaban and (2) rivaroxaban vs apixaban were performed on propensity score (PS)-matched patient sets. Proportional hazards regression was used to estimate hazard ratios (HRs) for outcomes of interest.

Results: The GLORIA-AF Phase III registry enrolled 21,300 patients between January 2014 and December 2016. Of these, 3839 were prescribed dabigatran, 4015 rivaroxaban and 4505 apixaban, with median ages of 71.0, 71.0, and 73.0 years, respectively. In the PS-matched set, the adjusted HRs and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for dabigatran vs rivaroxaban were, for stroke: 1.27 (0.79-2.03), major bleeding 0.59 (0.40-0.88), myocardial infarction 0.68 (0.40-1.16), and all-cause death 0.86 (0.67-1.10). For the comparison of dabigatran vs apixaban, in the PS-matched set, the adjusted HRs were, for stroke 1.16 (0.76-1.78), myocardial infarction 0.84 (0.48-1.46), major bleeding 0.98 (0.63-1.52) and all-cause death 1.01 (0.79-1.29). For the comparison of rivaroxaban vs apixaban, in the PS-matched set, the adjusted HRs were, for stroke 0.78 (0.52-1.19), myocardial infarction 0.96 (0.63-1.45), major bleeding 1.54 (1.14-2.08), and all-cause death 0.97 (0.80-1.19).

Conclusions: Patients treated with dabigatran had a 41% lower risk of major bleeding compared with rivaroxaban, but similar risks of stroke, MI, and death. Relative to apixaban, patients treated with dabigatran had similar risks of stroke, major bleeding, MI, and death. Rivaroxaban relative to apixaban had increased risk for major bleeding, but similar risks for stroke, MI, and death.

Registration: URL: https://www.

Clinicaltrials: gov . Unique identifiers: NCT01468701, NCT01671007. Date of registration: September 2013.

Keywords: Apixaban; Atrial fibrillation; Dabigatran; Non-vitamin K antagonists; Rivaroxaban.

Conflict of interest statement

GYHL: Consultant and speaker for BMS/Pfizer, Boehringer Ingelheim and Daiichi-Sankyo. No fees are received personally. HCD received honoraria for participation in clinical trials, contribution to advisory boards or oral presentations from: Abbott, BMS, Boehringer Ingelheim, Daiichi-Sankyo, Novo-Nordisk, Pfizer, Portola, and WebMD Global. Financial support for research projects by Boehringer Ingelheim. Research grants from the German Research Council (DFG), German Ministry of Education and Research (BMBF), European Union, NIH, Bertelsmann Foundation, and Heinz-Nixdorf Foundation. JLH has received consulting fees from Boehringer Ingelheim, Bayer Healthcare, Ortho-McNeil-Janssen, Pfizer, Bristol Myers Squibb, the ATLAS Group, Duke Clinical Research Institute and TIMI Group, and Population Health Research Institute. MVH has received research grants from Dutch Healthcare Fund, Dutch Heart Foundation, Bayer Health Care, Pfizer-BMS, Leo Pharma, and consulting fees from Boehringer Ingelheim, Bayer Health Care, Pfizer-BMS, to the LUMC. SJ Dubner has received consultancy fees for serving as a steering committee member for Boehringer Ingelheim; he also holds research grants from St Jude Medical. Authors are responsible for correctness of the statements provided in the manuscript.

© 2022. The Author(s).

References

    1. Kotalczyk A, Gue YX, Potpara TS, et al. Current trends in the use of anticoagulant pharmacotherapy in the United Kingdom are changes on the horizon? Expert Opin Pharmacother. 2021;22(8):1–10. doi: 10.1080/14656566.2021.1879050.
    1. Huisman MV, Rothman KJ, Paquette M, et al. The changing landscape for stroke prevention in AF. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2017;69:777–785. doi: 10.1016/j.jacc.2016.11.061.
    1. Giugliano RP, Ruff CT, Braunwald E, et al. Edoxaban versus warfarin in patients with atrial fibrillation. N Engl J Med. 2013;369:2093–2104. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1310907.
    1. Patel MR, Mahaffey KW, Garg J, et al. Rivaroxaban versus warfarin in nonvalvular atrial fibrillation. N Engl J Med. 2011;365:883–891. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1009638.
    1. Granger CB, Alexander JH, McMurray JJV, et al. Apixaban versus warfarin in patients with atrial fibrillation. N Engl J Med. 2011;365:981–992. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1107039.
    1. Connolly SJ, Ezekowitz MD, Yusuf S, et al. Dabigatran versus warfarin in patients with atrial fibrillation. N Engl J Med. 2009;361:1139–1151. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa0905561.
    1. Larsen TB, Skjøth F, Nielsen PB, et al. Comparative effectiveness and safety of non-Vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants and warfarin in patients with atrial fibrillation: propensity weighted nationwide cohort study. BMJ (Online) 2016;353:i3189.
    1. Ruff CT, Giugliano RP, Braunwald E, et al. Comparison of the efficacy and safety of new oral anticoagulants with warfarin in patients with atrial fibrillation: a meta-analysis of randomised trials. Lancet. 2014;383:955–962. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(13)62343-0.
    1. Hindricks G, Potpara T, Dagres N et al (2020) 2020 ESC Guidelines for the diagnosis and management of atrial fibrillation developed in collaboration with the European Association of Cardio-Thoracic Surgery (EACTS): the task force for the diagnosis and management of atrial fibrillation of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) Developed with the special contribution of the European Heart Rhythm Association (EHRA) of the ESC. Eur Heart J. Epub ahead of print August 29, 2020. 10.1093/eurheartj/ehaa612
    1. Chiang CE, Okumura K, Zhang S, et al. 2017 consensus of the Asia Pacific Heart Rhythm Society on stroke prevention in atrial fibrillation. J Arrhythmia. 2017;33:345–367. doi: 10.1016/j.joa.2017.05.004.
    1. January CT, Wann LS, Calkins H, et al. 2019 AHA/ACC/HRS focused update of the 2014 AHA/ACC/HRS guideline for the management of patients with atrial fibrillation: a report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Clinical Practice Guidelines and the Heart Rhythm Society in collaboration with the society of thoracic surgeons. Circulation. 2019;140:e125–e151. doi: 10.1161/CIR.0000000000000665.
    1. Steffel J, Collins R, Antz M, et al. 2021 European Heart Rhythm Association practical guide on the use of non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants in patients with atrial fibrillation. EP Europace. 2021;23:1612–1676. doi: 10.1093/europace/euab065.
    1. Li G, Lip GYH, Holbrook A, et al. Direct comparative effectiveness and safety between non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants for stroke prevention in nonvalvular atrial fibrillation: a systematic review and meta-analysis of observational studies. Eur J Epidemiol. 2019;34:173–190. doi: 10.1007/s10654-018-0415-7.
    1. Staerk L, Gerds TA, Lip GYH, et al. Standard and reduced doses of dabigatran, rivaroxaban and apixaban for stroke prevention in atrial fibrillation: a nationwide cohort study. J Intern Med. 2018;283:45–55. doi: 10.1111/joim.12683.
    1. Bonde AN, Martinussen T, Lee CJY, et al. Rivaroxaban versus apixaban for stroke prevention in atrial fibrillation: an instrumental variable analysis of a nationwide cohort. Circ Cardiovasc Qual Outcomes. 2020;13:e006058. doi: 10.1161/CIRCOUTCOMES.119.006058.
    1. Rutherford O-CW, Jonasson C, Ghanima W, et al. Comparison of dabigatran, rivaroxaban, and apixaban for effectiveness and safety in atrial fibrillation: a nationwide cohort study. Eur Heart J Cardiovasc Pharmacother. 2020;6:75–85. doi: 10.1093/ehjcvp/pvz086.
    1. Ko Y-J, Kim S, Park K, et al. Comparison of bleeding risks among non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants using the Korea adverse event reporting system database. Ther Adv drug Saf. 2019;10:2042098619876737. doi: 10.1177/2042098619876737.
    1. Euser AM, Zoccali C, Jager KJ, et al. Cohort studies: prospective versus retrospective. Nephron Clin Pract. 2009;113:c214–c217. doi: 10.1159/000235241.
    1. Ranganathan P, Aggarwal R. Study designs: Part 1—an overview and classification. Perspect Clin Res. 2018;9:184–186.
    1. Huisman MV, Lip GYH, Diener HC, et al. Design and rationale of Global Registry on Long-Term Oral Antithrombotic Treatment in Patients with Atrial Fibrillation: a global registry program on long-term oral antithrombotic treatment in patients with atrial fibrillation. Am Heart J. 2014;167:329–334. doi: 10.1016/j.ahj.2013.12.006.
    1. Bunge EM, van Hout B, Haas S, et al. Critical appraisal and issues regarding generalisability of comparative effectiveness studies of NOACs in atrial fibrillation and their relation to clinical trial data: a systematic review. BMJ Open. 2021;11:e042024–e042024. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2020-042024.
    1. Zhu J, Alexander GC, Nazarian S, et al. Trends and variation in oral anticoagulant choice in patients with atrial fibrillation, 2010–2017. Pharmacotherapy. 2018;38:907–920. doi: 10.1002/phar.2158.
    1. Camm AJ, Fox KAA, Virdone S et al (2021) Comparative effectiveness of oral anticoagulants in everyday practice. Heart 107:962–970

Source: PubMed

3
Suscribir