Benefit-Risk Assessment of Rivaroxaban in Older Patients With Nonvalvular Atrial Fibrillation or Venous Thromboembolism.

IF 3.8 3区 医学 Q2 GERIATRICS & GERONTOLOGY Drugs & Aging Pub Date : 2025-05-01 Epub Date: 2025-03-31 DOI:10.1007/s40266-025-01192-7
Paul P Dobesh, Albert A Volkl, Ákos Ferenc Pap, C V Damaraju, Bennett Levitan, Zhong Yuan, Alpesh N Amin
{"title":"Benefit-Risk Assessment of Rivaroxaban in Older Patients With Nonvalvular Atrial Fibrillation or Venous Thromboembolism.","authors":"Paul P Dobesh, Albert A Volkl, Ákos Ferenc Pap, C V Damaraju, Bennett Levitan, Zhong Yuan, Alpesh N Amin","doi":"10.1007/s40266-025-01192-7","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Both bleeding and adverse ischemic events increase with age, compounding the benefit-risk balance of anticoagulants in older patients. We present analyses using benefit-risk methods to better understand the age-dependence of the benefit-risk profile of rivaroxaban in patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF) or venous thromboembolism (VTE).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Randomized controlled trial data from the ROCKET-AF (NVAF) and EINSTEIN DVT, EINSTEIN PE, EINSTEIN-Extension, and EINSTEIN CHOICE in (VTE) were used. For ROCKET-AF, benefits and risks were assessed with incidence rates for key thrombotic and bleeding endpoints and a net clinical benefit (NCB) measure. Cumulative incidences (estimated by the Kaplan-Meier method) were estimated at day 185 for EINSTEIN and EINSTEIN Extension and 1 year for EINSTEIN CHOICE. Incidence differences were calculated for the overall population and age subgroups of < 65, 65-75, and > 75 years.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In ROCKET-AF, rate differences in the composite NCB outcome (vascular death, stroke, myocardial infarction, fatal bleeding, critical organ bleeding, and non-CNS systemic embolism) favored rivaroxaban overall and by age < 65, 65-75, and > 75 years (-84, -25, -61, and -150 cases per 10,000 patient-years, respectively). In the pooled EINSTEIN DVT and EINSTEIN PE studies, cumulative incidence differences for the composite NCB outcome (recurrent VTE and major bleeding) were -103, 3, -105, and -544 per 10,000 patients, respectively. For extended VTE treatment with rivaroxaban versus placebo in EINSTEIN-Extension, NCB results were -536, -492, -556, and -601 per 10,000 patients, respectively. In the EINSTEIN CHOICE analysis, NCB favored rivaroxaban 20 mg versus aspirin (-284, -255, -339, and -338, respectively) and rivaroxaban 10 mg versus aspirin (-339, -328, -485, and -80, respectively).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>This analysis demonstrated a positive benefit-risk profile with rivaroxaban versus trial comparators in older patients with NVAF or VTE, with benefit-risk increasingly favoring rivaroxaban with increasing age.</p><p><strong>Clinical trial registration: </strong>http://ClinicalTrials.gov , identifiers: NCT00403767 (ROCKET-AF), NCT00440193 (EINSTEIN DVT), NCT00439777 (EINSTEIN PE), NCT00439725 (EINSTEIN Extension), and NCT02064439 (EINSTEIN CHOICE).</p>","PeriodicalId":11489,"journal":{"name":"Drugs & Aging","volume":" ","pages":"469-484"},"PeriodicalIF":3.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12053352/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Drugs & Aging","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s40266-025-01192-7","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/3/31 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"GERIATRICS & GERONTOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Both bleeding and adverse ischemic events increase with age, compounding the benefit-risk balance of anticoagulants in older patients. We present analyses using benefit-risk methods to better understand the age-dependence of the benefit-risk profile of rivaroxaban in patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF) or venous thromboembolism (VTE).

Methods: Randomized controlled trial data from the ROCKET-AF (NVAF) and EINSTEIN DVT, EINSTEIN PE, EINSTEIN-Extension, and EINSTEIN CHOICE in (VTE) were used. For ROCKET-AF, benefits and risks were assessed with incidence rates for key thrombotic and bleeding endpoints and a net clinical benefit (NCB) measure. Cumulative incidences (estimated by the Kaplan-Meier method) were estimated at day 185 for EINSTEIN and EINSTEIN Extension and 1 year for EINSTEIN CHOICE. Incidence differences were calculated for the overall population and age subgroups of < 65, 65-75, and > 75 years.

Results: In ROCKET-AF, rate differences in the composite NCB outcome (vascular death, stroke, myocardial infarction, fatal bleeding, critical organ bleeding, and non-CNS systemic embolism) favored rivaroxaban overall and by age < 65, 65-75, and > 75 years (-84, -25, -61, and -150 cases per 10,000 patient-years, respectively). In the pooled EINSTEIN DVT and EINSTEIN PE studies, cumulative incidence differences for the composite NCB outcome (recurrent VTE and major bleeding) were -103, 3, -105, and -544 per 10,000 patients, respectively. For extended VTE treatment with rivaroxaban versus placebo in EINSTEIN-Extension, NCB results were -536, -492, -556, and -601 per 10,000 patients, respectively. In the EINSTEIN CHOICE analysis, NCB favored rivaroxaban 20 mg versus aspirin (-284, -255, -339, and -338, respectively) and rivaroxaban 10 mg versus aspirin (-339, -328, -485, and -80, respectively).

Conclusions: This analysis demonstrated a positive benefit-risk profile with rivaroxaban versus trial comparators in older patients with NVAF or VTE, with benefit-risk increasingly favoring rivaroxaban with increasing age.

Clinical trial registration: http://ClinicalTrials.gov , identifiers: NCT00403767 (ROCKET-AF), NCT00440193 (EINSTEIN DVT), NCT00439777 (EINSTEIN PE), NCT00439725 (EINSTEIN Extension), and NCT02064439 (EINSTEIN CHOICE).

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

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
利伐沙班治疗老年非瓣膜性房颤或静脉血栓栓塞患者的获益-风险评估
背景:出血和缺血性不良事件都随着年龄的增长而增加,这使得老年患者使用抗凝剂的获益-风险平衡更加复杂。为了更好地了解利伐沙班对非瓣膜性房颤(NVAF)或静脉血栓栓塞(VTE)患者的获益-风险特征的年龄依赖性,我们采用获益-风险方法进行了分析。方法:采用ROCKET-AF (NVAF)与EINSTEIN DVT、EINSTEIN PE、EINSTEIN- extension、EINSTEIN CHOICE in (VTE)的随机对照试验数据。对于ROCKET-AF,通过关键血栓和出血终点的发生率和净临床获益(NCB)指标来评估获益和风险。累积发病率(通过Kaplan-Meier方法估计)在EINSTEIN和EINSTEIN Extension的185天估计,而EINSTEIN CHOICE的1年估计。计算总体人群和年龄亚组< 65岁、65-75岁和75岁以下人群的发病率差异。结果:在ROCKET-AF中,综合NCB结局(血管性死亡、卒中、心肌梗死、致死性出血、危重器官出血和非中枢神经系统系统性栓塞)的比率差异总体上和年龄< 65岁、65-75岁和75岁(分别为-84、-25、-61和-150例/ 10,000患者年)有利于利伐沙班。在汇总的EINSTEIN DVT和EINSTEIN PE研究中,复合NCB结局(复发性静脉血栓栓塞和大出血)的累积发生率差异分别为-103、3、-105和-544 / 10000例患者。在EINSTEIN-Extension中,利伐沙班与安慰剂延长静脉血栓栓塞治疗,NCB结果分别为-536、-492、-556和-601 / 10000例患者。在EINSTEIN CHOICE分析中,NCB倾向于利伐沙班20mg vs阿司匹林(分别为-284、-255、-339和-338),利伐沙班10mg vs阿司匹林(分别为-339、-328、-485和-80)。结论:该分析表明,在老年非瓣膜性房颤或静脉血栓栓塞患者中,利伐沙班与试验比较物的获益-风险比为正,随着年龄的增长,利伐沙班的获益-风险比越来越有利。临床试验注册:http://ClinicalTrials.gov,标识符:NCT00403767 (ROCKET-AF)、NCT00440193 (EINSTEIN DVT)、NCT00439777 (EINSTEIN PE)、NCT00439725 (EINSTEIN Extension)、NCT02064439 (EINSTEIN CHOICE)。
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
Drugs & Aging
Drugs & Aging 医学-老年医学
CiteScore
5.50
自引率
7.10%
发文量
68
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Drugs & Aging delivers essential information on the most important aspects of drug therapy to professionals involved in the care of the elderly. The journal addresses in a timely way the major issues relating to drug therapy in older adults including: the management of specific diseases, particularly those associated with aging, age-related physiological changes impacting drug therapy, drug utilization and prescribing in the elderly, polypharmacy and drug interactions.
期刊最新文献
Applying the Bradford Hill Criteria to Assess the Independent Causal Roles of Aging and Medication in Frailty Progression: A Systematic Review. Australian Polypharmacy Trends Between 2013 and 2024: A Repeated Cross-Sectional Study in the Adult Population. Pharmacist-Led Deprescribing Interventions for Older Adults with Polypharmacy: A Retrospective Cohort Study of Community Pharmacy Practice in Japan. Implants to Treat Glaucoma: Promising or Not? Therapeutic Management of Glucocorticoid-Induced Osteoporosis with a Focus on Older Adults: A Narrative Review.
×
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:604180095
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