+ Site Statistics
+ Search Articles
+ PDF Full Text Service
How our service works
Request PDF Full Text
+ Follow Us
Follow on Facebook
Follow on Twitter
Follow on LinkedIn
+ Subscribe to Site Feeds
Most Shared
PDF Full Text
+ Translate
+ Recently Requested

Oral anticoagulants for primary prevention, treatment and secondary prevention of venous thromboembolic disease, and for prevention of stroke in atrial fibrillation: systematic review, network meta-analysis and cost-effectiveness analysis



Oral anticoagulants for primary prevention, treatment and secondary prevention of venous thromboembolic disease, and for prevention of stroke in atrial fibrillation: systematic review, network meta-analysis and cost-effectiveness analysis



Health Technology Assessment 21(9): 1-386



Warfarin is effective for stroke prevention in atrial fibrillation (AF), but anticoagulation is underused in clinical care. The risk of venous thromboembolic disease during hospitalisation can be reduced by low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH): warfarin is the most frequently prescribed anticoagulant for treatment and secondary prevention of venous thromboembolism (VTE). Warfarin-related bleeding is a major reason for hospitalisation for adverse drug effects. Warfarin is cheap but therapeutic monitoring increases treatment costs. Novel oral anticoagulants (NOACs) have more rapid onset and offset of action than warfarin, and more predictable dosing requirements. To determine the best oral anticoagulant/s for prevention of stroke in AF and for primary prevention, treatment and secondary prevention of VTE. Four systematic reviews, network meta-analyses (NMAs) and cost-effectiveness analyses (CEAs) of randomised controlled trials. Hospital (VTE primary prevention and acute treatment) and primary care/anticoagulation clinics (AF and VTE secondary prevention). Patients eligible for anticoagulation with warfarin (stroke prevention in AF, acute treatment or secondary prevention of VTE) or LMWH (primary prevention of VTE). NOACs, warfarin and LMWH, together with other interventions (antiplatelet therapy, placebo) evaluated in the evidence network. Efficacy Stroke, symptomatic VTE, symptomatic deep-vein thrombosis and symptomatic pulmonary embolism. Safety Major bleeding, clinically relevant bleeding and intracranial haemorrhage. We also considered myocardial infarction and all-cause mortality and evaluated cost-effectiveness. MEDLINE and PREMEDLINE In-Process & Other Non-Indexed Citations, EMBASE and The Cochrane Library, reference lists of published NMAs and trial registries. We searched MEDLINE and PREMEDLINE In-Process & Other Non-Indexed Citations, EMBASE and The Cochrane Library. The stroke prevention in AF review search was run on the 12 March 2014 and updated on 15 September 2014, and covered the period 2010 to September 2014. The search for the three reviews in VTE was run on the 19 March 2014, updated on 15 September 2014, and covered the period 2008 to September 2014. Two reviewers screened search results, extracted and checked data, and assessed risk of bias. For each outcome we conducted standard meta-analysis and NMA. We evaluated cost-effectiveness using discrete-time Markov models. Apixaban (Eliquis®, Bristol-Myers Squibb, USA; Pfizer, USA) [5 mg bd (twice daily)] was ranked as among the best interventions for stroke prevention in AF, and had the highest expected net benefit. Edoxaban (Lixiana®, Daiichi Sankyo, Japan) [60 mg od (once daily)] was ranked second for major bleeding and all-cause mortality. Neither the clinical effectiveness analysis nor the CEA provided strong evidence that NOACs should replace postoperative LMWH in primary prevention of VTE. For acute treatment and secondary prevention of VTE, we found little evidence that NOACs offer an efficacy advantage over warfarin, but the risk of bleeding complications was lower for some NOACs than for warfarin. For a willingness-to-pay threshold of > £5000, apixaban (5 mg bd) had the highest expected net benefit for acute treatment of VTE. Aspirin or no pharmacotherapy were likely to be the most cost-effective interventions for secondary prevention of VTE: our results suggest that it is not cost-effective to prescribe NOACs or warfarin for this indication. NOACs have advantages over warfarin in patients with AF, but we found no strong evidence that they should replace warfarin or LMWH in primary prevention, treatment or secondary prevention of VTE. These relate mainly to shortfalls in the primary data: in particular, there were no head-to-head comparisons between different NOAC drugs. Calculating the expected value of sample information to clarify whether or not it would be justifiable to fund one or more head-to-head trials. This study is registered as PROSPERO CRD42013005324, CRD42013005331 and CRD42013005330. The National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment programme.

Please choose payment method:






(PDF emailed within 1 workday: $29.90)

Accession: 060050613

Download citation: RISBibTeXText

PMID: 28279251


Related references

Network Meta-Analysis of Oral Anticoagulants for Primary Prevention, Treatment and Secondary Prevention of Venous Thromboembolic Disease, and for Prevention of Stroke in Atrial Fibrillation. Value in Health 18(7): A374, 2015

Oral anticoagulants for prevention of stroke in atrial fibrillation: systematic review, network meta-analysis, and cost effectiveness analysis. Bmj 359: J5058, 2017

Efficacy and Harms of Direct Oral Anticoagulants in the Elderly for Stroke Prevention in Atrial Fibrillation and Secondary Prevention of Venous Thromboembolism: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Circulation 132(3): 194-204, 2015

A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis Of Novel Oral Anticoagulants For Acute Treatment And Secondary Prevention Of Venous Thromboembolic Disease. Value in Health 18(7): A390, 2015

A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Novel Oral Anticoagulants for Primary Prevention of Venous Thromboembolic Disease. Value in Health 18(7): A339-A340, 2015

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. European Journal of Epidemiology 34(2): 173-190, 2019

Systematic review of cost-effectiveness analyses of novel oral anticoagulants for stroke prevention in atrial fibrillation. Revista Portuguesa de Cardiologia 34(3): 179-191, 2015

Cost-effectiveness of non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants for stroke prevention in non-valvular atrial fibrillation: a systematic and qualitative review. Expert Review of Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research 16(2): 221-235, 2016

An updated review of target-specific oral anticoagulants used in stroke prevention in atrial fibrillation, venous thromboembolic disease, and acute coronary syndromes. Journal of the American Heart Association 2(5): E000136, 2013

Efficacy and safety outcomes of oral anticoagulants and antiplatelet drugs in the secondary prevention of venous thromboembolism: systematic review and network meta-analysis. Bmj 347: F5133, 2013

Clinical and Safety Outcomes of Oral Antithrombotics for Stroke Prevention in Atrial Fibrillation: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-analysis. Journal of the American Medical Directors Association 16(12): 1103.E1, 2015

Left Atrial Appendage Occlusion Device and Novel Oral Anticoagulants Versus Warfarin for Stroke Prevention in Nonvalvular Atrial Fibrillation: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials. Circulation. Arrhythmia and Electrophysiology 8(5): 1057-1064, 2015

Real-World Setting Comparison of Nonvitamin-K Antagonist Oral Anticoagulants Versus Vitamin-K Antagonists for Stroke Prevention in Atrial Fibrillation: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Stroke 48(9): 2494-2503, 2017

Over 1-year efficacy and safety of left atrial appendage occlusion versus novel oral anticoagulants for stroke prevention in atrial fibrillation: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials and observational studies. Heart Rhythm 13(6): 1203-1214, 2016

Novel anticoagulants for stroke prevention in atrial fibrillation: a systematic review of cost-effectiveness models. Plos one 8(4): E62183, 2013