+ 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

Real-world comparison of bleeding risks among non-valvular atrial fibrillation patients prescribed apixaban, dabigatran, or rivaroxaban



Real-world comparison of bleeding risks among non-valvular atrial fibrillation patients prescribed apixaban, dabigatran, or rivaroxaban



Plos one 13(11): E0205989



Limited real-world data are available regarding the comparative safety of non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants (NOACs). The objective of this retrospective claims observational cohort study was to compare the risk of bleeding among non-valvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF) patients prescribed apixaban, dabigatran, or rivaroxaban. NVAF patients aged ≥18 years with a 1-year baseline period were included if they were new initiators of NOACs or switched from warfarin to a NOAC. Cox proportional hazards modelling was used to estimate the adjusted hazard ratios of any bleeding, clinically relevant non-major (CRNM) bleeding, and major inpatient bleeding within 6 months of treatment initiation for rivaroxaban and dabigatran compared to apixaban. Among 60,227 eligible patients, 8,785 were prescribed apixaban, 20,963 dabigatran, and 30,529 rivaroxaban. Compared to dabigatran or rivaroxaban patients, apixaban patients were more likely to have greater proportions of baseline comorbidities and higher CHA2DS2-VASc and HAS-BLED scores. After adjusting for baseline clinical and demographic characteristics, patients prescribed rivaroxaban were more likely to experience any bleeding (HR: 1.35, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.26-1.45), CRNM bleeding (HR: 1.38, 95% CI: 1.27-1.49), and major inpatient bleeding (HR: 1.43, 95% CI: 1.17-1.74), compared to patients prescribed apixaban. Dabigatran patients had similar bleeding risks as apixaban patients. In conclusion, NVAF patients treated with rivaroxaban appeared to have an increased risk of any bleeding, CRNM bleeding, and major inpatient bleeding, compared to apixaban patients. There was no significant difference in any bleeding, CRNM bleeding, or inpatient major bleeding risks between patients treated with dabigatran and apixaban.

Please choose payment method:






(PDF emailed within 0-6 h: $19.90)

Accession: 065898438

Download citation: RISBibTeXText

PMID: 30383768

DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0205989


Related references

Real-world comparison of major bleeding risk among non-valvular atrial fibrillation patients initiated on apixaban, dabigatran, rivaroxaban, or warfarin. A propensity score matched analysis. Thrombosis and Haemostasis 116(5): 975-986, 2016

Major bleeding risk among non-valvular atrial fibrillation patients initiated on apixaban, dabigatran, rivaroxaban or warfarin: a "real-world" observational study in the United States. International Journal of Clinical Practice 70(9): 752-763, 2016

Real-world clinical evidence on rivaroxaban, dabigatran, and apixaban compared with -vitamin K antagonists in patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation: a systematic literature review. Expert Review of Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research 19(3): 243-244, 2019

Discontinuation risk comparison among 'real-world' newly anticoagulated atrial fibrillation patients: Apixaban, warfarin, dabigatran, or rivaroxaban. Plos one 13(4): E0195950, 2018

Comparison of cost-effectiveness of anticoagulation with dabigatran, rivaroxaban and apixaban in patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation across countries. Journal of Thrombosis and Thrombolysis 37(4): 507-523, 2014

C0131 Comparison of the efficacy and safety of dabigatran, rivaroxaban and apixaban in patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation using network meta-analysis. Thrombosis Research 130: S100-S101, 2012

Bleeding risk of apixaban, dabigatran, and low-dose rivaroxaban compared with warfarin in Japanese patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation: a propensity matched analysis of administrative claims data. Current Medical Research and Opinion 33(11): 1955-1963, 2017

Real-world 2-year outcome of atrial fibrillation treatment with dabigatran, apixaban, and rivaroxaban in patients with and without chronic kidney disease. Internal and Emergency Medicine 14(8): 1259-1270, 2019

Risk of stroke/systemic embolism, major bleeding and associated costs in non-valvular atrial fibrillation patients who initiated apixaban, dabigatran or rivaroxaban compared with warfarin in the United States Medicare population. Current Medical Research and Opinion 33(9): 1595-1604, 2017

Comparative effectiveness and safety of apixaban, dabigatran, and rivaroxaban in patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation. International Journal of Cardiology 268: 113-119, 2018

Major bleeding with dabigatran and rivaroxaban in patients with atrial fibrillation: a real-world setting. Clinical and Applied Thrombosis/Hemostasis 20(7): 665-672, 2014

Real-world clinical evidence on rivaroxaban, dabigatran, and apixaban compared with vitamin K antagonists in patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation: a systematic literature review. Expert Review of Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research 19(1): 27-36, 2019

Apixaban may have lower risk of GI bleeding compared with dabigatran and rivaroxaban in patients with atrial fibrillation. Evidence-Based Medicine 22(4): 154-155, 2017

Point Plasma Dabigatran, Rivaroxaban and Apixaban Levels in Patients with Non-Valvular Atrial Fibrillation: A Single Centre Study. International Journal of Cardiology 249: S26-S27, 2017

Representativeness of the dabigatran, apixaban and rivaroxaban clinical trial populations to real-world atrial fibrillation patients in the United Kingdom: a cross-sectional analysis using the General Practice Research Database. Bmj Open 2(6):, 2012