Rivaroxaban

AimsThe aim of this study was to compare the risk of stroke or systemic embolism (SE) and major bleeding in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) using dabigatran, rivaroxaban, and apixaban in routine clinical practice.Methods and resultsUsing nationwide registries in Norway from January 2013 to December 2017, we established a cohort of 52 476 new users of non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants (NOACs) with AF. Users of individual NOACs were matched 1:1 on the propensity score to create three pairwise-matched cohorts: dabigatran vs. rivaroxaban (20 504 patients), dabigatran vs. apixaban (20 826 patients), and rivaroxaban vs. apixaban (27 398 patients). Hazard ratios (HRs) for the risk of stroke or SE and major bleeding were estimated. In the propensity-matched comparisons of the risk of stroke or SE, the HRs were 0.88 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.76-1.02] for dabigatran vs. rivaroxaban, 0.88 (95% CI 0.75-1.02) for dabigatran vs. apixaban, and 1.00 (95% CI 0.89-1.14) for apixaban vs. rivaroxaban. For the risk of major bleeding, the HRs were 0.75 (95% CI 0.64-0.88) for dabigatran vs. rivaroxaban, 1.03 (95% CI 0.85-1.24) for dabigatran vs. apixaban, and 0.79 (95% CI 0.68-0.91) for apixaban vs. rivaroxaban.ConclusionIn this nationwide study of patients with AF in Norway, we found no statistically significant differences in risk of stroke or SE in propensity-matched comparisons between dabigatran, rivaroxaban, and apixaban. However, dabigatran and apixaban were both associated with significantly lower risk of major bleeding compared with rivaroxaban.

AimsCiraparantag is a reversal agent for anticoagulants including direct oral anticoagulants. The aim was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of ciraparantag to reverse anticoagulation induced by apixaban or rivaroxaban in healthy elderly adults.Methods and resultsTwo randomized, placebo-controlled, dose-ranging trials conducted in healthy subjects aged 50-75 years. Subjects received apixaban (Study 1) 10 mg orally twice daily for 3.5 days or rivaroxaban (Study 2) 20 mg orally once daily for 3 days. At steady-state anticoagulation subjects were randomized 3:1 to a single intravenous dose of ciraparantag (Study 1: 30, 60, or 120 mg; Study 2: 30, 60, 120, or 180 mg) or placebo. Efficacy was based on correction of the whole blood clotting time (WBCT) at multiple timepoints over 24 h. Subjects and technicians performing WBCT testing were blinded to treatment. Complete reversal of WBCT within 1 h post-dose and sustained through 5 h (apixaban) or 6 h (rivaroxaban) was dose related and observed with apixaban in 67%, 100%, 100%, and 17% of subjects receiving ciraparantag 30 mg, 60 mg, 120 mg, or placebo, respectively; and with rivaroxaban in 58%, 75%, 67%, 100%, and 13% of subjects receiving ciraparantag 30 mg, 60 mg, 120 mg, 180 mg, or placebo, respectively. Adverse events related to ciraparantag were mild, transient hot flashes or flushing.ConclusionsCiraparantag provides a dose-related reversal of anticoagulation induced by steady-state dosing of apixaban or rivaroxaban. Sustained reversal was achieved with 60 mg ciraparantag for apixaban and 180 mg ciraparantag for rivaroxaban. All doses of ciraparantag were well tolerated.

BackgroundThe optimal anticoagulant for end-stage renal disease patients for stroke prophylaxis is unknown. The efficacy and safety of warfarin in this population are debatable. In addition, real-world evidence of direct oral anticoagulants in patients with end-stage renal disease is limited. The aim of this study was to evaluate the clinical outcomes of rivaroxaban compared with warfarin in Taiwanese patients with end-stage renal disease with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation in a real-world setting.Methods and resultsThis was a retrospective population-based cohort study conducted using Taiwan's National Health Insurance Research Database. Patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation and end-stage renal disease who started on rivaroxaban or warfarin between February 2013 and September 2017 were eligible to participate in the study. The inverse probability of treatment weighting approach was used to balance baseline characteristics. Bleeding and thromboembolic outcomes were compared using competing risk analyses. The study population consisted of 3358 patients (173 and 3185 patients on rivaroxaban and warfarin, respectively). In the rivaroxaban group, 50.8%, 38.7%, and 10.4% of the patients received 10, 15, and 20 mg of the drug, respectively. The cumulative incidence of major bleeding was similar between the two groups; however, the gastrointestinal bleeding rate was lower in the rivaroxaban group (adjusted subdistribution hazard ratio [SHR]: 0.56, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.34-0.91) than in the warfarin group. Furthermore, the composite risk of ischemic stroke or systemic embolism was significantly lower in the rivaroxaban group (adjusted SHR: 0.36, 95% CI: 0.17-0.79). Similar findings were observed for patients who received 10 mg of rivaroxaban.ConclusionsIn Taiwanese patients with end-stage renal disease and nonvalvular atrial fibrillation, rivaroxaban may be associated with a similar risk of major bleeding but a lower risk of thromboembolism compared with warfarin. The potential benefit of 10 mg of rivaroxaban in this population requires further investigation.

BackgroundThe patients taking direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) are at high risk for developing ischemic stroke and delayed bleeding in upper gastrointestinal endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD). We aimed to identify the optimal DOAC based on both adverse events in upper gastrointestinal ESD.MethodsA retrospective population-based cohort study was conducted using the Diagnosis Procedure Combination database in Japan. We included patients on a DOAC undergoing upper gastrointestinal ESD between 2012 and 2021. The primary outcomes were ischemic stroke occurring after upper gastrointestinal ESD and delayed bleeding in gastroduodenal and esophageal ESD. Inverse probability weightings were applied to balance the four DOAC groups (dabigatran, rivaroxaban, apixaban, and edoxaban), and logistic regression analyses were performed to compare the outcomes.ResultsWe analyzed 9729 patients on a DOAC undergoing upper gastrointestinal ESD. Ischemic stroke developed after upper gastrointestinal ESD in 1.4%, 0.7%, 0.6%, and 0.8% of patients taking dabigatran, rivaroxaban, apixaban, and edoxaban, respectively, after weighting. Rivaroxaban and apixaban showed significantly lower risk of ischemic stroke compared with dabigatran (odds ratio, 0.15 and 0.12, respectively) in standard doses. The delayed bleeding developed after gastroduodenal ESD in 7.6%, 14.6%, 19.2%, and 17.3% of patients taking each DOAC, respectively, with the lowest risk in dabigatran, followed by rivaroxaban. A similar pattern was observed in delayed bleeding in esophageal ESD (3.2%, 5.4%, 7.5%, and 5.5% in each DOAC), but with no significant results.ConclusionsRivaroxaban might be an optimal DOAC for upper gastrointestinal ESD showing a lower risk for both ischemic stroke and delayed bleeding.