Introduction: Randomized controlled trials have shown that direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) are a safe and effective alternative to vitamin K antagonists (VKAs) for the treatment of venous thromboembolism (VTE). However, there are limited post-marketing data describing the effectiveness and safety of the DOACs in the community setting. We aimed to compare the effectiveness of DOACs and VKAs on 12-month outcomes in a real-world VTE patient population. Methods: The Global Anticoagulant Registry in the FIELD (GARFIELD)-VTE is an observational study designed to document real-world treatment practices. This intention-to-treat analysis included 7987 VTE patients initiated on either DOACs (N = 4791) or VKAs (N = 3196) with or without pre-treatment with parenteral anticoagulants. Treatment groups were balanced according to baseline characteristics, using overlapping propensity score weights. Results: After adjustment for baseline characteristics, all-cause mortality was significantly lower with DOAC than with VKAs (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.73; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.56–0.95. Patients receiving VKAs were more likely than those receiving DOACs to die of complications of VTE (4.7% vs 2.7%) or from bleeding (4.2% vs. 1.3%). There was no significant difference in recurrent VTE (HR: 0.91, 95% CI 0.71–1.18), major bleeding (HR 1.03, 95% CI 0.69–1.54), or overall bleeding (HR 0.96, 95% CI 0.81–1.14) with DOACs or VKAs. Conclusions: n this real-world analysis of VTE treatment, DOACs were associated with reduced all-cause mortality compared with VKAs, and similar rates of recurrent VTE and bleeding.
Bounameaux, H., Haas, S., Farjat, A., Ageno, W., Weitz, J., Goldhaber, S., et al. (2020). Comparative effectiveness of oral anticoagulants in venous thromboembolism: GARFIELD-VTE. THROMBOSIS RESEARCH, 191, 103-112 [10.1016/j.thromres.2020.04.036].
Comparative effectiveness of oral anticoagulants in venous thromboembolism: GARFIELD-VTE
Mantovani L. G.;
2020
Abstract
Introduction: Randomized controlled trials have shown that direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) are a safe and effective alternative to vitamin K antagonists (VKAs) for the treatment of venous thromboembolism (VTE). However, there are limited post-marketing data describing the effectiveness and safety of the DOACs in the community setting. We aimed to compare the effectiveness of DOACs and VKAs on 12-month outcomes in a real-world VTE patient population. Methods: The Global Anticoagulant Registry in the FIELD (GARFIELD)-VTE is an observational study designed to document real-world treatment practices. This intention-to-treat analysis included 7987 VTE patients initiated on either DOACs (N = 4791) or VKAs (N = 3196) with or without pre-treatment with parenteral anticoagulants. Treatment groups were balanced according to baseline characteristics, using overlapping propensity score weights. Results: After adjustment for baseline characteristics, all-cause mortality was significantly lower with DOAC than with VKAs (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.73; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.56–0.95. Patients receiving VKAs were more likely than those receiving DOACs to die of complications of VTE (4.7% vs 2.7%) or from bleeding (4.2% vs. 1.3%). There was no significant difference in recurrent VTE (HR: 0.91, 95% CI 0.71–1.18), major bleeding (HR 1.03, 95% CI 0.69–1.54), or overall bleeding (HR 0.96, 95% CI 0.81–1.14) with DOACs or VKAs. Conclusions: n this real-world analysis of VTE treatment, DOACs were associated with reduced all-cause mortality compared with VKAs, and similar rates of recurrent VTE and bleeding.
I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.
