Comparison of the effectiveness and safety of direct oral anticoagulants: a nationwide propensity score–weighted study

• Published in: Blood advances 2023-06, Vol.7 (11), p.2564-2572
• Main Authors: Ingason, Arnar B., Hreinsson, Johann P., Agustsson, Arnar S., Lund, Sigrun H., Rumba, Edward, Palsson, Daniel A., Reynisson, Indridi E., Gudmundsdottir, Brynja R., Onundarson, Pall T., Bjornsson, Einar S.
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: Anticoagulants - adverse effects; apixaban; Atrial Fibrillation - chemically induced; Atrial Fibrillation - complications; Atrial Fibrillation - drug therapy; atrial-fibrillation; Clinical Trials and Observations; dabigatran; Dabigatran - adverse effects; Hematologi; Hematology; Hemorrhage - chemically induced; Hemorrhage - epidemiology; Humans; mortality risks; Myocardial Infarction - epidemiology; Myocardial Infarction - etiology; pharmacodynamics; pharmacokinetics; Propensity Score; real-world; rivaroxaban; Rivaroxaban - adverse effects; stroke; Stroke - epidemiology; Stroke - etiology; Stroke - prevention & control; warfarin
• ISSN: 2473-9529; 2473-9537
• DOI: 10.1182/bloodadvances.2022009099

•In this nationwide cohort study, apixaban, dabigatran, and rivaroxaban had similar rates of any stroke or systemic embolism.•Rivaroxaban had higher rates of major bleeding than apixaban and dabigatran but lower rates of myocardial infarction than dabigatran. [Display omitted] In the pivotal randomized controlled trials (RCTs) for patients with atrial fibrillation, direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) had similar or even superior efficacy and safety compared with warfarin. However, RCTs comparing different DOACs are nonexistent and previous observational studies have yielded conflicting results. In this nationwide cohort study, rates of any stroke or systemic embolism (stroke/SE) and major bleeding were compared among new users of apixaban, dabigatran, and rivaroxaban with atrial fibrillation from 2014 to 2019. Inverse probability weighting was used to yield balanced study groups, and outcomes were compared using Cox regression. Stroke/SE rates were similar in patients receiving apixaban, dabigatran, and rivaroxaban. Dabigatran was associated with twofold higher rates of myocardial infarction (MI) than rivaroxaban (1.4 events/100 person-years (py) vs 0.7 events/100-py, hazard ratio [HR] 2.21, 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.00-4.90) and apixaban (1.4 events/100-py vs 0.7 events/100-py, HR 2.26, 95% CI, 0.90-5.67), although the second comparison included the possibility of a null effect. Rivaroxaban was associated with higher major bleeding rates compared with apixaban (2.9 events/100-py vs 1.8 events/100-py, HR 1.64, 95% CI, 1.13-2.37) and dabigatran (2.9 events/100-py vs 1.4 events/100-py, HR 2.18, 95% CI, 1.21-3.93). Specifically, rivaroxaban had higher rates of major gastrointestinal bleeding and other major bleeding than apixaban. In conclusion, although stroke/SE rates were similar for DOACs, rivaroxaban was associated with higher rates of major bleeding than other DOACs and lower rates of MI than dabigatran. These results may help guide oral anticoagulant selection, especially in patients at high risk of bleeding or MI.