Department of Pharmacy Practice, College of Pharmacy (O.D.L., A.L.H., T.H.T., K.L.M., X.W.), University of Rhode Island, Kingston.
Lifespan Cardiovascular Institute, Providence, RI (H.D.A., T.H.T.).
Circulation. 2023 Mar 7;147(10):782-794. doi: 10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.122.060687. Epub 2023 Feb 10.
The benefit-risk profile of direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) compared with warfarin, and between DOACs in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) and chronic liver disease is unclear.
We conducted a new-user, retrospective cohort study of patients with AF and chronic liver disease who were enrolled in a large, US-based administrative database between January 1, 2011, and December 31, 2017. We assessed the effectiveness and safety of DOACs (as a class and individually) compared with warfarin, and between DOACs in patients with AF and chronic liver disease. The primary outcomes were hospitalization for ischemic stroke/systemic embolism and hospitalization for major bleeding. Inverse probability treatment weights were used to balance the treatment groups on measured confounders.
Overall, 10 209 participants were included, with 4421 (43.2%) on warfarin, 2721 (26.7%) apixaban, 2211 (21.7%) rivaroxaban, and 851 (8.3%) dabigatran. The incidence rates per 100 person-years for ischemic stroke/systemic embolism were 2.2, 1.4, 2.6, and 4.4 for DOACs as a class, apixaban, rivaroxaban, and warfarin, respectively. The incidence rates per 100 person-years for major bleeding were 7.9, 6.5, 9.1, and 15.0 for DOACs as a class, apixaban, rivaroxaban, and warfarin, respectively. After inverse probability treatment weights, the risk of hospitalization for ischemic stroke/systemic embolism was significantly lower between DOACs as a class (hazard ratio [HR], 0.64 [95% CI, 0.46-0.90]) or apixaban (HR, 0.40 [95% CI, 0.19-0.82]) compared with warfarin, but not significantly different between rivaroxaban versus warfarin (HR, 0.76 [95% CI, 0.47-1.21]) or rivaroxaban versus apixaban (HR, 1.73 [95% CI, 0.91-3.29]). Compared with warfarin, the risk of hospitalization for major bleeding was lower with DOACs as a class (HR, 0.69 [95% CI, 0.58-0.82]), apixaban (HR, 0.60 [95% CI, 0.46-0.78]), and rivaroxaban (HR, 0.79 [95% CI, 0.62-1.0]). However, the risk of hospitalization for major bleeding was higher for rivaroxaban versus apixaban (HR, 1.59 [95% CI, 1.18-2.14]).
Among patients with AF and chronic liver disease, DOACs as a class were associated with lower risks of hospitalization for ischemic stroke/systemic embolism and major bleeding versus warfarin. However, the incidence of clinical outcomes among patients with AF and chronic liver disease varied between individual DOACs and warfarin, and in head-to-head DOAC comparisons.
与华法林相比,直接口服抗凝剂(DOACs)在房颤(AF)和慢性肝病患者中的获益-风险比,以及 DOACs 之间的获益-风险比尚不明确。
我们对 2011 年 1 月 1 日至 2017 年 12 月 31 日期间在美国一个大型行政数据库中登记的患有 AF 和慢性肝病的患者进行了一项新用户、回顾性队列研究。我们评估了 DOAC 类药物(整体及各药物)与华法林相比,以及在患有 AF 和慢性肝病的患者中 DOAC 类药物之间的有效性和安全性。主要结局为缺血性卒中/全身性栓塞住院和主要出血住院。采用逆概率治疗权重(inverse probability treatment weights)来平衡治疗组的测量混杂因素。
共有 10209 名参与者,其中 4421 名(43.2%)接受华法林治疗,2721 名(26.7%)接受阿哌沙班治疗,2211 名(21.7%)接受利伐沙班治疗,851 名(8.3%)接受达比加群治疗。DOAC 类药物、阿哌沙班、利伐沙班和华法林的缺血性卒中/全身性栓塞发病率(每 100 人年)分别为 2.2、1.4、2.6 和 4.4;主要出血发病率(每 100 人年)分别为 7.9、6.5、9.1 和 15.0。经过逆概率治疗权重后,DOAC 类药物(风险比 [HR],0.64 [95%置信区间,0.46-0.90])或阿哌沙班(HR,0.40 [95%置信区间,0.19-0.82])与华法林相比,缺血性卒中/全身性栓塞住院风险显著降低,但利伐沙班与华法林(HR,0.76 [95%置信区间,0.47-1.21])或利伐沙班与阿哌沙班(HR,1.73 [95%置信区间,0.91-3.29])之间无显著差异。与华法林相比,DOAC 类药物(HR,0.69 [95%置信区间,0.58-0.82])、阿哌沙班(HR,0.60 [95%置信区间,0.46-0.78])和利伐沙班(HR,0.79 [95%置信区间,0.62-1.0])的主要出血住院风险较低。然而,利伐沙班与阿哌沙班(HR,1.59 [95%置信区间,1.18-2.14])相比,主要出血住院风险较高。
在患有 AF 和慢性肝病的患者中,DOAC 类药物与华法林相比,缺血性卒中/全身性栓塞和主要出血的住院风险降低。然而,在患有 AF 和慢性肝病的患者中,DOAC 类药物和华法林的临床结局发生率在个体 DOAC 类药物之间以及 DOAC 类药物之间存在差异。