-
Journal of the American Heart... Jul 2017The original non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulant (NOAC) trials in nonvalvular atrial fibrillation (AF) enrolled patients with native valve pathologies. The... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Effects of Non-Vitamin K Antagonist Oral Anticoagulants Versus Warfarin in Patients With Atrial Fibrillation and Valvular Heart Disease: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
BACKGROUND
The original non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulant (NOAC) trials in nonvalvular atrial fibrillation (AF) enrolled patients with native valve pathologies. The object of this study was to quantify the benefit-risk profiles of NOACs versus warfarin in AF patients with native valvular heart disease (VHD).
METHODS AND RESULTS
Trials were identified by exhaustive literature search. Trial data were combined using inverse variance weighting to produce a meta-analytic summary hazard ratio (HR) and 95% confidence interval (CI) of efficacy and safety of NOACs versus warfarin. Our final analysis included 4 randomized controlled trials that enrolled 71 526 participants, including 13 574 with VHD. Pooling results from included trials showed that NOACs versus warfarin reduced stroke or systemic embolism (HR: 0.70; 95% CI, 0.60-0.82) and intracranial hemorrhage (HR: 0.47; 95% CI, 0.24-0.92) in AF patients with VHD. However, risk reduction of major bleeding and intracranial hemorrhage was driven by apixaban, edoxaban, and dabigatran (HR for major bleeding: 0.79 [95% CI, 0.69-0.91]; HR for intracranial hemorrhage: 0.33 [95% CI, 0.25-0.45]) but not rivaroxaban (HR for major bleeding: 1.56 [95% CI, 1.20-2.04]; HR for intracranial hemorrhage: 1.27 [95% CI, 0.77-2.10]).
CONCLUSIONS
Among patients with AF and native VHD, NOACs reduce stroke and systemic embolism compared with warfarin. Evidence shows that apixaban, dabigatran, and edoxaban also reduce bleeding in this patient subgroup, whereas major bleeding (but not intracranial hemorrhage or mortality rate) is significantly increased in VHD patients treated with rivaroxaban. NOACs are a reasonable alternative to warfarin in AF patients with VHD.
Topics: Administration, Oral; Aged; Aged, 80 and over; Anticoagulants; Atrial Fibrillation; Blood Coagulation; Chi-Square Distribution; Female; Heart Valve Diseases; Hemorrhage; Humans; Intracranial Hemorrhages; Male; Middle Aged; Odds Ratio; Risk Factors; Stroke; Treatment Outcome; Vitamin K; Warfarin
PubMed: 28720644
DOI: 10.1161/JAHA.117.005835 -
Frontiers in Cardiovascular Medicine 2021Antiphospholipid antibody syndrome (APS) requires long-term anticoagulation to prevent recurrent thrombosis. Direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) have been increasingly... (Review)
Review
Antiphospholipid antibody syndrome (APS) requires long-term anticoagulation to prevent recurrent thrombosis. Direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) have been increasingly used in APS patients, but contradictory guidelines recommendations on their use do exist. We performed a systematic review of literature including studies investigating the role of DOACs in APS patients. At this aim, PubMed and Cochrane databases were searched according to PRISMA guidelines. We identified 14 studies which investigated the use of DOACs in patients with APS, of which 3 randomized clinical trials (RCTs), 1 analysis of 3 RCTs, 7 case series and 3 cohort studies (2 prospective and 1 retrospective). Among DOACs, rivaroxaban was the most used ( = 531), followed by dabigatran ( = 90) and apixaban ( = 46). Regarding guidelines indications, the 2019 European Society of Cardiology (ESC) and American Society of Hematology (ASH) guidelines recommend against the use of DOACs in all APS patients. The European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR), British Society for Haematology (BSH), and International Society on Thrombosis and Haemostasis (ISTH) guidance provided more detailed indications stating that warfarin should be the first-choice treatment but DOACs may be considered in patients (1) already on a stable anticoagulation with a DOAC, (2) with low-quality anticoagulation by warfarin, (3) unwilling/unable to undergo INR monitoring, (4) with contraindications or serious adverse events under warfarin. Patients with arterial APS or triple positivity should be treated with warfarin while venous APS with single or double positivity may be candidate to DOACs, but high-quality studies are needed.
PubMed: 34414220
DOI: 10.3389/fcvm.2021.715878 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Nov 2017Chronic kidney disease (CKD) is an independent risk factor for atrial fibrillation (AF), which is more prevalent among CKD patients than the general population. AF... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Chronic kidney disease (CKD) is an independent risk factor for atrial fibrillation (AF), which is more prevalent among CKD patients than the general population. AF causes stroke or systemic embolism, leading to increased mortality. The conventional antithrombotic prophylaxis agent warfarin is often prescribed for the prevention of stroke, but risk of bleeding necessitates regular therapeutic monitoring. Recently developed direct oral anticoagulants (DOAC) are expected to be useful as alternatives to warfarin.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the efficacy and safety of DOAC including apixaban, dabigatran, edoxaban, and rivaroxaban versus warfarin among AF patients with CKD.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the Cochrane Kidney and Transplant Specialised Register (up to 1 August 2017) through contact with the Information Specialist using search terms relevant to this review. Studies in the Specialised Register are identified through searches of CENTRAL, MEDLINE, and EMBASE, conference proceedings, the International Clinical Trials Register (ICTRP) Search Portal, and ClinicalTrials.gov.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included all randomised controlled trials (RCTs) which directly compared the efficacy and safety of direct oral anticoagulants (direct thrombin inhibitors or factor Xa inhibitors) with dose-adjusted warfarin for preventing stroke and systemic embolic events in non-valvular AF patients with CKD, defined as creatinine clearance (CrCl) or eGFR between 15 and 60 mL/min (CKD stage G3 and G4).
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently selected studies, assessed quality, and extracted data. We calculated the risk ratio (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CI) for the association between anticoagulant therapy and all strokes and systemic embolic events as the primary efficacy outcome and major bleeding events as the primary safety outcome. Confidence in the evidence was assessing using GRADE.
MAIN RESULTS
Our review included 12,545 AF participants with CKD from five studies. All participants were randomised to either DOAC (apixaban, dabigatran, edoxaban, and rivaroxaban) or dose-adjusted warfarin. Four studies used a central, interactive, automated response system for allocation concealment while the other did not specify concealment methods. Four studies were blinded while the other was partially open-label. However, given that all studies involved blinded evaluation of outcome events, we considered the risk of bias to be low. We were unable to create funnel plots due to the small number of studies, thwarting assessment of publication bias. Study duration ranged from 1.8 to 2.8 years. The large majority of participants included in this study were CKD stage G3 (12,155), and a small number were stage G4 (390). Of 12,545 participants from five studies, a total of 321 cases (2.56%) of the primary efficacy outcome occurred per year. Further, of 12,521 participants from five studies, a total of 617 cases (4.93%) of the primary safety outcome occurred per year. DOAC appeared to probably reduce the incidence of stroke and systemic embolism events (5 studies, 12,545 participants: RR 0.81, 95% CI 0.65 to 1.00; moderate certainty evidence) and to slightly reduce the incidence of major bleeding events (5 studies, 12,521 participants: RR 0.79, 95% CI 0.59 to 1.04; low certainty evidence) in comparison with warfarin.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Our findings indicate that DOAC are as likely as warfarin to prevent all strokes and systemic embolic events without increasing risk of major bleeding events among AF patients with kidney impairment. These findings should encourage physicians to prescribe DOAC in AF patients with CKD without fear of bleeding. The major limitation is that the results of this study chiefly reflect CKD stage G3. Application of the results to CKD stage G4 patients requires additional investigation. Furthermore, we could not assess CKD stage G5 patients. Future reviews should assess participants at more advanced CKD stages. Additionally, we could not conduct detailed analyses of subgroups and sensitivity analyses due to lack of data.
Topics: Administration, Oral; Anticoagulants; Antithrombins; Atrial Fibrillation; Dabigatran; Embolism; Hemorrhage; Humans; Pyrazoles; Pyridines; Pyridones; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Renal Insufficiency, Chronic; Rivaroxaban; Stroke; Thiazoles; Warfarin
PubMed: 29105079
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD011373.pub2 -
Genetics Research 2023Pharmacogenetics is a potential approach that can be applied to decline the burden of rivaroxaban's ADRs. The current systematic review and meta-analysis aim to identify... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
INTRODUCTION
Pharmacogenetics is a potential approach that can be applied to decline the burden of rivaroxaban's ADRs. The current systematic review and meta-analysis aim to identify genetic variants correlated with rivaroxaban exposure and evaluate their importance.
METHODS
We systematically searched PubMed, Web of Science, and Scopus databases for all observational and interventional studies. The fixed effect method was used to pool the data when the Q-test's value was higher than 0.1. We used random models when the value was less than 0.1.
RESULTS
Data from ten studies (4721 participants) were analyzed in the current review. Qualitative synthesis from included studies found that two variants of ABCB1 (rs1045642 and rs2032582) and one variant of APOB (rs13306198) are potential contributors to rivaroxaban concentrations. Both wild homozygotes (AA) and heterozygotes (AC) of rs1045642 have significantly lower rivaroxaban concentrations compared to mutated homozygotes (CC) (SMD = 0.516, 95% CI: 0.115 to 0.917; SMD = 0.772, 95% CI: 0.088 to 1.455, respectively). Nevertheless, pooling unadjusted odds ratios did not yield a statistically significant correlation between rivaroxaban ADRs and genetic mutations.
CONCLUSION
This study revealed that being an AC or CC for rs1045642 is attributed to a considerably higher rivaroxaban level in participants using rivaroxaban. That is to say, rs1045642 is a remarkable predictor of rivaroxaban metabolism. We concluded that identifying rs1045642 before drug administration might decrease ADRs although further studies adjusted for potential confounders are strongly suggested.
Topics: Humans; Rivaroxaban; Pharmacogenetics; Homozygote; Heterozygote; Drug-Related Side Effects and Adverse Reactions
PubMed: 37942082
DOI: 10.1155/2023/6105320 -
Frontiers in Pharmacology 2020This study aims to explore the role of low-dose rivaroxaban (≤10 mg daily) for the treatment of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD). PubMed, Embase and...
This study aims to explore the role of low-dose rivaroxaban (≤10 mg daily) for the treatment of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD). PubMed, Embase and the Cochrane Library were searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of low-dose rivaroxaban in patients with ASCVD including coronary artery disease (CAD) and peripheral artery disease (PAD). Literature screening, data extraction, and risk of bias assessment were carried out independently by two researchers. Hazard ratio (HR) and 95% confidence interval (CI) were calculated using random-effect models to determine risks of outcomes in ASCVD patients treated with rivaroxaban and comparators, and meta-analysis was conducted via Review Manager 5.3.5 software. 3,768 records were obtained through literature search, and 9 articles representing 6 RCTs ultimately qualified for this study. The meta-analysis indicated that for patients with CAD, the addition of rivaroxaban (5 mg daily) to aspirin could significantly reduce the risk of major adverse cardiovascular events (MACEs) compared with aspirin alone (HR 0.81, 95% CI, 0.72 to 0.91, = 0.0004, I = 60%, 4 studies). For PAD patients receiving rivaroxaban (5 mg daily) plus aspirin, there was no significant reduction in the risk of MACEs (HR 0.84, 95% CI, 0.63 to 1.13, = 0.25, I = 74%, 2 studies); however, there was significant reduction in major adverse limb events (MALEs) (HR 0.54, 95% CI, 0.35 to 0.83, = 0.005, one studies) and in the composite of MACEs or MALEs (HR 0.78, 95% CI, 0.64 to 0.95, = 0.02, I = 66%, 2 studies) when compared with patients receiving aspirin alone. Meanwhile, rivaroxaban combined with aspirin significantly increased the risk of International Society on Thrombosis and Haemostasis (ISTH) major bleeding compared with aspirin alone in patients with CAD (HR 1.74, 95% CI, 1.43 to 2.13, < 0.00001, I = 0%, 2 studies) and PAD (HR 1.47, 95% CI, 1.19 to 1.83, = 0.0004, I = 0%, 2 studies). Compared with standard antiplatelet therapy, the addition of a 5 mg daily dose of rivaroxaban to standard antiplatelet therapy may improve cardiovascular or limb outcomes of patients with ASCVD, with an increase in major bleeding. Patients who would benefit from the addition of low-dose rivaroxaban to antiplatelet agents and appropriate dual-pathway antithrombotic strategies should be identified in clinical practice to individualize antithrombotic therapy.
PubMed: 33732144
DOI: 10.3389/fphar.2020.608247 -
Cureus Aug 2022Livedoid vasculopathy (LV) is an uncommon chronic coagulation disorder whose underlying etiology is not yet fully understood. It predominantly affects females,... (Review)
Review
Livedoid vasculopathy (LV) is an uncommon chronic coagulation disorder whose underlying etiology is not yet fully understood. It predominantly affects females, especially those in late adolescence. There is currently limited research on treatment options for those with this diagnosis. The present systematic review aims to compare the efficacy of rivaroxaban and intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIG) therapy in the treatment of livedoid vasculopathy. A detailed search was conducted from April 20, 2022, to May 1, 2022, using four databases: Elsevier, Medline Complete, Medline Ovid, and PubMed. Out of these, 20 relevant articles were used, and the data was extracted and analyzed. Both rivaroxaban and IVIG were shown to be effective treatment options with similar treatment response times. However, future large-scale clinical trials are needed to determine an established treatment regimen for these patients.
PubMed: 36051980
DOI: 10.7759/cureus.28485 -
Science Progress 2021All cancers can increase the risk of developing venous thromboembolism (VTE), and anticoagulants should be considered as an optimal treatment for patients suffering from... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
All cancers can increase the risk of developing venous thromboembolism (VTE), and anticoagulants should be considered as an optimal treatment for patients suffering from cancer-associated VTE. However, there is still a debate about whether the new oral anticoagulant, rivaroxaban, can bring better efficacy and safety outcomes globally. Thus, this systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted to evaluate the efficacy and safety of rivaroxaban. We searched PubMed, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Web of Science, and China National Knowledge Infrastructure for relevant published papers before 1 September 2019, with no language restrictions. The primary outcomes are defined as the recurrence of VTE. The secondary outcomes are defined as clinically relevant non-major bleeding, adverse major bleeding events, and all-cause of death. The data were analyzed by Stata with risk ratio (RR) and 95% confidence interval (CI). Four trials encompassing 1996 patients were included. Rivaroxaban reduced recurrent VTE with no significant difference (RR = 0.68, 95% CI = 0.43-1.07). Similarly, there were no significant differences in adverse major bleeding events (RR = 0.86, 95% CI = 0.37-2.00), clinically relevant non-major bleeding (RR = 1.24, 95% CI = 0.73-2.12) and all-cause mortality (RR = 0.76, 95% CI = 0.40-1.44). In a selected study population of cancer patients with VTE, rivaroxaban is as good as other anticoagulants. Further, carefully designed randomized controlled trials should be performed to confirm these results.
Topics: Administration, Oral; Anticoagulants; Hemorrhage; Humans; Neoplasms; Rivaroxaban; Venous Thromboembolism
PubMed: 33913387
DOI: 10.1177/00368504211012160 -
Europace : European Pacing,... Oct 2023Limited real-world data show that rivaroxaban following dosage criteria from either ROCKET AF [20 mg/day or 15 mg/day if creatinine clearance (CrCl) < 50 mL/min]... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Comparisons of effectiveness and safety between on-label dosing, off-label underdosing, and off-label overdosing in Asian and non-Asian atrial fibrillation patients treated with rivaroxaban: a systematic review and meta-analysis of observational studies.
AIMS
Limited real-world data show that rivaroxaban following dosage criteria from either ROCKET AF [20 mg/day or 15 mg/day if creatinine clearance (CrCl) < 50 mL/min] or J-ROCKET AF (15 mg/day or 10 mg/day if CrCl < 50 mL/min) is associated with comparable risks of thromboembolism and bleeding with each other in patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF). We are aimed to study whether these observations differ between Asian and non-Asian subjects.
METHODS AND RESULTS
A systematic review and meta-analysis with random effects was conducted to estimate the aggregate hazard ratio (HR) and 95% confidence interval (CI) using PubMed and MEDLINE databases from 8 September 2011 to 31 December 2022 searched for adjusted observational studies that reported relevant clinical outcomes of NVAF patients receiving rivaroxaban 10 mg/day if CrCl > 50 mL/min, on-label dose rivaroxaban eligible for ROCKET AF or J-ROCKET AF, and rivaroxaban 20 mg/day if CrCl < 50 mL/min. Effectiveness and safety endpoints were compared between ROCKET AF and J-ROCKET AF dosing regimen in Asian and non-Asian subjects, separately. Also, risks of events of rivaroxaban 10 mg/day despite of CrCl > 50 mL/min and rivaroxaban 20 mg/day despite of CrCl < 50 mL/min were compared to that of 'ROCKET AF/J-ROCKET AF dosing'. Sensitivity analyses were performed by sequential elimination of each study from the pool. The meta-regression analysis was performed to explore the influence of potential factors on the effectiveness and safety outcomes. Eighteen studies involving 67 571 Asian and 54 882 non-Asian patients were included. Rivaroxaban following J-ROCKET AF criteria was associated with comparable risks of thromboembolism in the Asian subgroup, whereas rivaroxaban following J-ROCKET AF criteria was associated with higher risks of all-cause mortality (HR:1.30; 95% CI:1.05-1.60) compared with that of ROCKET AF criteria in the non-Asian population. There were no differences in risks of major bleeding between rivaroxaban following J-ROCKET AF vs. ROCKET AF criteria either in the Asian or non-Asian population. The use of rivaroxaban 10 mg despite of CrCl > 50 mL/min was associated with a higher risk of thromboembolism (HR:1.64; 95% CI:1.28-2.11) but lower risk of major bleeding (HR:0.72; 95% CI:0.57-0.90) compared with eligible dosage criteria. The use of rivaroxaban 20 mg despite of CrCl < 50 mL/min was associated with worse clinical outcomes in the risks of thromboembolism (HR:1.32; 95% CI:1.09-1.59), mortality (HR:1.33; 95% CI:1.10-1.59), and major bleeding (HR:1.26; 95% CI:1.03-1.53) compared with eligible dosage criteria. The pooled results were generally in line with the primary effectiveness and safety outcomes by removing a single study at one time. Meta-regression analyses failed to detect the bias in most potential patient characteristics associated with the clinical outcomes.
CONCLUSION
Rivaroxaban dosing regimen following J-ROCKET criteria may serve as an alternative to ROCKET AF criteria for the Asian population with NVAF, whereas the dosing regimen following ROCKET AF criteria was more favourable for the non-Asian population. The use of rivaroxaban 10 mg despite of CrCl > 50 mL/min was associated with a higher risk of thromboembolism but a lower risk of major bleeding, while use of rivaroxaban 20 mg despite of CrCl < 50 mL/min was associated with worse outcome in most clinical events.
Topics: Humans; Anticoagulants; Atrial Fibrillation; Factor Xa Inhibitors; Hemorrhage; Off-Label Use; Rivaroxaban; Stroke; Thromboembolism; Treatment Outcome; Warfarin; Observational Studies as Topic
PubMed: 37738425
DOI: 10.1093/europace/euad288 -
Journal of Clinical Medicine Jul 2022Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is a serious complication that can occur during and after postoperative treatment, including in treatment after orthopedic surgery. The... (Review)
Review
Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is a serious complication that can occur during and after postoperative treatment, including in treatment after orthopedic surgery. The current guidelines for VTE prophylaxis in postoperative patients recommend the use of LMWHs, one of which is enoxaparin. Another recommendation for use in pharmacological VTE prophylaxis is rivaroxaban, which has better efficacy than enoxaparin but a higher bleeding risk. The aim of this systematic review is to provide an update on the profile of rivaroxaban for VTE prophylaxis after orthopedic surgery. PubMed, SCOPUS, EMBASE, and EBSCOhost were searched up until May 2022. The outcome sought was efficacy and safety, described by the incidence of VTE and incidence of bleeding, respectively. Five randomized controlled trials (RCT) were finally included. Rivaroxaban was confirmed to have better efficacy by significantly reducing the risk of VTE and all-cause mortality (RR = 0.38; 95% CI = 0.27-0.54) compared to enoxaparin. However, regarding the safety variable, no significant difference was found between the incidence of major bleeding in rivaroxaban and enoxaparin (RR = 0.97; 95% CI = 0.56-1.68). The results of the analysis show that rivaroxaban has better efficacy than enoxaparin but the same safety profile, so when used, the bleeding of patients should still be monitored.
PubMed: 35887834
DOI: 10.3390/jcm11144070 -
Pharmaceutics Feb 2023Rivaroxaban has been widely used to prevent and treat various thromboembolic diseases for more than a decade. However, whether a lower dose of rivaroxaban is required... (Review)
Review
Rivaroxaban has been widely used to prevent and treat various thromboembolic diseases for more than a decade. However, whether a lower dose of rivaroxaban is required for Asians is still debatable. This review aimed to explore the potential ethnic difference in pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic (PK/PD) characteristics between Asians and Caucasians. A systematic search was conducted and twenty-four studies were identified, of which 10 were conducted on Asian adults, 11 on predominantly Caucasian adults, and 3 on Caucasian pediatrics. The apparent clearance (CL/F) of rivaroxaban in Caucasian adults with non-valvular atrial fibrillation (6.45-7.64 L/h) was about 31-43% higher than that in Asians (4.46-5.98 L/h) taking 10~20 mg rivaroxaban every 24 h. Moreover, there was no obvious difference in CL/F among Japanese, Chinese, Thai, and Irani people. Regarding PK/PD relationship, prothrombin time was linked to rivaroxaban concentration in a linear or near-linear manner, and Factor Xa activity was linked with the E model. The exposure-response relationship was comparable between Asians and Caucasians. Renal function has a significant influence on CL/F, and no covariate was recognized for exposure-response relationship. In conclusion, a lower dose of rivaroxaban might be required for Asians, and further studies are warranted to verify this ethnic difference to facilitate optimal dosing regimens.
PubMed: 36839909
DOI: 10.3390/pharmaceutics15020588