Effect of Previous INR Control during VKA Therapy on Subsequent DOAC Adherence and Persistence, in Patients Switched from VKA to DOAC.

IF 5 2区 医学 Q1 HEMATOLOGY Thrombosis and haemostasis Pub Date : 2024-08-01 Epub Date: 2023-09-06 DOI:10.1055/a-2168-9378
Tessa Elling, Eelko Hak, Jens H Bos, Vladimir Y I G Tichelaar, Nic J G M Veeger, Karina Meijer
{"title":"Effect of Previous INR Control during VKA Therapy on Subsequent DOAC Adherence and Persistence, in Patients Switched from VKA to DOAC.","authors":"Tessa Elling, Eelko Hak, Jens H Bos, Vladimir Y I G Tichelaar, Nic J G M Veeger, Karina Meijer","doi":"10.1055/a-2168-9378","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong> Current guideline suggests a switch from vitamin K antagonist (VKA) to direct oral anticoagulant (DOAC) in patients with low time in therapeutic range (TTR < 70%). Poor international normalized ratio (INR) control may be the result of poor compliance, and might therefore be associated with subsequent DOAC intake. Therefore, this study evaluates the effect of previous TTR and other measures of INR control on DOAC nonadherence and nonpersistence, in patients who switched from VKA to DOAC.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong> A total of 437 patients who switched from VKA to DOAC between 2012 and 2019 were included using data from Certe Thrombosis Service, IADB.nl pharmacy community database University Groningen, and Statistics Netherlands. DOAC prescriptions were used to determine nonadherence and nonpersistence. INR control (i.e., TTR, time under therapeutic range [TUR], and INR variability) was assessed during the last 180 days of VKA use. Multivariable regression models were applied to determine the association between INR control and DOAC nonpersistence/nonadherence.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong> On VKA, 67.7% of the patients had a TTR below 70%. DOAC nonpersistence was 39.8% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 33.4-45.5%) during a median follow-up of 34.4 months (interquartile range: 19.1-49.2). Approximately 80% of persistent patients were DOAC-adherent. Low TTR was not associated with DOAC nonpersistence (hazard ratio: 1.14, 95% CI: 0.69-1.87) and DOAC nonadherence (odds ratio: 1.38, 95% CI: 0.67-2.84), nor were TUR and INR variability.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong> Previous INR control during VKA therapy is not associated with subsequent DOAC nonadherence and nonpersistence. This study suggests that INR control on VKA cannot, and therefore should not, be used for predicting DOAC adherence or persistence.</p>","PeriodicalId":23036,"journal":{"name":"Thrombosis and haemostasis","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":5.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11259495/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Thrombosis and haemostasis","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1055/a-2168-9378","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/9/6 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HEMATOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction:  Current guideline suggests a switch from vitamin K antagonist (VKA) to direct oral anticoagulant (DOAC) in patients with low time in therapeutic range (TTR < 70%). Poor international normalized ratio (INR) control may be the result of poor compliance, and might therefore be associated with subsequent DOAC intake. Therefore, this study evaluates the effect of previous TTR and other measures of INR control on DOAC nonadherence and nonpersistence, in patients who switched from VKA to DOAC.

Methods:  A total of 437 patients who switched from VKA to DOAC between 2012 and 2019 were included using data from Certe Thrombosis Service, IADB.nl pharmacy community database University Groningen, and Statistics Netherlands. DOAC prescriptions were used to determine nonadherence and nonpersistence. INR control (i.e., TTR, time under therapeutic range [TUR], and INR variability) was assessed during the last 180 days of VKA use. Multivariable regression models were applied to determine the association between INR control and DOAC nonpersistence/nonadherence.

Results:  On VKA, 67.7% of the patients had a TTR below 70%. DOAC nonpersistence was 39.8% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 33.4-45.5%) during a median follow-up of 34.4 months (interquartile range: 19.1-49.2). Approximately 80% of persistent patients were DOAC-adherent. Low TTR was not associated with DOAC nonpersistence (hazard ratio: 1.14, 95% CI: 0.69-1.87) and DOAC nonadherence (odds ratio: 1.38, 95% CI: 0.67-2.84), nor were TUR and INR variability.

Conclusion:  Previous INR control during VKA therapy is not associated with subsequent DOAC nonadherence and nonpersistence. This study suggests that INR control on VKA cannot, and therefore should not, be used for predicting DOAC adherence or persistence.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
VKA治疗期间既往INR控制对从VKA转为DOAC患者后续DOAC粘附和持续性的影响。
简介: 目前的指南建议在治疗时间较短(TTR)的患者中从维生素K拮抗剂(VKA)转换为直接口服抗凝剂(DOAC) 方法: 使用Certe血栓形成服务、IADB.nl药房社区数据库Groningen大学和荷兰统计局的数据,纳入了2012年至2019年间从VKA转为DOAC的437名患者。使用DOAC处方来确定不依从性和不依从性。在使用VKA的最后180天评估INR控制(即TTR、在治疗范围[TUR]下的时间和INR变异性)。应用多变量回归模型来确定INR控制与DOAC不持久性/不依从性之间的相关性。结果: 在VKA中,67.7%的患者的TTR低于70%。中位随访34.4个月(四分位间距19.1-49.2)期间,DOAC不依从性为39.8%(95%置信区间[CI]:33.4-4.5.5%)。约80%的顽固性患者为DOAC依从性患者。低TTR与DOAC不耐受性(危险比:1.14,95%CI:0.69-1.87)和DOAC不依从性(比值比:1.38,95%CI:0.67-2.84)无关,TUR和INR的变异性也无关。结论: VKA治疗期间先前的INR控制与随后的DOAC不依从性和不耐受性无关。这项研究表明,对VKA的INR控制不能也不应该用于预测DOAC的依从性或持续性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Thrombosis and haemostasis
Thrombosis and haemostasis 医学-外周血管病
CiteScore
11.90
自引率
9.00%
发文量
140
审稿时长
1 months
期刊介绍: Thrombosis and Haemostasis publishes reports on basic, translational and clinical research dedicated to novel results and highest quality in any area of thrombosis and haemostasis, vascular biology and medicine, inflammation and infection, platelet and leukocyte biology, from genetic, molecular & cellular studies, diagnostic, therapeutic & preventative studies to high-level translational and clinical research. The journal provides position and guideline papers, state-of-the-art papers, expert analysis and commentaries, and dedicated theme issues covering recent developments and key topics in the field.
期刊最新文献
Characteristics of bleeding complications in patients with severe COVID19 requiring veno-venous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation in Japan. Reversible Thrombocytopenia of Functional Platelets after Nose-horned Viper Envenomation is Induced by a Snaclec. Unraveling the Molecular Pathogenesis of Protein C Deficiency-Associated VTE: Insights from Protein C Mutations C238G and R189W in Thai Patients. Unravelling the causal relationship between endometriosis and the risk for developing venous thromboembolism: a pooled analysis. Carotid Stenosis and Stroke: Medicines, Stents, Surgery-"Wait-and-See" or Protect?
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1