» Articles » PMID: 24889848

Systematic Review and Network Meta-analysis Comparing Antithrombotic Agents for the Prevention of Stroke and Major Bleeding in Patients with Atrial Fibrillation

Overview
Journal BMJ Open
Specialty General Medicine
Date 2014 Jun 4
PMID 24889848
Citations 31
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Objective: To examine the comparative efficacy and safety of antithrombotic treatments (apixaban, dabigatran, edoxaban, rivaroxaban and vitamin K antagonists (VKA) at a standard adjusted dose (target international normalised ratio 2.0-3.0), acetylsalicylic acid (ASA), ASA and clopidogrel) for non-valvular atrial fibrillation and among subpopulations.

Design: Systematic review and network meta-analysis.

Data Sources: A systematic literature search strategy was designed and carried out using MEDLINE, EMBASE, the Cochrane Register of Controlled Trials and the grey literature including the websites of regulatory agencies and health technology assessment organisations for trials published in English from 1988 to January 2014.

Eligibility Criteria For Selecting Studies: Randomised controlled trials were selected for inclusion if they were published in English, included at least one antithrombotic treatment and involved patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation eligible to receive anticoagulant therapy.

Results: For stroke or systemic embolism, dabigatran 150 mg and apixaban twice daily were associated with reductions relative to standard adjusted dose VKA, whereas low-dose ASA and the combination of clopidogrel plus low-dose ASA were associated with increases. Absolute risk reductions ranged from 6 fewer events per 1000 patients treated for dabigatran 150 mg twice daily to 15 more events for clopidogrel plus ASA. For major bleeding, edoxaban 30 mg daily, apixaban, edoxaban 60 mg daily and dabigatran 110 mg twice daily were associated with reductions compared to standard adjusted dose VKA. Absolute risk reductions with these agents ranged from 18 fewer per 1000 patients treated each year for edoxaban 30 mg daily to 24 more for medium dose ASA.

Conclusions: Compared with standard adjusted dose VKA, new oral anticoagulants were associated with modest reductions in the absolute risk of stroke and major bleeding. People on antiplatelet drugs experienced more strokes compared with anticoagulant drugs without any reduction in bleeding risk. To fully elucidate the comparative benefits and harms of antithrombotic agents across the various subpopulations, rigorously conducted comparative studies or network meta-regression analyses of patient-level data are required.

Systematic Review Registration Number: PROSPERO registry-CRD42012002721.

Citing Articles

Prescription of DOACs in Patients with Atrial Fibrillation at Different Stages of Renal Insufficiency.

Hahn K, Lamparter M Adv Ther. 2023; 40(10):4264-4281.

PMID: 37594666 PMC: 10499752. DOI: 10.1007/s12325-023-02544-8.


A Combination of Ex Vivo and In Vivo Strategies for Evaluating How Much New Oral Anticoagulants Exacerbate Experimental Intracerebral Bleeding.

Ferreira J, Sucupira I, Carvalho G, Paiva F, Pimentel-Coelho P, Rosado-de-Castro P TH Open. 2023; 7(3):e195-e205.

PMID: 37435564 PMC: 10332909. DOI: 10.1055/s-0043-1770782.


Antithrombotic therapy to prevent cognitive decline in people with small vessel disease on neuroimaging but without dementia.

Kwan J, Hafdi M, Chiang L, Myint P, Wong L, Quinn T Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2022; 7:CD012269.

PMID: 35833913 PMC: 9281623. DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD012269.pub2.


Comparative efficacy and safety of neoadjuvant radiotherapy for patients with borderline resectable, and locally advanced pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma: a systematic review and network meta-analysis protocol.

Lv W, Wang Q, Hu Q, Wang X, Cao D BMJ Open. 2022; 12(7):e050558.

PMID: 35831044 PMC: 9280870. DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2021-050558.


Role of CDK4/6 inhibitors in patients with hormone receptor (HR)-positive, human epidermal receptor-2 negative (HER-2) metastatic breast cancer study protocol for a systematic review, network meta-analysis and cost-effectiveness analysis.

Hu Q, Kang W, Wang Q, Luo T BMJ Open. 2022; 12(5):e056374.

PMID: 35636793 PMC: 9152932. DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2021-056374.


References
1.
Salanti G, Kavvoura F, Ioannidis J . Exploring the geometry of treatment networks. Ann Intern Med. 2008; 148(7):544-53. DOI: 10.7326/0003-4819-148-7-200804010-00011. View

2.
Turner R, Davey J, Clarke M, Thompson S, Higgins J . Predicting the extent of heterogeneity in meta-analysis, using empirical data from the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. Int J Epidemiol. 2012; 41(3):818-27. PMC: 3396310. DOI: 10.1093/ije/dys041. View

3.
Dias S, Welton N, Sutton A, Caldwell D, Lu G, Ades A . Evidence synthesis for decision making 4: inconsistency in networks of evidence based on randomized controlled trials. Med Decis Making. 2013; 33(5):641-56. PMC: 3704208. DOI: 10.1177/0272989X12455847. View

4.
Guo J, Pandey S, Doyle J, Bian B, Lis Y, Raisch D . A review of quantitative risk-benefit methodologies for assessing drug safety and efficacy-report of the ISPOR risk-benefit management working group. Value Health. 2010; 13(5):657-66. DOI: 10.1111/j.1524-4733.2010.00725.x. View

5.
Dias S, Sutton A, Ades A, Welton N . Evidence synthesis for decision making 2: a generalized linear modeling framework for pairwise and network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Med Decis Making. 2012; 33(5):607-17. PMC: 3704203. DOI: 10.1177/0272989X12458724. View