Clinical trials with new direct oral anticoagulants

Summary

To compare the efficacy and safety of the new direct oral anticoagulants (DOAC), ideally head-to-head clinical trials should be performed. Given the expense of such an undertaking, it is highly unlikely that such a comparison would be performed. Therefore, there is a need for an unbiased comparative assessment of the benefits and risks of the DOACs, based on the available trial data. Indirect or mixed treatment comparisons may be an useful tool to overcome these limitations also known as network meta-analysis (NMA).

The aim of this paper is to give an overview on published NMAs for dabigatran, rivaroxaban and apixaban, each assessed against warfarin in patients with atrial fibrillation, and against enoxaparin in patients undergoing total knee and total hip replacement surgery, in order to obtain insights into the comparability of the adopted methodological techniques.

English version available at:www.phlebologieonline.de

Keywords

Oral anticoagulants - Apixaban - Dabigatran - Rivaroxaban - Edoxaban - atrial fibrillation - total knee replace ment - total hip replacement - pro phylaxis of thromboembolism

• Literatur

• 1 Roskell NS, Lip GY, Noack H. et al. Treatments for stroke prevention in atrial fibrillation: a network meta-analysis and indirect comparisons versus dabigatran etexilate. Thromb Haemost 2010; 104: 1106-1115.
• 2 Hart RG, Pearce LA, Aguilar MI. Adjusted-dose warfarin versus aspirin for preventing stroke in patients with atrial fibrillation. Ann Intern Med 2007; 147: 590-592.
• 3 Lip GY, Andreotti F, Fauchier L. et al. Bleeding risk assessment and management in atrial fibrillation patients. Thromb Haemost 2011; 106: 997-1011.
• 4 Ansell J, Hirsh J, Hylek E. et al. Pharmacology and management of the vitamin K antagonists: American College of Chest Physicians Evidence-Based Clinical Practice Guidelines (8th ed). Chest 2008; 133 (06) 160S-198S.
• 5 Ogilvie IM, Newton N, Welner SA. et al. Underuse of oral anticoagulants in atrial fibrillation: a systematic review. Am J Med 2010; 123: 638-645.
• 6 Tasker A, Harbord R, Bannister GC. Meta-analysis of low molecular weight heparin versus placebo in patients undergoing total hip replacement and post-operative morbidity and mortality since their introduction. Hip Int 2010; 20: 64-74.
• 7 Falck-Ytter Y, Francis CW, Johanson NA. et al. Prevention of VTE in orthopedic surgery patients: Antithrombotic Therapy and Prevention of Thrombosis, 9th ed. American College of Chest Physicians Evidence-Based Clinical Practice Guidelines. Chest 2012; 141 (02) e278S-325S.
• 8 Linkins LA, Dans AL, Moores LK. et al. Treatment and prevention of heparin-induced thrombocytopenia: Antithrombotic Therapy and Prevention of Thrombosis, 9th ed. American College of Chest Physicians Evidence-Based Clinical Practice Guidelines. Chest 2012; 141 (Suppl. 02) e495S-530S.
• 9 Harenberg J, Wehling M. Current and future prospects for anticoagulant therapy: inhibitors of factor Xa and factor IIa. Semin Thromb Hemost 2008; 34: 39-57.
• 10 Connolly SJ, Ezekowitz MD, Yusuf S. et al. Dabigatran versus warfarin in patients with atrial fibrillation. N Engl J Med 2009; 361: 1139-1151.
• 11 Connolly SJ, Ezekowitz MD, Yusuf S. et al. Newly identified events in the RE-LY trial. N Engl J Med 2010; 363: 1875-1876.
• 12 Patel MR, Mahaffey KW, Garg J. et al. Rivaroxaban versus warfarin in nonvalvular atrial fibrillation. N Engl J Med 2011; 365: 883-891.
• 13 Granger CB, Alexander JH, McMurray JJ. et al. Apixaban versus warfarin in patients with atrial fibrillation. N Engl J Med 2011; 365: 981-992.
• 14 Glenny AM, Altman DG, Song F. et al. Indirect comparisons of competing interventions. Health Technol Assess 2005; 9: 1-134.
• 15 Lumley T. Network meta-analysis for indirect treatment comparisons. Stat Med 2002; 21: 2313-2324.
• 16 Ades AE, Madan J, Welton NJ. Indirect and mixed treatment comparisons in arthritis research. Rheumatology 2011; 50 (Suppl. 04) Iv5-9.
• 17 Cooper NJ, Sutton AJ, Morris D. et al. Addressing between-study heterogeneity and inconsistency in mixed treatment comparisons: application to stroke prevention treatments in individuals with nonrheumatic atrial fibrillation. Stat Med 2009; 28: 1861-1881.
• 18 Salanti G, Higgins JP, Ades AE, Ioannidis JP. Evaluation of networks of randomized trials. Stat Methods Med Res 2008; 17: 279-301.
• 19 Jansen JP, Fleurence R, Devine B. et al. Interpreting indirect treatment comparisons and network meta-analysis for health-care decision making: report of the ISPOR Task Force on Indirect Treatment Comparisons Good Research Practices: part 1. Value Health 2011; 14: 417-428.
• 20 Hoaglin DC, Hawkins N, Jansen JP. et al. Conducting indirect-treatment-comparison and network-meta-analysis studies: report of the ISPOR Task Force on Indirect Treatment Comparisons Good Research Practices: part 2. Value Health 2011; 14: 429-437.
• 21 Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, Altman DG. Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. Ann Intern Med 2009; 151: 264-269.
• 22 Harenberg J, Marx S, Diener HC. et al. Comparison of efficacy and safety of dabigatran, rivaroxaban and apixaban in patients with atrial fibrillation using network meta-analysis. Int Angiol 2012; 31: 330-339.
• 23 Lip GY, Larsen TB, Skjøth F. et al. Indirect comparisons of new oral anticoagulant drugs for efficacy and safety when used for stroke prevention in atrial fibrillation. J Am Coll Cardiol 2012; 60: 738-746.
• 24 Mantha S, Ansell J. An indirect comparison of dabigatran, rivaroxaban and apixaban for atrial fibrillation. Thromb Haemost 2012; 108: 476-484.
• 25 Wells GA, Coyle D, Cameron C. et al. Safety, effectiveness, and cost-effectiveness of new oral anticoagulants compared with warfarin in preventing stroke and other cardiovascular events in patients with atrial fibrillation. www.cadth.ca/media/pdf/NOAC_Therapeutic_Review_final_report.pdf (assessed Dec 22, 2012)
• 26 Harenberg J, Marx S, Wehling M. Head-to-head or indirect comparisons of the novel oral anticoagulants in atrial fibrillation: what’s next?. Thromb Haemost 2012; 108: 407-409.
• 27 Schneeweiss S, Gagne JJ, Patrick AR. et al. Comparative efficacy and safety of new oral anticoagulants in patients with atrial fibrillation. Circ Cardiovasc Qual Outcomes 2012; 5: 480-486.
• 28 Camm AJ, Kirchhof P, Lip GY. et al. Guidelines for the management of atrial fibrillation: The task force for the management of atrial fibrillation of the European Society of Cardiology. Europace 2010; 12: 1360-1420.
• 29 You JJ, Singer DE, Howard PA. et al. Antithrombotic therapy for atrial fibrillation: Antithrombotic therapy and prevention of thrombosis, 9th ed: American college of chest physicians evidence-based clinical practice guidelines. Chest 2012; 141: e531S-575S.
• 30 Harenberg J, Lip GY. Differences between indirect comparison studies of the oral anticoagulants for stroke prevention in atrial fibrillation: where do we go next?. QJM 2013; 106: 95-96.
• 31 Testa L, Agnifili M, Latini RA. et al. Adjusted indirect comparison of new oral anticoagulants for stroke prevention in atrial fibrillation. QJM 2012; 105: 949-957.
• 32 Miller CS, Grandi SM, Shimony A. et al. Meta-analysis ofefficacy and safety of new oral anticoagulants (dabigatran, rivaroxaban, apixaban) versus warfarin in patients with atrial fibrillation. Am J Cardiol 2012; 110: 453-460.
• 33 Dentali F, Riva N, Crowther M. et al. Efficacy and safety of the novel oral anticoagulants in atrial fibrillation: a systematic review and meta-analysis of the Literature. Circulation 2012; 126: 2381-2391.
• 34 Rasmussen LH, Larsen TB, Graungaard T. et al. Primary and secondary prevention with new oral anticoagulant drugs for stroke prevention in atrial fibrillation: indirect comparison analysis. BMJ 2012; 345: e7097
• 35 Alonso-Coello P, Zhou Q, Guyatt G. Home-monitoring of oral anticoagulation vs. dabigatran. An indirect comparison. Thromb Haemost 2012; 108: 647-653.
• 36 Trkulja V, Kolundzic R. Rivaroxaban vs dabigatran for thromboprophylaxis after joint-replacement surgery: exploratory indirect comparison based on meta-analysis of pivotal clinical trials. Croat Med J 2010; 51: 113-123.
• 37 Lereun C, Wells P, Diamantopoulos A. et al. An indirect comparison, via enoxaparin, of rivaroxaban with dabigatran in the prevention of venous thromboembolism after hip or knee replacement. J Med Econ 2011; 14: 238-244.
• 38 Loke YK, Kwok CS. Dabigatran and rivaroxaban for prevention of venous thromboembolism-systematic review and adjusted indirect comparison. J Clin Pharm Ther 2011; 36: 111-124.
• 39 Cohen A, Drost P, Marchant N. et al. The Efficacy and Safety of Pharmacological Prophylaxis of Venous Thromboembolism Following Elective Knee or Hip Replacement. Clin Appl Thromb Hemost 2012; 18: 611-627.
• 40 Dahl OE, Quinlan DJ, Bergqvist D. et al. A critical appraisal of bleeding events reported in venous thromboembolism prevention trials of patients undergoing hip and knee arthroplasty. J Thromb Haemost 2010; 8: 1966-1975.
• 41 Maratea D, Fadda V, Trippoli S, Messori A. Prevention of venous thromboembolism after major orthopedic surgery. J Thromb Haemost 2011; 9: 1868-1870.
• 42 Gómez-Outes A. et al. Dabigatran, rivaroxaban, or apixaban versus enoxaparin for thromboprophylaxis after total hip or knee replacement. BMJ 2012; 344: e3675
• 43 Harenberg J, Marx S, Dahl OE. et al. Interpretation of endpoints in a network meta-analysis of new oral anticoagulants following total hip or total knee replacement surgery. Thromb Haemost 2012; 108: 903-912.
• 44 Hamid JS, Meaney C, Crowcroft NS, Granerod J, Beyene J. UK Etiology of Encephalitis Study Group. BMC Infect Dis 2010; 10: 364-374.
• 45 Song EK. et al. Symptom clusters predict event-free survival in patients with heart failure. J Cardiovasc Nurs 2010; 25: 284-291.
• 46 McLachlan GJ. Cluster analysis and related techniques in medical research. Stat Methods Med Res 1992; 1: 27-48.
• 47 Schulman S. Is the network meta-analysis (NETMA) bringing us closer to the truth?. Thromb Haemost 2012; 108: 872-875.
• 48 Fox BD, Kahn SR, Langleben D. et al. Efficacy and safety of novel oral anticoagulants for treatment of acute venous thromboembolism: direct and adjusted indirect meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials. BMJ 2012; 345: e7498
• 49 Freeman JV, Zhu RP, Owens DK. et al. Cost-effectiveness of dabigatran compared with warfarin for stroke prevention in atrial fibrillation. Ann Int Med 2011; 154: 1-11.
• 50 Kansal AR, Sorensen SV, Gani R. et al. Cost-effectiveness of dabigatran etexilate for the prevention of stroke and systemic embolism in UK patients with atrial fibrillation. Heart 2012; 98: 573-578.
• 51 Lee S, Anglade MW, Pham D. et al. Cost-effectiveness of rivaroxaban compared to warfarin for stroke prevention in atrial fibrillation. Am J Cardiol 2012; 110: 845-851.
• 52 Deitelzweig S. et al. Medical cost reductions associated with the usage of novel oral anticoagulants vs warfarin among atrial fibrillation patients, based on the RE-LY, ROCKET-AF, and ARISTOTLE trials. J Med Econ 2012; 15: 776-785.
• 53 Krejczy M, Harenberg J, Marx S. et al. Comparison of cost-effectiveness of anticoagulation with dabigatran, rivaroxaban and apixaban in patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation across countries. Blood 2012; 120 Suppl P1164
• 54 Harenberg J, Weiss C. Clinical trials with new oral anticoagulants. Additive value of indirect comparisons also named network meta-analyses. Hamostaseologie 2013; 33: 62-70.
• 55 MacLean S. et al. American College of Chest Physicians. Patient values and preferences in decision making for antithrombotic therapy: a systematic review: Antithrombotic Therapy and Prevention of Thrombosis, 9th ed: American College of Chest Physicians Evidence-Based Clinical Practice Guidelines. Chest 2012; 141 (Suppl. 02) e1S-23S.
• 56 Camm AJ. et al. ESC Committee for Practice Guidelines-CPG; Document Reviewers. 2012 focused update of the ESC Guidelines for the management of atrial fibrillation: an update of the 2010 ESC Guidelines for the management of atrial fibrillation. Europace 2012; 14 (10) 1385-1413.