Mette Søgaard, Anne Gulbech Ording, Flemming Skjøth, Torben Bjerregaard Larsen, Peter Brønnum Nielsen
{"title":"直接口服抗凝与华法林在虚弱房颤患者中的有效性和安全性。","authors":"Mette Søgaard, Anne Gulbech Ording, Flemming Skjøth, Torben Bjerregaard Larsen, Peter Brønnum Nielsen","doi":"10.1093/ehjcvp/pvad091","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Aims: </strong>Although frail patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) carry a high risk of stroke and treatment-related bleeding complications, evidence for the safety and effectiveness of anticoagulation remains sparse. This study investigated the effectiveness and safety of direct oral anticoagulant (DOAC) vs. warfarin in frail AF patients.</p><p><strong>Methods and results: </strong>Nationwide registry-based cohort study including 32 048 anticoagulation naïve frail patients (median age 80 years, 53% female) with incident AF during 2012-20. Frailty was assessed using the hospital frailty risk score. To address baseline confounding, we applied inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) and marginal structural models with weighted pooled regression to compute weighted hazard ratios (wHRs) and risk differences for thromboembolism and major bleeding comparing specific DOAC doses with warfarin. After AF diagnosis, 6747 (21.1%) initiated warfarin, 17 076 (50.3%) initiated standard-dose DOAC, and 9179 (28.6%) initiated reduced-dose DOAC. Comparative effectiveness analyses in the IPTW pseudo-populations revealed similar thromboembolism risk between standard-dose DOAC and warfarin [wHR 0.95, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.80-1.13] and between reduced-dose DOAC and warfarin (wHR 0.97, 95% CI 0.77-1.23). The 1-year thromboembolic event-free survival difference was -0.2% for DOAC, regardless of dosing, vs. warfarin. Major bleeding risk was significantly lower with standard-dose DOAC (wHR 0.69, 95% CI 0.59-0.87) and reduced-dose DOAC (wHR 0.67, 95% CI 0.55-0.81) vs. warfarin. The 1-year bleeding risk difference with DOAC ranged from -1.3% to -3.0%.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Our findings indicate comparable thromboembolism risk and significantly lower bleeding risk with both standard and reduced DOAC regimens compared with warfarin in frail AF patients in routine care.</p>","PeriodicalId":11982,"journal":{"name":"European Heart Journal - Cardiovascular Pharmacotherapy","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":5.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-02-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Effectiveness and safety of direct oral anticoagulation vs. warfarin in frail patients with atrial fibrillation.\",\"authors\":\"Mette Søgaard, Anne Gulbech Ording, Flemming Skjøth, Torben Bjerregaard Larsen, Peter Brønnum Nielsen\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/ehjcvp/pvad091\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Aims: </strong>Although frail patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) carry a high risk of stroke and treatment-related bleeding complications, evidence for the safety and effectiveness of anticoagulation remains sparse. This study investigated the effectiveness and safety of direct oral anticoagulant (DOAC) vs. warfarin in frail AF patients.</p><p><strong>Methods and results: </strong>Nationwide registry-based cohort study including 32 048 anticoagulation naïve frail patients (median age 80 years, 53% female) with incident AF during 2012-20. Frailty was assessed using the hospital frailty risk score. To address baseline confounding, we applied inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) and marginal structural models with weighted pooled regression to compute weighted hazard ratios (wHRs) and risk differences for thromboembolism and major bleeding comparing specific DOAC doses with warfarin. After AF diagnosis, 6747 (21.1%) initiated warfarin, 17 076 (50.3%) initiated standard-dose DOAC, and 9179 (28.6%) initiated reduced-dose DOAC. Comparative effectiveness analyses in the IPTW pseudo-populations revealed similar thromboembolism risk between standard-dose DOAC and warfarin [wHR 0.95, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.80-1.13] and between reduced-dose DOAC and warfarin (wHR 0.97, 95% CI 0.77-1.23). The 1-year thromboembolic event-free survival difference was -0.2% for DOAC, regardless of dosing, vs. warfarin. Major bleeding risk was significantly lower with standard-dose DOAC (wHR 0.69, 95% CI 0.59-0.87) and reduced-dose DOAC (wHR 0.67, 95% CI 0.55-0.81) vs. warfarin. The 1-year bleeding risk difference with DOAC ranged from -1.3% to -3.0%.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Our findings indicate comparable thromboembolism risk and significantly lower bleeding risk with both standard and reduced DOAC regimens compared with warfarin in frail AF patients in routine care.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":11982,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"European Heart Journal - Cardiovascular Pharmacotherapy\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":5.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-02-23\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"European Heart Journal - Cardiovascular Pharmacotherapy\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/ehjcvp/pvad091\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Heart Journal - Cardiovascular Pharmacotherapy","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/ehjcvp/pvad091","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
目的:尽管虚弱的心房颤动(AF)患者具有卒中和治疗相关出血并发症的高风险,但抗凝治疗的安全性和有效性的证据仍然很少。本研究探讨了DOAC与华法林在虚弱房颤患者中的有效性和安全性。方法和结果:全国基于登记的队列研究,包括32048例抗凝naïve体弱患者(中位年龄80岁,53%女性),2012-2020年发生房颤。虚弱程度采用医院虚弱风险评分进行评估。为了解决基线混淆,我们应用治疗加权逆概率(IPTW)和边际结构模型加权合并回归来计算加权风险比(wHR)以及比较特定DOAC剂量与华法林在血栓栓塞和大出血方面的风险差异。房颤诊断后,6747例(21.1%)开始使用华法林,17076例(50.3%)开始使用标准剂量DOAC, 9179例(28.6%)开始使用减少剂量DOAC。在IPTW伪人群中的比较有效性分析显示,标准剂量DOAC和华法林之间的血栓栓塞风险相似(wHR 0.95, 95% CI 0.80-1.13),降低剂量DOAC和华法林之间的wHR 0.97, 95% CI 0.77-1.23)。与华法林相比,DOAC的1年无血栓栓塞事件生存率差异为-0.2%,无论剂量如何。与华法林相比,标准剂量DOAC (wHR 0.69, 95% CI 0.59-0.87)和降低剂量DOAC (wHR 0.67, 95% CI 0.55-0.81)的大出血风险显著降低。与DOAC的一年出血风险差异范围为-1.3%和-3.0%。结论:我们的研究结果表明,与华法林相比,在常规护理的虚弱房颤患者中,标准和降低DOAC方案的血栓栓塞风险相当,出血风险显著降低。
Effectiveness and safety of direct oral anticoagulation vs. warfarin in frail patients with atrial fibrillation.
Aims: Although frail patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) carry a high risk of stroke and treatment-related bleeding complications, evidence for the safety and effectiveness of anticoagulation remains sparse. This study investigated the effectiveness and safety of direct oral anticoagulant (DOAC) vs. warfarin in frail AF patients.
Methods and results: Nationwide registry-based cohort study including 32 048 anticoagulation naïve frail patients (median age 80 years, 53% female) with incident AF during 2012-20. Frailty was assessed using the hospital frailty risk score. To address baseline confounding, we applied inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) and marginal structural models with weighted pooled regression to compute weighted hazard ratios (wHRs) and risk differences for thromboembolism and major bleeding comparing specific DOAC doses with warfarin. After AF diagnosis, 6747 (21.1%) initiated warfarin, 17 076 (50.3%) initiated standard-dose DOAC, and 9179 (28.6%) initiated reduced-dose DOAC. Comparative effectiveness analyses in the IPTW pseudo-populations revealed similar thromboembolism risk between standard-dose DOAC and warfarin [wHR 0.95, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.80-1.13] and between reduced-dose DOAC and warfarin (wHR 0.97, 95% CI 0.77-1.23). The 1-year thromboembolic event-free survival difference was -0.2% for DOAC, regardless of dosing, vs. warfarin. Major bleeding risk was significantly lower with standard-dose DOAC (wHR 0.69, 95% CI 0.59-0.87) and reduced-dose DOAC (wHR 0.67, 95% CI 0.55-0.81) vs. warfarin. The 1-year bleeding risk difference with DOAC ranged from -1.3% to -3.0%.
Conclusion: Our findings indicate comparable thromboembolism risk and significantly lower bleeding risk with both standard and reduced DOAC regimens compared with warfarin in frail AF patients in routine care.
期刊介绍:
The European Heart Journal - Cardiovascular Pharmacotherapy (EHJ-CVP) is an international, peer-reviewed journal published in English, specifically dedicated to clinical cardiovascular pharmacology. EHJ-CVP publishes original articles focusing on clinical research involving both new and established drugs and methods, along with meta-analyses and topical reviews. The journal's primary aim is to enhance the pharmacological treatment of patients with cardiovascular disease by interpreting and integrating new scientific developments in this field.
While the emphasis is on clinical topics, EHJ-CVP also considers basic research articles from fields such as physiology and molecular biology that contribute to the understanding of cardiovascular drug therapy. These may include articles related to new drug development and evaluation, the physiological and pharmacological basis of drug action, metabolism, drug interactions, and side effects.