Effectiveness and Safety in Patients with Non-Valvular Atrial Fibrillation Who Switched from Warfarin to Direct Oral Anticoagulants in Medicare Population

Overview

Journal Adv Ther

Date 2025 Jan 30

PMID 39883308

Authors

Nipun Atreja

Anandkumar Dubey

Amiee Kang

Jenny Jiang

Melissa Hagan

Abimbola Michael-Asalu

Dong Cheng

Steven Deitelzweig

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Introduction: Atrial fibrillation (AF), a common heart rhythm abnormality, is linked to a higher risk of stroke. Traditionally, warfarin has been the primary anticoagulation treatment for reducing the stroke risk. The new standard of treatment by direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) offers greater benefits including improved efficacy and fewer adverse effects with reduced monitoring. This study aims to evaluate the risk of stroke/systemic embolism (SE) and major bleeding (MB) among patients with AF who switched from warfarin to DOACs.

Methods: This study utilized Medicare data to conduct a retrospective analysis of patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF) who switched from warfarin to DOACs between January 1, 2012, and December 31, 2019. Patients with NVAF aged 65 and older who switched from warfarin and had continuous health plan enrollment were included. Descriptive statistics, propensity score matching (PSM), and Cox proportional hazard (PH) models were utilized to compare the outcomes and assess risks of SE and MB across the DOAC cohorts.

Results: Among 1,843,495 patients with NVAF on warfarin, 171,700 switched to DOACs within 90 days of discontinuation (apixaban: 90,850; rivaroxaban: 67,698; dabigatran: 12,900). The mean follow-up period across DOAC cohorts ranged from 552 to 628 days. After PSM, apixaban showed significantly lower rates of stroke/SE compared to dabigatran (2.99% vs. 3.98%, p < 0.0001) and rivaroxaban (3.08% vs. 3.80%, p < 0.0001). MB rates were also lower with apixaban versus dabigatran (4.29% vs. 5.57%, p < 0.0001) and rivaroxaban (4.07% vs. 6.35%, p < 0.0001). Cox PH models confirmed these findings, with apixaban demonstrating lower risks of stroke/SE [hazard ratio (HR) 0.83, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.72-0.96 vs. dabigatran; HR 0.91, 95% CI 0.85-0.96 vs. rivaroxaban] and MB (HR 0.79, 95% CI 0.71-0.89 vs. dabigatran; HR 0.68, 95% CI 0.65-0.72 vs. rivaroxaban).

Conclusion: The risk of stroke/SE and MB varies significantly among patients with NVAF switching from warfarin to different DOACs, with apixaban presenting the lowest risk compared to dabigatran and rivaroxaban.

References

Francis K, Yu C, Alvrtsyan H, Sander S, Ghosh S, Rao Y . Healthcare utilization and costs associated with dabigatran compared to warfarin treatment in newly diagnosed patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation. Curr Med Res Opin. 2015; 31(12):2189-95. DOI: 10.1185/03007995.2015.1092124. View

Julia S, James U . Direct Oral Anticoagulants: A Quick Guide. Eur Cardiol. 2018; 12(1):40-45. PMC: 6206466. DOI: 10.15420/ecr.2017:11:2. View

Granger C, Alexander J, McMurray J, Lopes R, Hylek E, Hanna M . Apixaban versus warfarin in patients with atrial fibrillation. N Engl J Med. 2011; 365(11):981-92. DOI: 10.1056/NEJMoa1107039. View

Fung V, Brand R, Newhouse J, Hsu J . Using medicare data for comparative effectiveness research: opportunities and challenges. Am J Manag Care. 2011; 17(7):488-96. PMC: 3705556. View

Li G, Lip G, Holbrook A, Chang Y, Larsen T, Sun X . Direct comparative effectiveness and safety between non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants for stroke prevention in nonvalvular atrial fibrillation: a systematic review and meta-analysis of observational studies. Eur J Epidemiol. 2018; 34(2):173-190. DOI: 10.1007/s10654-018-0415-7. View

Hylek E, Skates S, Sheehan M, Singer D . An analysis of the lowest effective intensity of prophylactic anticoagulation for patients with nonrheumatic atrial fibrillation. N Engl J Med. 1996; 335(8):540-6. DOI: 10.1056/NEJM199608223350802. View

Osmancik P, Herman D, Neuzil P, Hala P, Taborsky M, Kala P . Left Atrial Appendage Closure Versus Direct Oral Anticoagulants in High-Risk Patients With Atrial Fibrillation. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2020; 75(25):3122-3135. DOI: 10.1016/j.jacc.2020.04.067. View

Grymonprez M, De Backer T, Bertels X, Steurbaut S, Lahousse L . Long-term comparative effectiveness and safety of dabigatran, rivaroxaban, apixaban and edoxaban in patients with atrial fibrillation: A nationwide cohort study. Front Pharmacol. 2023; 14:1125576. PMC: 9932194. DOI: 10.3389/fphar.2023.1125576. View

Patel M, Mahaffey K, Garg J, Pan G, Singer D, Hacke W . Rivaroxaban versus warfarin in nonvalvular atrial fibrillation. N Engl J Med. 2011; 365(10):883-91. DOI: 10.1056/NEJMoa1009638. View

10.

Zheng J, Li D, Qiu Y, Huang Y, Xu Z, Zhao L . CHA2DS2-VASc score as a prognostic indicator in patients with atrial fibrillation undergoing coronary stenting. Turk J Med Sci. 2022; 52(4):1103-1110. PMC: 10388117. DOI: 10.55730/1300-0144.5413. View

11.

January C, Samuel Wann L, Calkins H, Chen L, Cigarroa J, Cleveland Jr J . 2019 AHA/ACC/HRS Focused Update of the 2014 AHA/ACC/HRS Guideline for the Management of Patients With Atrial Fibrillation: A Report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Clinical Practice Guidelines and the.... Circulation. 2019; 140(2):e125-e151. DOI: 10.1161/CIR.0000000000000665. View

12.

Ko D, Lin K, Bessette L, Lee S, Walkey A, Cheng S . Trends in Use of Oral Anticoagulants in Older Adults With Newly Diagnosed Atrial Fibrillation, 2010-2020. JAMA Netw Open. 2022; 5(11):e2242964. PMC: 9675002. DOI: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2022.42964. View

13.

Platt A, Russell Localio A, Brensinger C, Cruess D, Christie J, Gross R . Risk factors for nonadherence to warfarin: results from the IN-RANGE study. Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf. 2008; 17(9):853-60. PMC: 2919157. DOI: 10.1002/pds.1556. View

14.

Gilligan A, Gandhi P, Song X, Wang C, Henriques C, Sander S . All-Cause, Stroke-, and Bleed-Specific Healthcare Costs: Comparison among Patients with Non-Valvular Atrial Fibrillation (NVAF) Newly Treated with Dabigatran or Warfarin. Am J Cardiovasc Drugs. 2017; 17(6):481-492. PMC: 5701952. DOI: 10.1007/s40256-017-0244-1. View

15.

Steffel J, Collins R, Antz M, Cornu P, Desteghe L, Haeusler K . 2021 European Heart Rhythm Association Practical Guide on the Use of Non-Vitamin K Antagonist Oral Anticoagulants in Patients with Atrial Fibrillation. Europace. 2021; 23(10):1612-1676. PMC: 11636576. DOI: 10.1093/europace/euab065. View

16.

Pisters R, Lane D, Nieuwlaat R, de Vos C, Crijns H, Lip G . A novel user-friendly score (HAS-BLED) to assess 1-year risk of major bleeding in patients with atrial fibrillation: the Euro Heart Survey. Chest. 2010; 138(5):1093-100. DOI: 10.1378/chest.10-0134. View

17.

Gupta K, Trocio J, Keshishian A, Zhang Q, Dina O, Mardekian J . Real-World Comparative Effectiveness, Safety, and Health Care Costs of Oral Anticoagulants in Nonvalvular Atrial Fibrillation Patients in the U.S. Department of Defense Population. J Manag Care Spec Pharm. 2018; 24(11):1116-1127. PMC: 10398049. DOI: 10.18553/jmcp.2018.17488. View

17.

Krittayaphong R, Winijkul A, Methavigul K, Chichareon P, Lip G . Clinical outcomes of patients with atrial fibrillation in relation to multimorbidity status changes over time and the impact of ABC pathway compliance: a nationwide cohort study. J Thromb Thrombolysis. 2024; 58(1):97-108. DOI: 10.1007/s11239-024-03007-9. View

18.

Reynolds S, Ghate S, Sheer R, Gandhi P, Moretz C, Wang C . Healthcare utilization and costs for patients initiating Dabigatran or Warfarin. Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2017; 15(1):128. PMC: 5480105. DOI: 10.1186/s12955-017-0705-x. View

19.

Molteni M, Polo Friz H, Primitz L, Marano G, Boracchi P, Cimminiello C . The definition of valvular and non-valvular atrial fibrillation: results of a physicians' survey. Europace. 2014; 16(12):1720-5. DOI: 10.1093/europace/euu178. View