Search

Background Days alive out of hospital (DAOH) is an objective and patient‐centered net benefit end point. There are no assessments of DAOH in clinical trials of interventions for atrial fibrillation (AF), and it is not known whether this end point is of clinical utility in these populations. Methods and Results ROCKET AF (Rivaroxaban Once Daily Oral Direct Factor Xa Inhibition Compared With Vitamin K Antagonism for Prevention of Stroke and Embolism Trial in Atrial Fibrillation) was an international double‐blind, double‐dummy randomized clinical trial that compared rivaroxaban with warfarin in patients with atrial fibrillation at increased risk for stroke. We assessed DAOH using investigator‐reported event data for up to 12 months after randomization in ROCKET AF. We assessed DAOH overall, by treatment group, and by subgroup, including age, sex, and comorbidities, using Poisson regression. The mean±SD number of days dead was 7.3±41.2, days hospitalized was 1.2±7.2, and mean DAOH was 350.7±56.2, with notable left skew. Patients with comorbidities had fewer DAOH overall. There were no differences in DAOH by treatment arm, with mean DAOH of 350.6±56.5 for those randomized to rivaroxaban and 350.7±55.8 for those randomized to warfarin (P=0.86). A sensitivity analysis found no difference in DAOH not disabled with rivaroxaban versus warfarin (DAOH not disabled, 349.2±59.5 days and 349.1 days±59.3 days, respectively, P=0.88). Conclusions DAOH did not identify a treatment difference between patients randomized to rivaroxaban versus warfarin. This may be driven in part by the low overall event rates in atrial fibrillation anticoagulation trials, which leads to substantial left skew in measures of DAOH.

Background The VOYAGER PAD (Efficacy and Safety of Rivaroxaban in Reducing the Risk of Major Thrombotic Vascular Events in Subjects With Symptomatic Peripheral Artery Disease Undergoing Peripheral Revascularization Procedures of the Lower Extremities) trial compared rivaroxaban (2.5 mg twice a day) plus aspirin with aspirin alone in patients with symptomatic peripheral artery disease requiring endovascular or surgical limb revascularization, with 50% receiving clopidogrel background therapy. The New Drug Indication application includes benefit–risk assessments using clinical judgment to balance benefits against risks. During its review, the US Food and Drug Administration requested additional quantitative benefit–risk analyses with formal weighting approaches. Methods and Results Benefits and risks were assessed using rate differences between treatment groups (unweighted analysis). To account for clinical importance of the end points, a multi‐criteria decision analysis was conducted using health state utility values as weights. Monte Carlo simulations incorporated statistical uncertainties of the event rates and utility weights. Intent‐to‐treat and on‐treatment analyses were conducted. For unweighted intent‐to‐treat analyses, rivaroxaban plus aspirin would result in 120 (95% CI, −208 to −32) fewer events of the primary composite end point (per 10 000 patient‐years) compared with aspirin alone. Rivaroxaban caused an excess of 40 (95% CI, 8–72) Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction major bleeding events, which was largely driven by nonfatal, nonintracranial hemorrhage Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction major bleeding events. For weighted analyses, rivaroxaban resulted in the utility equivalent of 13.7 (95% CI, −85.3 to 52.6) and 68.1 (95% CI, 7.9–135.7) fewer deaths per 10 000 patient‐years (intent‐to‐treat and on‐treatment, respectively), corresponding to probabilities of 64.4% and 98.7%, respectively, that benefits outweigh risks favoring rivaroxaban per Monte Carlo simulation. Conclusions These analyses show a favorable benefit–risk profile of rivaroxaban therapy in the VOYAGER PAD trial, with findings generally consistent between the unweighted and weighted approaches.

Background Despite high female prevalence of peripheral artery disease (PAD), little is known about sex‐based outcomes after lower extremity revascularization (LER) for symptomatic PAD. The effects of rivaroxaban according to sex following LER have not been fully reported. Methods and Results In VOYAGER PAD (Vascular Outcomes Study of ASA [acetylsalicylic acid] Along with Rivaroxaban in Endovascular or Surgical Limb Revascularization for Peripheral Artery Disease), low‐dose rivaroxaban versus placebo on a background of aspirin reduced the composite primary efficacy outcome of cardiovascular and limb events in patients with PAD undergoing LER. Unplanned index limb revascularization was prespecified and prospectively ascertained. The primary safety outcome was Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction major bleeding. Analyses of outcomes and treatment effects by sex were performed using Cox proportional hazards models. Among 6564 randomly assigned patients followed for a median of 28 months, 1704 (26.0%) were women. Among patients administered placebo, women were at similar risk for the primary efficacy outcome (hazard ratio [HR], 0.90; [95% CI, 0.74–1.09]; P=0.29) as men, while female sex was associated with a trend toward higher risk of unplanned index limb revascularization (HR, 1.18; [95% CI, 1.00–1.40]; P=0.0499). Irrespective of sex, effects of rivaroxaban were consistent for the primary efficacy outcome (P‐interaction=0.22), unplanned index limb revascularization (P‐interaction=0.64), and bleeding (P‐interaction=0.61). Women were more likely than men to discontinue study treatment (HR, 1.13; [95% CI, 1.03–1.25]; P=0.0099). Conclusions Among >1700 women with PAD undergoing LER, women and men were at similar risk for the primary outcome, but a trend for greater risk of unplanned index limb revascularization among women was observed. Effects of rivaroxaban were consistent by sex, though women more often discontinued treatment. Better understanding of sex‐based outcomes and treatment adherence following LER is needed. Registration URL: http://clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT02504216.

Background In event‐driven clinical trials, study termination is based on accrual of a target number of primary efficacy events. For noninferiority trials in which superiority is conditionally examined, the ideal cohort in which to track event accrual is unclear. We used data from the ROCKET AF (Rivaroxaban Once Daily Oral Direct Factor Xa Inhibition Compared With Vitamin K Antagonism for Prevention of Stroke and Embolism Trial in Atrial Fibrillation) trial to determine the effect of primary efficacy‐event tracking in the per‐protocol cohort during the on‐treatment period versus the intention‐to‐treat (ITT) cohort during the ITT period. Methods and Results ROCKET AF was terminated after accruing 429 primary efficacy events (stroke or systemic embolism) in the per‐protocol cohort during the on‐treatment period for noninferiority. We identified the date on which 429 events occurred in the ITT cohort during the ITT period. We performed noninferiority and superiority analyses based on hypothetical study termination on this date. ROCKET AF would have terminated 226 days earlier if events were tracked during the ITT period. Similar to the main trial findings, rivaroxaban would have met noninferiority versus warfarin for the primary efficacy end point (hazard ratio [HR], 0.77; 95% CI, 0.62–0.96; P

Background There is concern that selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) substantially increase bleeding risk in patients taking anticoagulants. Methods and Results We studied 737 patients taking SSRIs in the ROCKET AF (Rivaroxaban Once Daily Oral Direct Factor Xa Inhibition Compared With Vitamin K Antagonism for Prevention of Embolism and Stroke Trial in Atrial Fibrillation) trial of rivaroxaban compared with warfarin for the prevention of stroke/systemic embolism in patients with atrial fibrillation. These patients were propensity score matched 1:1 to 737 patients not taking SSRIs. The primary outcome measure was major and nonmajor clinically relevant bleeding events, the principal safety outcome in ROCKET AF. Over a mean 1.6 years of follow‐up, the rate of major/nonmajor clinically relevant bleeding was 18.57 events/100 patient‐years for SSRI users versus 16.84 events/100 patient‐years for matched comparators, adjusted hazard ratio (aHR) of 1.16 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.95–1.43). The aHRs were similar in patients taking rivaroxaban (aHR 1.11 [95% CI, 0.82–1.51]) and those taking warfarin (aHR 1.21 [95% CI, 0.91–1.60]). For the rarer outcome of major bleeding, the aHR for SSRI users versus those not taking SSRIs was 1.13 (95% CI, 0.62–2.06) for rivaroxaban; for warfarin, the aHR was higher, at 1.58 (95% CI, 0.96–2.60) but not statistically significantly elevated. Conclusions We found no significant increase in bleeding risk when SSRIs were combined with anticoagulant therapy, although there was a suggestion of increased bleeding risk with SSRIs added to warfarin. While physicians should be vigilant regarding bleeding risk, our results provide reassurance that SSRIs can be safely added to anticoagulants in patients with atrial fibrillation. Clinical Trial Registration URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT00403767.

BackgroundAlthough implantation of cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIEDs) in patients receiving warfarin is well studied, limited data are available on the use of oral factor Xa inhibitors in this setting. Methods and ResultsUsing data from Rivaroxaban Once Daily Oral Direct Factor Xa Inhibition Compared with Vitamin K Antagonism for Prevention of Stroke and Embolism Trial in Atrial Fibrillation (ROCKET AF) (n=14 264), we compared baseline characteristics and clinical outcomes in patients with atrial fibrillation randomized to rivaroxaban versus warfarin who did and did not undergo CIED implantation or revision. In this post‐hoc, postrandomization, on‐treatment analysis, only the first intervention per patient was analyzed. During a median follow‐up of 2.2 years, 453 patients (242 rivaroxaban group; 211 warfarin group) underwent de novo CIED implantation (64.2%) or revision procedures (35.8%). Patients who received CIEDs were older, more likely to be male, and more likely to have past myocardial infarction, but had similar stroke risk compared to patients who did not receive CIEDs. Most patients who received a device had study drug interrupted for the procedure and did not receive bridging anticoagulation. During the 30‐day postprocedural period, 11 patients (4.55%) in the rivaroxaban group experienced bleeding complications compared with 15 (7.13%) in the warfarin group. Thromboembolic complications occurred in 3 patients (1.26%) in the rivaroxaban group and 1 (0.48%) in the warfarin group. Event rates were too low for formal hypothesis testing. ConclusionsBleeding and thromboembolic events were low in both rivaroxaban‐ and warfarin‐treated patients. Periprocedural use of oral factor Xa inhibitors in CIED implantation requires further study in prospective, randomized trials. Clinical Trial RegistrationURL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT00403767.

BackgroundAtrial fibrillation is associated with higher mortality. Identification of causes of death and contemporary risk factors for all‐cause mortality may guide interventions. Methods and ResultsIn the Rivaroxaban Once Daily Oral Direct Factor Xa Inhibition Compared with Vitamin K Antagonism for Prevention of Stroke and Embolism Trial in Atrial Fibrillation (ROCKET AF) study, patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation were randomized to rivaroxaban or dose‐adjusted warfarin. Cox proportional hazards regression with backward elimination identified factors at randomization that were independently associated with all‐cause mortality in the 14 171 participants in the intention‐to‐treat population. The median age was 73 years, and the mean CHADS2 score was 3.5. Over 1.9 years of median follow‐up, 1214 (8.6%) patients died. Kaplan–Meier mortality rates were 4.2% at 1 year and 8.9% at 2 years. The majority of classified deaths (1081) were cardiovascular (72%), whereas only 6% were nonhemorrhagic stroke or systemic embolism. No significant difference in all‐cause mortality was observed between the rivaroxaban and warfarin arms (P=0.15). Heart failure (hazard ratio 1.51, 95% CI 1.33–1.70, P