Amanda Bruno

Major bleeding risk among non-valvular atrial fibrillation patients initiated on apixaban, dabigatran, rivaroxaban or warfarin: a "real-world" observational study in the United States

Limited data are available about the real‐world safety of non‐vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants (NOACs).

An early evaluation of bleeding-related hospital readmissions among hospitalized patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation treated with direct oral anticoagulants.

Abstract Objective: Clinical trials have demonstrated that direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) are efficacious in reducing stroke risk among patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF) with differences in the reduction of bleeding risks vs. warfarin. The objective of this study was to assess bleeding-related hospital readmissions among hospitalized NVAF patients treated with dabigatran, rivaroxaban, and apixaban in the US. Research design and methods: Patients (≥18 years) with a discharge diagnosis of NVAF who received apixaban, dabigatran, or rivaroxaban during hospitalization were identified from the Premier Hospital database (1 January 2012–31 March 2014) and the Cerner Health Facts hospital database (1 January 2012–31 August 2014). Patients identified from each database were analyzed separately and grouped into three cohorts depending on which DOAC was received. Patient characteristics, hospital resource use and costs, and frequency of readmissions within 1 month were evaluated. Results: Among study populations identified from the Premier database (N = 74,730) and the Cerner database (N = 14,201), patients who received apixaban were older, had greater comorbidity, and had higher stroke and bleeding risks. After controlling for patient characteristics, including comorbidity and stroke and bleeding risks, compared with patients who received apixaban during their index hospitalizations, the odds of bleeding-related hospital readmissions were significantly greater by 1.4-fold (p < 0.01) for patients who received rivaroxaban and 1.2-fold (p = 0.16) numerically greater for patients who received dabigatran among patients identified from the Premier Hospital database. Among patients in the Cerner Health Facts hospital database, bleeding-related hospital readmissions were significantly greater by 1.6-fold (p = 0.04) for patients who received rivaroxaban and 1.3-fold (p = 0.30) numerically greater for patients who received dabigatran compared to patients who received apixaban. Limitations: No causal relationship between treatment and outcomes can be concluded. Conclusions: NVAF patients using different DOACs had different characteristics, including stroke and bleeding risks. Use of rivaroxaban, compared to apixaban was associated with significantly greater risk of bleeding-related readmissions across two database claims analyses.

Comparison of differences in medical costs when new oral anticoagulants are used for the treatment of patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation and venous thromboembolism vs warfarin or placebo in the US

Abstract Objective: Medical costs that may be avoided when any of the four new oral anticoagulants (NOACs), dabigatran, rivaroxaban, apixaban, and edoxaban, are used instead of warfarin for the treatment of non-valvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF) were estimated and compared. Additionally, the overall differences in medical costs were estimated for NVAF and venous thromboembolism (VTE) patient populations combined. Methods: Medical cost differences associated with NOAC use vs warfarin or placebo among NVAF and VTE patients were estimated based on clinical event rates obtained from the published trial data. The clinical event rates were calculated as the percentage of patients with each of the clinical events during the trial periods. Univariate and multivariate sensitivity analyses were conducted for the medical-cost differences determined for NVAF patients. A hypothetical health plan population of 1 million members was used to estimate and compare the combined medical-cost differences of the NVAF and VTE populations and were projected in the years 2015–2018. Results: In a year, the medical-cost differences associated with NOAC use instead of warfarin were estimated at −

Comparison of hospital length of stay and hospitalization costs among patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation treated with apixaban or warfarin: An early view.

204, −

Real-World Medical Cost Avoidance When New Oral Anticoagulants are Used Versus Warfarin for Venous Thromboembolism in the United States

140, −

Stroke and Bleeding Risk Associated With Antithrombotic Therapy for Patients With Nonvalvular Atrial Fibrillation in Clinical Practice

495, and −

Comparison of hospital length of stay between hospitalized non-valvular atrial fibrillation patients treated with either apixaban or warfarin

340 per patient for dabigatran, rivaroxaban, apixaban, and edoxaban, respectively. In 2014, among the hypothetical population, the medical-cost differences were −

Economic Evaluations of Medical Cost Differences: Use of Targeted-SpecificOral Anticoagulants vs. Warfarin among Patients with Nonvalvular AtrialFibrillation and Venous Thromboembolism in the U.S.

3.7, −

Warfarin time in therapeutic range and its impact on healthcare resource utilization and costs among patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation

4.2, −

COMPARISON OF MEDICAL COSTS AVOIDED AMONG NONVALVULAR ATRIAL FIBRILLATION PATIENTS TREATED WITH DABIGATRAN, RIVAROXABAN, APIXABAN, AND EDOXABAN VERSUS WARFARIN

11.5, and −