Search

Introduction: This study aims to assess the risk of direct oral anticoagulant (DOAC) discontinuation among Medicare beneficiaries with non-valvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF) who reach the Medicare coverage gap stratified by low-income subsidy (LIS) status and the impact of DOAC discontinuation on rates of stroke and systemic embolism (SE) among beneficiaries with increased out-of-pocket (OOP) costs due to not receiving LIS., Methods: In this retrospective cohort study, Medicare claims data (2015-2020) were used to identify beneficiaries with NVAF who initiated rivaroxaban or apixaban and entered the coverage gap during ≥ 1 year. DOAC discontinuation rates during the coverage gap were stratified by receipt of Medicare Part D Low-Income Subsidy (LIS), a proxy for not experiencing increased OOP costs. Among non-LIS beneficiaries, incidence rates of stroke and SE during the subsequent 12 months were compared between beneficiaries who did and did not discontinue DOAC in the coverage gap., Results: Among 303,695 beneficiaries, mean age was 77.3 years, and 28% received LIS. After adjusting for baseline differences, non-LIS beneficiaries (N = 218,838) had 78% higher risk of discontinuing DOAC during the coverage gap vs. LIS recipients (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR], 1.78; 95% CI [1.73, 1.82]). Among non-LIS beneficiaries, DOAC discontinuation during coverage gap (N = 91,397; 34%) was associated with 14% higher risk of experiencing stroke and SE during the subsequent 12 months (aHR, 1.14; 95% CI [1.08, 1.20])., Conclusion: Increased OOP costs during Medicare coverage gap were associated with higher risk of DOAC discontinuation, which in turn was associated with higher risk of stroke and SE among beneficiaries with NVAF., (© 2023. The Author(s).)

Objectives: To compare the risk of stroke and systemic embolism (SE) among patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF) who abandoned their first direct oral anticoagulant (DOAC) fill ("abandoners") relative to patients who continued DOACs beyond the first fill ("continuers")., Methods: In this retrospective longitudinal study, adults with NVAF prescribed DOACs were selected from Symphony Health, an ICON plc Company, PatientSource, 1 April 2017 to 31 October 2020. A 90-day landmark period following the first DOAC fill was used to classify patients as abandoners or continuers. Inverse probability of treatment weighting was used to balance baseline characteristics between cohorts. Time to ischemic stroke/SE was described and compared between cohorts using weighted Kaplan-Meier and Cox proportional hazard models from the end of the landmark period until end of clinical activity or data., Results: After weighting, 200,398 and 211,352 patients comprised the abandoner and continuer cohorts, respectively. The mean duration of follow-up was 14.9 and 15.7 months, respectively. At 12 months of follow-up, the probability of ischemic stroke/SE was 1.34% in the abandoner cohort and 1.00% in the continuer cohort; the risk of ischemic stroke/SE was 35% higher in the abandoner versus continuer cohort (hazard ratio [95% confidence interval] = 1.35 [1.20, 1.51]; p  < 0.0001)., Conclusions: Patients with NVAF who abandoned the first DOAC fill had significantly higher risk of ischemic stroke/SE compared to patients who continued therapy beyond the first fill. There is an unmet need for better access to DOACs so that the long-term risk of poor outcomes may be minimized.

Introduction: Direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) are essential in ischemic stroke/systemic embolism (SE) prevention among patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF). This study compared the risk of ischemic stroke/SE among patients with NVAF who discontinued DOACs following the first fill ("one-and-done") relative to patients who continued DOACs beyond the first fill ("continuers")., Methods: De-identified data from Symphony Health, an ICON plc Company, PatientSource ® , April 1, 2017 to October 31, 2020, were used to identify adults with NVAF initiated on DOACs (index date). Patients with only one DOAC claim during the 90-day landmark period starting on the index date were classified as one-and-done and the remaining as continuers. Inverse probability of treatment weighting was used to balance baseline characteristics in the cohorts. Time from the landmark period end to the first ischemic stroke/SE event or, among those without the event, to clinical activity or data end was compared between balanced cohorts using survival analysis., Results: Of patients initiating DOACs, 23.6% were classified as one-and-done users. After weighting was performed, 241,159 and 238,889 patients comprised the one-and-done and continuer cohorts, respectively. At 12 months of follow-up, the probability of ischemic stroke/SE was 1.44% in the one-and-done cohort and 1.00% in the continuer cohort [hazard ratio (95% confidence interval) 1.44 (1.34-1.54); p < 0.0001]. Results at earlier and later time points and in a sensitivity analysis with a 75-day landmark period were similar., Conclusion: A substantial proportion of patients were one-and-done DOAC users, which was associated with significantly higher risk of ischemic stroke/SE events. There is an unmet need to improve access and encourage continuous use of DOACs among patients with NVAF so that severe and fatal complications may be mitigated., (© 2023. The Author(s).)

Introduction: The healthcare resource utilization (HRU) and costs of oral anticoagulant-naïve patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF) and diabetes initiated on rivaroxaban or warfarin in the United States (US) has not been previously evaluated., Methods: This retrospective study used data from the Optum's de-identified Clinformatics ® Data Mart Database (1 January, 2012 to 30 September, 2021) to evaluate the HRU and costs of adult patients with NVAF and diabetes newly initiated on rivaroxaban or warfarin (on or after January 2013). Inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) was used to adjust for confounding between cohorts. HRU and costs (USD 2021) were assessed per patient-year (PPY) post-treatment initiation. Weighted cohorts were compared using rate ratios (RR) from Poisson regression models, odds ratios (OR) from logistic regression models, and cost differences; 95% confidence intervals (CI) and p values were generated using non-parametric bootstrap procedures., Results: After IPTW, 17,881 and 19,274 patients initiated on rivaroxaban and warfarin were included, respectively (mean age: 73 years; 40% female). During 12 months of follow-up, the rivaroxaban cohort had lower all-cause HRU PPY across all components, including lower rates of inpatient stays (RR: 0.84, 95% CI 0.81, 0.88), outpatient visits (RR: 0.67, 95% CI 0.66, 0.68), and 30 day hospital readmission (OR: 0.75, 95% CI 0.66, 0.83; all p < 0.001) compared to the warfarin cohort. Moreover, rivaroxaban was associated with medical cost savings PPY (mean cost difference: - $9306, 95% CI - $11,769, - $6607), which compensated for higher pharmacy costs relative to warfarin (mean cost difference: $5518, 95% CI $5193, $5839), resulting in significantly lower all-cause total healthcare costs for rivaroxaban versus warfarin (mean cost difference: - $3788, 95% CI - $6258, - $1035; all p < 0.001)., Conclusion: Among NVAF patients with diabetes in a real-world US setting, rivaroxaban was associated with lower healthcare costs compared to warfarin., (© 2023. The Author(s).)

Background: Atrial fibrillation (AF) is a recognized adverse consequence associated with all Bruton's tyrosine kinase inhibitors used to treat chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL)/small lymphocytic lymphoma (SLL); however, real-world time to discontinuation (TTD) and time to next treatment (TTNT) of CLL/SLL patients with a high baseline AF/stroke risk remain unknown., Materials and Methods: Patients with CLL/SLL from a nationwide electronic health record-derived database (February 12, 2013-January 31, 2021) initiating first-line (1L) or second or later-line (2L+) treatment with ibrutinib or other regimens on or after February 12, 2014 (index date) were analyzed. Kaplan-Meier survival analysis was used to assess TTD and TTNT among all patients, patients with high AF risk (CHARGE-AF risk score ≥10.0%), and patients at high risk of stroke (CHA 2 DS 2 -VASc risk score ≥3 [females] or ≥2 [males])., Results: In 1L/2L+, 2190/1851 patients received ibrutinib and 4388/4135, were treated with other regimens. Median TTD for ibrutinib was similar regardless of AF/stroke-related risk (1L: all patients, 15.7 months; high AF risk, 11.7 months; high stroke risk, 13.7 months; similar results in 2L+). Median TTNT was significantly longer for ibrutinib vs. other regimens (1L: not reached vs. 45.9 months; 2L+: not reached vs. 23.6 months; both P < .05), including among those with high AF/stroke risk. TTNT was similar between all patients and high-risk cohorts in 1L and 2L+ (all P > .05)., Conclusion: This study highlights that elevated baseline AF/stroke-related risk does not adversely impact TTD and TTNT outcomes associated with ibrutinib use. Additionally, TTNT was significantly longer for patients treated with ibrutinib vs. other regimens., Competing Interests: Disclosure A.N. has received consulting fees from Pharmacyclics, Janssen Scientific Affairs, and Epsilon imaging Inc. B.E., A.H., S.L., M-H.L., and P.L. are employees of Analysis Group, Inc., which has provided paid consulting services to Janssen Scientific Affairs, LLC. S.P.F. was an employee of Analysis Group, Inc. at the time the study was conducted. S.P., X.L., and Q.H. are employees of Janssen Scientific Affairs, LLC, and stockholders of Johnson & Johnson. M.C. has received research funding from Abbvie, Pharmacyclics, Oncternal, Velosbio, Merck, and Geron. N.A. reports no relevant conflicts of interest related to this work., (Copyright © 2022 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Aim: Evaluate healthcare resource utilization (HRU) and costs associated with rivaroxaban and warfarin among nonvalvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF) patients with obesity and polypharmacy. Materials & methods: IQVIA PharMetrics ® Plus (January 2010-September 2019) data were used to identify NVAF patients with obesity (BMI ≥30 kg/m 2 ) and polypharmacy (≥5 medications) initiated on rivaroxaban or warfarin. Weighted rate ratios and cost differences were evaluated post-treatment initiation. Results: Rivaroxaban was associated with significantly lower rates of HRU, including hospitalization (rate ratio [95% CI]: 0.83 [0.77, 0.92]). Medical costs were reduced in rivaroxaban users (difference [95% CI]: -US$6868 [-US$10,628, -US$2954]), resulting in significantly lower total healthcare costs compared with warfarin users (difference [95% CI]: -US$4433 [-US$8136, -US$582]). Conclusion: Rivaroxaban was associated with lower HRU and costs compared with warfarin among NVAF patients with obesity and polypharmacy in commercially insured US patients.

Introduction: Current evidence indicates that rivaroxaban may be a safe and effective alternative to warfarin among patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF) and obesity. However, evidence regarding the impact of polypharmacy is limited in this population. The present study evaluated the effectiveness and safety of rivaroxaban versus warfarin among NVAF patients with obesity and polypharmacy in the US., Methods: De-identified health insurance claims data from the IQVIA PharMetrics ® Plus data (01/2010-09/2019) were used to identify NVAF patients with obesity (BMI ≥ 30 kg/m 2 ) and polypharmacy (≥ 5 medications) initiated on rivaroxaban or warfarin. Inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) was used to adjust for imbalances between groups. Study outcomes were evaluated up to 36 months post-treatment initiation and included the composite of stroke or systemic embolism (stroke/SE) and major bleeding. Subgroup analyses were conducted stratified by polypharmacy category (5-9 or ≥ 10 medications). Outcomes were assessed using Cox proportional hazards regression models with hazard ratios (HR) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs)., Results: A total of 7000 and 3920 NVAF patients with obesity and polypharmacy were initiated on rivaroxaban and warfarin, respectively. At 36 months of follow-up, rivaroxaban was associated with a 29% lower risk of stroke/SE relative to warfarin (HR 0.71, 95% CI 0.57, 0.90). Major bleeding risk was not significantly different among rivaroxaban- compared to warfarin-treated patients (HR 0.85, 95% CI 0.70, 1.03). Subgroup analyses yielded results that were largely consistent with the overall polypharmacy analysis., Conclusions: These results suggest that rivaroxaban is an effective and safe treatment option among NVAF patients with obesity and polypharmacy in a commercially-insured US population., (© 2021. The Author(s).)

Objectives: Current evidence indicates that the pharmacokinetic profile of rivaroxaban is not significantly impacted by body weight. However, real-world data are needed to better assess the potential clinical benefits and risks associated with rivaroxaban in non-valvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF) patients with obesity. Thus, our objectives were to assess the real-world effectiveness and safety of rivaroxaban versus warfarin among NVAF patients with obesity in the US nationally representative commercially-insured population., Methods: Health insurance claims data from the IQVIA PharMetrics Plus database (January 2010-September 2019) were used to identify NVAF patients with obesity (based on diagnosis codes) initiated on rivaroxaban or warfarin. Inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) was used to adjust for imbalances between groups. Study outcomes of interest were evaluated up to 36 months post-treatment initiation and included the composite of stroke or systemic embolism (stroke/SE) and major bleeding. Outcomes were compared using Cox proportional hazards regression models with hazard ratios (HR) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs)., Results: A total of 10,555 patients were initiated on rivaroxaban and 5080 patients on warfarin. Following IPTW, the risk of stroke/SE was 26% lower among patients prescribed rivaroxaban relative to warfarin (HR: 0.74, 95% CI: 0.60, 0.91, p  = .004) at 36 months. Rivaroxaban-initiated patients had a risk of major bleeding similar to that of warfarin-initiated patients (HR: 0.85, 95% CI: 0.71, 1.02, p  = .085)., Conclusions: These results suggest that rivaroxaban is an effective and safe treatment option among NVAF patients with obesity in a commercially-insured US population.

Aim: To assess the real-world healthcare resource utilization (HRU) and costs of patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF) and obesity newly initiated on rivaroxaban or warfarin in the US., Methods: This retrospective study used IQVIA PharMetrics Plus data (01/2010-09/2019) to evaluate patients (≥18 years) with NVAF and obesity (body mass index ≥30 kg/m 2 ) initiated on rivaroxaban or warfarin (on or after 01/2013). Inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) was used to adjust for confounding between cohorts. HRU and costs were assessed post-treatment initiation. Weighted cohorts were compared using Poisson regression models and cost differences, with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) and p values generated using non-parametric bootstrap procedures., Results: After IPTW, 10,555 and 5,080 patients were initiated on rivaroxaban and warfarin, respectively (mean age: 59 years). At 12 months follow-up, the rivaroxaban cohort had lower all-cause HRU, including fewer hospitalizations (rate ratio [RR]: 0.80, 95% CI: 0.74, 0.87), emergency room visits (RR: 0.89, 95% CI: 0.83, 0.97), and outpatient visits (RR: 0.72, 95% CI: 0.69, 0.77; all p  < .05). Medical costs were also reduced in the rivaroxaban cohort (mean difference: -$6,759, 95% CI: -$9,814, -$3,311) due to reduced hospitalization costs (mean difference: -$5,967, 95% CI: -$8,721, -$3,327), resulting in lower total all-cause healthcare costs compared to the warfarin cohort (mean difference: -$4,579, 95% CI: -$7,609, -$1,052; all p  < .05). The rivaroxaban cohort also had lower NVAF-related HRU and medical costs driven by lower hospitalization at 12 months post-treatment initiation. HRU and cost reductions associated with rivaroxaban persisted up to 36 months of follow-up., Limitations: Claims data may have contained inaccuracies and obesity was classified based on ICD diagnosis codes given that patient BMI values were not available., Conclusions: Rivaroxaban was associated with reduced HRU and costs compared to warfarin among NVAF patients with obesity in a real-world US setting.

Objectives: To provide the most current assessment of real-world healthcare resource utilization (HRU) and costs among patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF) who newly initiated rivaroxaban and apixaban using a large US database., Material and Methods: A retrospective weighted cohort design was used with healthcare insurance claims from the Optum Clinformatics Data Mart databases (January 2012-December 2018). The index date was defined as the first dispensing of rivaroxaban or apixaban. Adult NVAF patients with an index date on or after 1 January 2016, ≥ 12 months of continuous eligibility before the index date and ≥ 1 month after, and without prior use of oral anticoagulant were included. The observation period spanned from the index date to the earliest of the end of data availability, end of insurance coverage, or death. Inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) was used to adjust for differences in baseline characteristics between cohorts. All-cause healthcare resource utilization (HRU), including hospitalization, emergency room, and outpatient visits, and healthcare costs, including medical and pharmacy costs, were evaluated from the payer's perspective during the observation period up to 18 and 24 months, separately., Results: In total, 23,822 rivaroxaban and 53,666 apixaban users were included. After weighting, all baseline characteristics were well balanced between cohorts (mean age: 73.8 years, female: 46.6% in both cohorts). Up to 18 months of follow-up, rivaroxaban users incurred significantly lower total healthcare costs compared to apixaban users (cost difference = -$1,121; p  = 0.020), driven by significantly lower rates of outpatient hospital visits and associated costs (cost difference = -$1,579; p  < 0.001). Similar results were found in the analysis conducted for up to 24 months of follow-up (total cost difference = ‒$1,111; p  = 0.020)., Conclusions: In this large retrospective analysis, patients with NVAF initiated on rivaroxaban incurred significantly lower healthcare costs compared to those initiated on apixaban, which were primarily driven by significantly lower outpatient visits and costs during the 18- and 24-month follow-up periods.

Objective: To assess long-term healthcare costs related to ischemic stroke and systemic embolism (stroke/SE) and major bleeding (MB) events in patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF) treated with non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants (NOACs). Materials and methods: Optum's Clinformatics Data Mart database from 1/2009-12/2016 was analyzed. Adult patients with ≥1 stroke/SE hospitalization (index date) were matched 1:1 to patients without stroke/SE (random index date), based on propensity scores. Patients with an MB event were matched to patients without MB. All patients had an NOAC dispensing overlapping index date, ≥12 months of eligibility pre-index date, and ≥1 NVAF diagnosis. The observation period spanned from the index date until the earliest date of death, switch to warfarin, end of insurance coverage, or end of data availability. Mean costs were evaluated: (1) per-patient-per-year (PPPY) and (2) at 1, 2, 3, and 4 years using Lin's method. Results: The cost differences were, respectively, $48,807 and $28,298 PPPY for NOAC users with stroke/SE ( n =  1,340) and those with MB ( n =  3,774) events compared to controls. Cost differences of patients with vs without stroke/SE were $49,876, $51,627, $57,822, and $60,691 at 1, 2, 3, and 4 years post-index, respectively ( p  < 0.001). These cost differences were $31,292, $35,658, $44,069, and $47,022 for patients with vs without MB after 1, 2, 3, and 4 years post-index, respectively ( p  < 0.001). Limitations: Limitations include unobserved confounders, coding and/or billing inaccuracies, limited sample sizes over longer follow-up, and the under-reporting of mortality for deaths occurring after 2011. Conclusions: The incremental healthcare costs incurred by patients with vs without stroke/SE was nearly twice as high as those of patients with vs without MB. Moreover, each additional year up to 4 years after the first event was associated with an incremental cost for patients with a stroke/SE or MB event compared to those without an event.

Background: Heart failure (HF) is associated with an incremental risk of stroke, but limited real-world data exist in patients with HF without atrial fibrillation (AF)., Objectives: To quantify the incremental risk of ischemic stroke among newly diagnosed patients with HF and without AF., Methods: Adults with HF and ≥18 months of enrollment before their index HF (ie, baseline period) were identified in Truven Health Analytics MarketScan Databases (January 2010-April 2015). Patients without AF during baseline and without an ischemic stroke within 14 days of the index date were propensity score matched 1:1 to individuals with neither HF nor AF and observed for ischemic stroke. A similar analysis was performed for the overall HF population. Incidence rates were compared using incidence rate ratios between HF and non-HF cohorts; Kaplan-Meier analyses with log-rank tests were used to compare incidence rates over time., Results: A total of 66,414 patients with HF were identified, of which 52,005 did not have AF. Patients with HF without AF had significantly higher rates of ischemic stroke than patients without HF without AF during follow-up (incidence rate ratio 1.91 [95% confidence interval 1.75-2.09], P < .001). Ischemic stroke rates remained significantly higher for patients with HF over time among individuals without AF (P < .001 for log-rank test at 12, 24, and 36 months). Similar results were found for the overall HF population., Conclusions: Even in the absence of AF, patients with HF are at heightened risk of ischemic stroke compared with patients without HF., (Copyright © 2018 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objectives: To estimate the real-world (RW) impact of adherence to once-daily (QD: rivaroxaban and edoxaban) and twice-daily (BID: apixaban and dabigatran) non-vitamin K antagonist (NOACs) on the risk of stroke and major bleeding (MB) among non-valvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF) patients., Methods: First, claims from the Optum Clinformatics Data Mart database (July 2012-December 2016) were analyzed. Adult NVAF patients with ≥2 NOAC dispensings (index date) were included. The relationship between NOAC adherence (proportion of days covered ≥80%) and stroke/MB 1-year post-index was evaluated using adjusted Cox proportional hazards models. Second, the natural logarithm of hazard ratios (HRs) was multiplied to a literature-derived mean adherence difference between QD and BID NOACs yielding stroke and MB rates. Third, these rates were multiplied by 1-year Kaplan-Meier rates of stroke and MB which yielded the number of strokes prevented and MBs caused. Annual cost savings were evaluated using literature-based stroke ($81,414/patient) and MB ($63,905/patient) cost estimates., Results: In total, 54,280 patients were included. HRs for adherent vs non-adherent patients were 0.67 (p < .001) for stroke and 1.09 (p = .179) for MB. The claims-derived 1-year Kaplan-Meier rates were 3.0% and 3.4% for strokes and MBs, respectively. For 100,000 AF patients, 64 strokes were prevented (p < .001), and a non-significant number of MBs (n = 15, p < .191) were caused by QD vs BID NOACs annually, which leads to cost savings estimated at $58 million for QD NOACs., Conclusion: QD NOACs prevented a significant number of strokes and caused no significant increase in MBs compared to BID NOACs, which leads to significant net cost savings for NVAF patients in the US.

Background: Renal dysfunction increases the risk of thromboembolic and bleeding events in patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF)., Materials and Methods: Adult NVAF patients with ≥ 6 months prior to first warfarin or rivaroxaban dispensing were selected from the IMS Health Real-World Data Adjudicated Claims database (05/2011 - 06/2015) with electronic medical records. Ischemic stroke events, thromboembolic events (venous thromboembolism, myocardial infarction, or ischemic stroke), and major bleeding events were compared between patients by renal function identified by 1) relevant ICD-9-CM diagnosis codes and 2) estimated creatinine clearance (eCrCl). Baseline confounders were adjusted using inverse probability of treatment weights., Results: The diagnosis-based analysis included 39,872 rivaroxaban and 48,637 warfarin users (3,572 and 8,230 with renal dysfunction, respectively). The eCrCl-based analysis included 874 rivaroxaban and 1,069 warfarin users (66 and 208 with eCrCl < 60 mL/min, respectively). In the diagnosis-based analysis, rivaroxaban users with renal dysfunction had a significantly lower stroke rate (HR = 0.55, p = 0.0004) compared to warfarin users; rivaroxaban users with and without renal dysfunction had significantly lower thromboembolic event rates (HR = 0.62, p < 0.0001; and HR = 0.64, p < 0.0001, respectively), and similar major bleeding rates to warfarin users. In the eCrCl-based analysis, rivaroxaban users with eCrCl ≥ 60 mL/min had a significantly lower thromboembolic event rate, but other outcomes were not statistically significant., Conclusion: Rivaroxaban-treated NVAF patients with diagnosed renal dysfunction had a significantly lower stroke rate compared to warfarin-treated patients. Regardless of renal dysfunction diagnoses, rivaroxaban users had lower thromboembolic event rates compared to warfarin users, and a similar rate of major bleeding. eCrCl-based analysis was limited by a small sample size.
.

Background: Medication non-adherence can result in poor health outcomes. Understanding differences in adherence rates to non-vitamin K oral anticoagulants (NOACs) could guide treatment decisions and improve clinical outcomes among patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF)., Objective: To compare adherence to rivaroxaban and apixaban among the overall NVAF population and subgroups of prior oral anticoagulant (OAC) users (e.g., multiple comorbidities, non-adherence risk factors)., Methods: Using healthcare claims from the Truven Health Analytics MarketScan (7/2012-7/2015), adult patients with ≥2 dispensings of rivaroxaban or apixaban ≥ 180 days apart with > 60 days of supply, ≥ 6 months of pre- and post-index eligibility, ≥ 1 atrial fibrillation diagnosis pre- or on the index date, and without valvular involvement were identified. Propensity-score methods adjusting for potential baseline confounders were used to create matched cohorts of rivaroxaban and apixaban patients. Adherence was assessed during the implementation phase using the percentage of patients with proportion of days covered (PDC) ≥0.8 at 6 months. Subgroups of patients with prior OAC use were evaluated; additional subgroups were identified and evaluated by Quan-Charlson Comorbidity index ≥2 and presence of non-adherence risk factors (i.e., mental disorders, stress, isolation, and rheumatoid arthritis)., Results: A total of 13,890 NVAF subjects were included in each of the 2 matched cohorts. All baseline characteristics were balanced between cohorts. At 6 months, significantly more rivaroxaban users were adherent to treatment compared to apixaban users (81.8% vs. 78.0%; absolute difference of 3.8%; p<.001). Rivaroxaban users had significantly higher adherence rates in all subgroups examined., Conclusion: Rivaroxaban users had consistently higher adherence rates than apixaban users overall and among all NVAF subgroups examined.

Objectives: Due to the high cost of nonvalvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF), this condition may be a suitable candidate for condition-specific bundled payments. This paper evaluates the healthcare cost of NVAF and uses common bleeding and stroke risk scores (HAS-BLED and CHA 2 DS 2 -VASc) to explore the risk-based healthcare cost differences among NVAF patients., Methods: MarketScan claims of NVAF patients (ICD-9-CM code 427.31) were analyzed from January 2010 to April 2015. These claims feature more than 196 million covered lives and more than 300 contributing employers and 25 contributing health plans. A retrospective cohort design was used to assess episodes of care costs among patients with NVAF. Previously and newly diagnosed NVAF patients were selected from adult patients with ≥2 diagnoses of NVAF, and without valvular disease. Total all-cause healthcare costs at 1 year were stratified by stroke (CHA 2 DS 2 -VASc) and bleeding (HAS-BLED) risk scores. Study data was extracted in the MarketScan Commercial Claims and Encounters Database (Commercial Database) and the MarketScan Medicare Supplemental and Coordination of Benefits Database (Medicare Supplemental Database)., Results: Mean all-cause 1 year cost of care based on stroke risk (CHA 2 DS 2 -VASc) varied from $15,703 to $59,163 for previously diagnosed and $25,992 to $62,458 for newly diagnosed NVAF. Similarly, mean cost varied base on bleeding risk (HAS-BLED) for previously and newly diagnosed NVAF from $17,950 to $57,029 and $26,356 to $67,104 respectively., Conclusion: NVAF patients accrue variable healthcare costs. Stroke and bleeding risk should be taken into account during the creation of NVAF payment bundles.

Objectives: Renal dysfunction is associated with increased risk of cardiovascular disease and is an independent predictor of stroke and systemic embolism. Nonvalvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF) patients with renal dysfunction may face a particularly high risk of thromboembolism and bleeding. The current retrospective cohort study was designed to assess the impact of renal function on ischemic stroke and major bleeding rates in NVAF patients in the real-world setting (outside a clinical trial)., Methods: Medical claims and Electronic Health Records were retrieved retrospectively from Optum's Integrated Claims-Clinical de-identified dataset from May 2011 to August 2014. Patients with NVAF treated with warfarin (2468) or rivaroxaban (1290) were selected. Each treatment cohort was stratified by baseline estimated creatinine clearance (eCrCl) levels. Confounding adjustments were made using inverse probability of treatment weights (IPTWs). Incidence rates and hazard ratios of ischemic stroke and major bleeding events were calculated for both cohorts., Results: Overall, patients treated with rivaroxaban had an ischemic stroke incidence rate of 1.9 per 100 person-years (PY) while patients treated with warfarin had a rate of 4.2 per 100 PY (HR = 0.41 [0.21-0.80], p = .009). Rivaroxaban patients with an eCrCl below 50 mL/min (N = 229) had an ischemic stroke rate of 0.8 per 100 PY, while the rate for the warfarin cohort (N = 647) was 6.0 per 100 PY (HR = 0.09 [0.01-0.72], p = .02). For the other renal function levels (i.e. eCrCl 50-80 and ≥80 mL/min) HRs indicated no statistically significant differences in ischemic stroke risks. Bleeding events did not differ significantly between cohorts stratified by renal function., Conclusions: Ischemic stroke rates were significantly lower in the overall NVAF population for rivaroxaban vs. warfarin users, including patients with eCrCl below 50 mL/min. For all renal function groups, major bleeding risks were not statistically different between treatment groups.

Background: Adherence to oral anticoagulant (OAC) agents is important for patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF) to prevent potentially severe adverse events., Objective: To compare real-world adherence rates and time to discontinuation for rivaroxaban versus other OACs (apixaban, dabigatran, and warfarin) among patients with NVAF using claims-based data., Methods: Health care claims from the IMS Health Real-World Data Adjudicated Claims database (July 2012-June 2015) were analyzed. Adherence rate was defined as the percentage of patients with proportion of days covered (PDC) ≥ 0.80 and ≥ 0.90. Discontinuation was defined as a gap of more than 30 days between the end of a dispensing days of supply and the start date of the next fill, if any. Patients were included if they had ≥ 2 dispensings of rivaroxaban, apixaban, dabigatran, or warfarin at least 180 days apart (the first was considered the index date), had > 60 days of supply, had ≥ 6 months of pre-index eligibility, had ≥ 1 atrial fibrillation (AF) diagnosis pre-index or at index date, and had no valvular involvement. A logistic regression model was used to evaluate adherence to OAC therapy, while a Cox model was used to compare time to discontinuation; both models adjusted for baseline confounders., Results: A total of 13,645 rivaroxaban, 6,304 apixaban, 3,360 dabigatran, and 13,366 warfarin patients were identified. A significantly higher proportion of rivaroxaban users (80.1%) was adherent to therapy (PDC ≥ 0.80 at 6 months) versus apixaban (75.8%), dabigatran (69.2%), and warfarin users (64.5%). After adjustment, the proportion of patients adherent to therapy remained significantly higher for rivaroxaban users versus apixaban (absolute difference [AD] = 5.8%), dabigatran (AD = 9.5%), and warfarin users (AD = 13.6%; all P < 0.001). More pronounced differences were found with a PDC ≥0.90. In addition, rivaroxaban users were significantly less likely to discontinue therapy compared with other OACs after adjustments (all P < 0.05)., Conclusions: Among NVAF patients, rivaroxaban was associated with significantly higher adherence rates relative to other OACs whether using either a PDC of > 0.80 or > 0.90. Such differences in adherence could translate into improved patient outcomes and lower health care costs., Disclosures: This research was funded by Janssen Scientific Affairs. Ashton, Crivera, and Schein are employees and stockholders of Janssen Scientific Affairs. Laliberté, Germain, Wynant, and Lefebvre are employees of Analysis Group, a consulting company that received research grants from Janssen Scientific Affairs in connection with this study. McHorney is an employee of Evidera, a consulting company that received research grants from Janssen Scientific Affairs in connection with this study. Peterson received research grants from Janssen Scientific Affairs in connection with this study. All authors contributed to concept and design. The data were collected by Germain, Wynant, Laliberté, and Lefebvre and interpreted primarily by McHorney and Peterson, with the assistance of Lefebvre, Laliberté, Ashton, Crivera, and Schein. The manuscript was written primarily by Laliberté, Germain, and Lefebvre, with the assistance of Wynant. Revisions were made primarily by Ashton, Crivera, McHorney, Schein, and Peterson.

Objective: Studies comparing medications adherence have become common yet they often do not account for differences in relative follow-up. Patient selection criteria may impact validity and comparability of these studies as well., Methods: Adults with non-valvular atrial fibrillation, ≥1 rivaroxaban or apixaban dispensing (index date), and ≥1 year of pre-index eligibility were selected from IMS Health Real World Data Adjudicated Claims (IMS RWD Adjudicated Claims) and Truven Health MarketScan Research (Truven MarketScan) databases. Adherence was evaluated using proportion of days covered (PDC) ≥ 0.8 for treatment cohorts: (1) unmatched, with different follow-up, (2) propensity-score matched with similar follow-up, (3) matched, with similar follow-up and ≥2 rivaroxaban or apixaban dispensings, and (4) matched, with similar follow-up and chronic medication users only. Robustness was verified with PDC ≥0.9., Results: In the IMS RWD Adjudicated Claims database, rivaroxaban users had a longer mean follow-up than apixaban users (408 versus 254 days, respectively; p < .01). While crude comparisons demonstrated lower adherence rates for rivaroxaban than apixaban (-12.4 percentage points [pp]; p < .05), these difference attenuated after matching and (1) balancing follow-up (-2.2 pp; p < .05), (2) excluding single-time medication users (0.2 pp; p > .05), and reversed after (3) excluding non-chronic medication users (5.0 pp; p < .05). Results obtained were consistent when these analyses were repeated within the Truven MarketScan databases and when using a PDC ≥0.9., Conclusion: Medication adherence comparisons need to account for differences in follow-up. Selection of chronic medication users may impact comparative adherence advantage between medications.

Objective: Warfarin is widely used for stroke prevention in patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF). We compared the rates of stroke and major bleeding in NVAF patients with a high stroke risk and low bleeding risk profile during warfarin treated (W+) and warfarin untreated (W-) periods., Method: Insurance claims from six commercial, Medicaid or Medicare databases were analyzed from 2000 to 2014. NVAF patients treated with warfarin, with a CHADS 2 /CHA 2 DS 2 -VASc score ≥2, and an ATRIA score ≤3 at baseline were identified. Incidence rate ratios (IRRs) of stroke and major bleeding were calculated for W + versus W- episodes of person-time, as well as for first 30 days versus beyond 30 days of W + episodes., Results: Among 316,145 patients, anticoagulant prophylaxis with warfarin significantly reduced stroke risk, with IRRs ranging from 0.48 (95% CI: 0.46-0.51) to 0.80 (95% CI: 0.70-0.91), and increased major bleeding risk, with IRRs ranging from 1.13 (95% CI: 1.10-1.15) to 1.95 (95% CI: 1.10-3.45). Stroke and major bleeding rates were higher during the first 30 days of W + than beyond., Conclusion: In NVAF patients at high risk for stroke and low risk for bleeding, our data confirm the effectiveness of anticoagulation for stroke prevention. The decrease in stroke risk of anticoagulation may outweigh the risk of major bleeding events, particularly among elderly patients. Potential risks of warfarin during initiation warrant attention, especially among patients who stop and start therapy repeatedly.

Purpose: Non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulant medications are increasingly used for stroke prophylaxis in patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF). This study aimed to compare adherence with rivaroxaban and apixaban among patients with NVAF in routine clinical practice., Methods: Using pharmacy and medical claims from Truven Health Analytics MarketScan databases, we identified NVAF patients aged ≥18 years treated with rivaroxaban or apixaban. Baseline demographic and clinical features were balanced using 1:1 propensity score matching. Adherence to therapy was measured at 90 and 180 days post-index date and was defined by the proportion of days covered (PDC) ≥0.80 and PDC ≥0.90. "Gaps in care," defined as those with 10 or more day gaps in supply, were also evaluated., Findings: Between June 2012 and April 2014, 11,477 rivaroxaban and 2992 apixaban users were identified. Baseline characteristics for rivaroxaban and apixaban users were well matched. Relative to apixaban users, rivaroxaban users were more likely to have a PDC ≥0.80 at both 90 days (85.3% vs 79.9%; P < 0.001) and 180 days (75.8% vs 72.2%; P = 0.001). Similar results were observed with PDC ≥0.90. The proportion of patients with at least one 5+ and 10+ day gap in prescriptions was significantly lower in the rivaroxaban versus apixaban cohorts: 54.2% versus 62.4% (P < 0.001) and 40.0% versus 49.2% (P < 0.001), respectively., Implications: Adherence to non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants among NVAF patients is less than ideal, and gaps in treatment are common. Those on once-a-day rivaroxaban had significantly higher adherence and fewer gaps in treatment compared with twice-a-day apixaban. Future studies are needed to explore whether these treatment differences affect comparative patient outcomes., (Copyright © 2016 Elsevier HS Journals, Inc. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: Compared with warfarin, the new target-specific oral anticoagulant agents may have advantages, such as shorter hospital length of stay, in patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF). The objective of the present study was to assess, among patients with NVAF, the effects of rivaroxaban versus warfarin on the number of hospitalization days and other health care resource utilization in a cohort of rivaroxaban users and matched warfarin users., Methods: Data from health care claims dated from May 2011 to December 2012 from the Humana database were analyzed. Adult patients newly initiated on treatment with rivaroxaban or warfarin, with ≥2 diagnoses of AF (ICD-9-CM code 427.31), and without valvular AF were identified. Based on propensity score methods, warfarin recipients were matched 1:1 to rivaroxaban recipients. The end of the observation period was defined as the end of data availability, the end of insurance coverage, death, the date of a switch to another anticoagulant agent, or day 14 of treatment nonpersistence. The total number of hospitalization days and other health care resource utilization parameters (numbers of hospitalizations, emergency department [ED] visits, and outpatient visits) were evaluated using the method by Lin et al., Findings: Matches for all rivaroxaban recipients were found, and the characteristics of the matched groups (n = 2253 per group) were well balanced. The mean age of both cohorts was 74 years; 46% were female. The estimated mean total numbers of hospitalization days were significantly less in rivaroxaban users compared with those in warfarin users (all-cause, 2.71 vs 3.87 days [P = 0.032]; AF-related, 2.11 vs 3.02 days [P = 0.014]). The numbers of outpatient visits were also significantly less (all-cause, 25.26 vs 35.79 visits [P < 0.001]; AF-related, 5.48 vs 9.06 visits [P < 0.001]). Rivaroxaban users had a lesser estimated mean number of all-cause hospitalizations compared with warfarin users (0.55 vs 0.73; P = 0.084), and a significantly lesser estimated mean number of AF-related hospitalizations (0.40 vs 0.57; P = 0.022). The difference in the estimated mean numbers of all-cause ED visits was not statistically significant between the rivaroxaban and warfarin users., Implications: In this study conducted in clinical practice, the estimated mean numbers of hospitalization days, outpatient visits, and AF-related hospitalizations associated with rivaroxaban were significantly less than were those associated with warfarin in these patients with NVAF. The corresponding estimated difference in all-cause ED visits was not statistically significant., (Copyright © 2015 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Introduction: New target-specific oral anticoagulants may have benefits, such as shorter hospital length of stay, compared to warfarin in patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF). This study aimed to assess, among patients with NVAF, the effect of rivaroxaban versus warfarin on health care costs in a cohort of rivaroxaban users and matched warfarin users., Methods: Health care claims from the Humana database from 5/2011 to 12/2012 were analyzed. Adult patients newly initiated on rivaroxaban or warfarin with ≥2 atrial fibrillation (AF) diagnoses (The International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision, Clinical Modification: 427.31) and without valvular AF were identified. Based on propensity score methods, warfarin patients were matched 1:1 to rivaroxaban patients. Patients were observed up to end of data, end of insurance coverage, death, a switch to another anticoagulant, or treatment nonpersistence. Health care costs [hospitalization, emergency room (ER), outpatient, and pharmacy costs] were evaluated using Lin's method., Results: Matches were found for all rivaroxaban patients, and characteristics of the matched groups (n = 2253 per group) were well balanced. Estimated mean all-cause and AF-related hospitalization costs were significantly lower for rivaroxaban versus warfarin patients (all-cause: $5411 vs. $7427, P = 0.047; AF-related: $2872 vs. $4147, P = 0.020). Corresponding estimated mean all-cause outpatient visit costs were also significantly lower, but estimated mean pharmacy costs were significantly higher for rivaroxaban patients ($5316 vs. $2620, P < 0.001). Although estimated mean costs of ER visits were higher for rivaroxaban users compared to those of warfarin users, differences were not statistically significant. Including anticoagulant costs, mean overall total all-cause costs were comparable for rivaroxaban versus warfarin users due to cost offset from a reduction in the number and length of hospitalizations and number of outpatient visits ($17,590 vs. $18,676, P = 0.542)., Conclusion: Despite higher anticoagulant cost, mean overall total all-cause and AF-related cost remains comparable for patients with NVAF treated with rivaroxaban versus warfarin due to the cost offset from reduced health care resource utilization.

Background: Atrial fibrillation (AF) is the most common cardiac rhythm disturbance in the US, with an estimated prevalence of 2.7-6.1 million persons in 2010., Objective: This study evaluates the progression of daily hospitalization costs among non-valvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF) patients treated with anticoagulant therapy., Methods: A claims analysis was conducted with Premier Perspective Comparative Hospital Database records from January 2009-March 2013. Patients of 18 years or older who were diagnosed with NVAF and used anticoagulant therapy were studied. Treatment patterns and mean daily costs of hospitalization per patient as well as total costs of hospitalization were reported. Comparisons of mean daily costs with those of the previous day were presented to identify statistical cost differences between hospitalization days., Results: A total of 375,560 patients were identified; 67,017 with AF as admitting/primary diagnosis, and 308,543 with AF as a secondary diagnosis. The mean age of the overall population, primary AF diagnosis cohort, and secondary AF diagnosis cohort was 73.8, 67.9, and 75.0 years, while their proportion of females was 46.3%, 45.6%, and 46.5%, respectively. The mean length of stay was 6.8 days, 3.7 days, and 7.5 days for the overall population, the primary AF diagnosis cohort, and the secondary AF diagnosis cohort, respectively. For all cohorts, mean daily costs stabilized on the third day (overall population: $2103; primary AF diagnosis cohort: $1505; secondary AF diagnosis cohort: $2208)., Limitations: Claims data may have contained inaccuracies or omissions in coded procedures, diagnoses, or pharmacy claims., Conclusion: The study showed that daily hospitalization costs for NVAF patients stabilized on the third day of hospitalization and that any reduction or prolongation in hospital length of stay could have a significant impact on the cost burden associated with AF.

Background: Warfarin has been the only anticoagulant used for decades to prevent strokes and systemic embolisms in nonvalvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF) patients. Compared with rivaroxaban, warfarin has a narrow therapeutic range and many genetic and food-drug interactions that could potentially prolong hospital length of stay (LOS)., Objective: To compare hospital LOS between NVAF patients who were administered rivaroxaban versus warfarin with and without pretreatment of parenteral anticoagulant agents in a population of rivaroxaban-treated patients., Methods: A retrospective matched-cohort analysis was conducted using the Premier Perspective Comparative Hospital Database from November 2010 to September 2012. Adult patients were included in the study if they had a hospitalization for NVAF. Rivaroxaban users were matched with up to 4 warfarin users based on propensity score analyses. Patients with and without pretreatment of parenteral anticoagulant agents were evaluated separately. Hospital LOS was compared between treatment groups using generalized estimating equations., Results: The matched cohorts' characteristics were well balanced. Among the matched rivaroxaban and warfarin users who were administered parenteral agents, the mean age of the cohorts was 70 years and 47% of patients were female, whereas in the sample of patients who were not administered parenteral agents, the mean age was 72 years and 50% of patients were female. In the sample of patients who were administered parenteral agents, rivaroxaban users had significantly shorter hospital LOS (LOS difference: 1.38 days, P < 0.001) compared with warfarin users among rivaroxaban-treated patients. No significant difference in LOS was found in the sample of patients who were not administered parenteral anticoagulant agents (P = 0.169)., Conclusion: In the study sample of NVAF patients who were administered parenteral anticoagulant agents, rivaroxaban was associated with a significantly shorter hospital LOS compared with warfarin. The difference in LOS was not statistically significant in the sample of patients who were not administered parenteral anticoagulant agents.

Background: Warfarin has been the mainstay treatment used by patients with a moderate-to-high risk of stroke due to non-valvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF). Unlike rivaroxaban, laboratory monitoring to allow the attainment of the prothrombin time international normalized ratio goal is required with warfarin, thereby potentially increasing a patient's hospitalization costs., Objective: To compare hospitalization costs between hospitalized NVAF patients using rivaroxaban versus warfarin in a real-world setting., Methods: A retrospective claims analysis was conducted using the Premier Perspective Comparative Hospital Database from November 2010 to September 2012. The study included adult patients hospitalized for NVAF after November 2011. Patients using rivaroxaban during hospitalization were matched with up to four warfarin users by propensity score analyses. Hospitalization costs were compared between the matched cohorts using generalized estimating equations. A sub-analysis was performed for patients who were first administered their treatment on day three or later of their hospital stay. Sensitivity analyses were conducted on matched cohorts with a primary diagnosis of AF., Results: The matched cohorts' (2809 rivaroxaban and 11,085 warfarin users) characteristics were well balanced. The mean age of cohorts was 71 years and 49% of patients were female. The average hospitalization cost of rivaroxaban users was $11,993 compared to $13,255 for warfarin users. The cost difference was significantly lower by $1284 (P < 0.001). Patients who were administered rivaroxaban treatment on day three or after incurred significantly lower hospitalization costs (cost difference: $4350; P < 0.001) compared to warfarin users. Rivaroxaban users with a primary diagnosis of AF also had significantly lower costs compared to warfarin users., Limitations: These included possible inaccuracies or omissions in diagnoses, completeness of baseline characteristics, and a study population that included patients newly initiated on and patients who continued anticoagulant therapy., Conclusion: Hospitalization costs for rivaroxaban were significantly lower than those for warfarin in NVAF patients treated with rivaroxaban.

Background: Rivaroxaban was shown to be effective in reducing the risk of stroke and systemic embolism in patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation (AF) in a randomized controlled trial setting., Objective: To assess real-world safety, effectiveness, and persistence associated with rivaroxaban and warfarin in nonvalvular AF patients., Methods: Healthcare claims from Symphony Health Solutions' Patient Transactional Datasets from May 2011 to July 2012 were analyzed. Adult patients newly initiated on rivaroxaban or warfarin, with ≥2 AF diagnoses (ICD-9-CM: 427.31) and a CHADS2 score ≥1 during the 180 day baseline period were included. Cohorts were matched 1:4 using propensity score methods. Study outcomes were major bleeding, intracranial hemorrhage (ICH), gastrointestinal (GI) bleeding, composite stroke and systemic embolism, and venous thromboembolism (VTE) events. Cox proportional hazard models were used to compare event and persistence rates., Results: The matched sample included 3654 rivaroxaban and 14,616 warfarin patients. Matching was adequate, with all standardized differences in patient characteristics <10%. No significant differences were observed for bleeding and composite stroke and systemic embolism outcomes, although rivaroxaban users were associated with significantly fewer VTE events (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.36, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.24-0.54, p < 0.0001) compared to warfarin users. Rivaroxaban was also associated with a significantly lower risk of treatment non-persistence (HR = 0.66; 95% CI: 0.60-0.72, p < 0.0001)., Limitations: Claims data may have contained inaccuracies, and mortality and laboratory data were not available. Confounding may still have been possible even after propensity score matching. Early use pattern of medications may have changed over time., Conclusion: This analysis suggests that rivaroxaban and warfarin do not differ significantly in real-world rates of composite stroke and systemic embolism and major, intracranial, or GI bleeding. Rivaroxaban, however, was associated with significantly fewer VTE events and significantly better treatment persistence compared with warfarin.

Background: Warfarin has been the mainstay treatment for prevention of stroke among patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF). Unlike rivaroxaban, warfarin requires laboratory monitoring to allow the attainment of the prothrombin time (PT) international normalized ratio (INR) goal, thereby potentially prolonging a patient's hospital length of stay (LOS)., Objective: To compare hospital LOS between hospitalized NVAF patients using rivaroxaban versus warfarin in a real-world setting., Methods: A retrospective claims analysis was conducted using the Premier Perspective Comparative Hospital Database from 11/2010 to 9/2012. Adult patients were included in the study if they had a hospitalization for NVAF. Patients using rivaroxaban during hospitalization were matched with up to four warfarin users by propensity score analyses. Patients who were first administered their oral anticoagulants on day 3 or later of their hospital stay were also evaluated. Comparison of hospital LOS was assessed using generalized estimating equations., Results: The characteristics of the matched cohorts were well balanced. Among the matched rivaroxaban and warfarin users (2809 and 11,085 patients, respectively), the mean age of the cohorts was 71 years and 49% of patients were female. The average (median) hospital LOS for rivaroxaban patients was 4.46 (3) days, compared to 5.27 (4) days for the warfarin cohort. The mean difference in hospital LOS of 0.81 days (19.44 hours) was found to be significant at P < 0.001. Patients who were administered rivaroxaban on day 3 of their hospital stay or later also had a significantly lower LOS compared to warfarin users., Limitations: These included inaccuracies or omissions in diagnoses, completeness of baseline characteristics, and a study population that included patients newly initiated on and patients who continued anticoagulant therapy., Conclusion: The study sample of NVAF patients receiving rivaroxaban was associated with a significantly shorter hospital length of stay compared to the sample of patients receiving warfarin.

Introduction: Multiple daily dosing may be negatively associated with patient medication adherence, but the findings are inconclusive. The objective of this study was to compare adherence rates to once-daily (q.d.) versus twice-daily (b.i.d.) dosing regimen of chronic medications in patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation (AF)., Patients and Methods: The authors analyzed the PharMetrics Integrated Claims database from January 1, 2004 to December 31, 2009. Adult patients with continuous insurance coverage, newly initiated on diabetes or hypertension medication, and having at least one AF diagnosis with no valvular heart disease or valve replacement procedures were included. Compliance to q.d. and b.i.d. therapies was calculated in two ways: medication possession ratio (MPR) and proportion of days covered (PDC). Adherence was defined as an MPR or PDC ≥0.8. Multivariate logistic regressions were conducted to compare the probability of adherence between the q.d. and b.i.d. groups adjusting for baseline confounders., Results: A total of 8,256 q.d. and 2,441 b.i.d. patients were identified. The mean duration of exposure to therapy for q.d. and b.i.d. patients was 447 and 406 days (P < 0.001), respectively. Based on MPR, 75.3% of q.d. and 70.4% of b.i.d. patients were adherent (P < 0.001). For PDC at 12 months, the proportion of adherent patients for the q.d. and b.i.d. groups was 56.5% and 49.6% (P < 0.001), respectively. Adjusted odds ratios (95% CI) of adherence for the q.d. relative to b.i.d. group were 1.26 (1.13, 1.41) based on MPR and 1.23 (1.07, 1.41) based on PDC at 12 months., Conclusion: This study demonstrates that nonvalvular AF patients treated with q.d. dosing regimens for chronic medications were associated with approximately a 26% higher likelihood of adherence compared with subjects on b.i.d. regimens.

Peripheral artery disease (PAD), often treated with lower extremity revascularization, is associated with risk of major atherothrombotic vascular events (acute limb ischemia [ALI], major non-traumatic lower-limb amputation, myocardial infarction [MI], ischemic stroke, cardiovascular death). This study aims to assess healthcare resource utilization and costs of such events among patients with PAD after revascularization. Patients aged ≥50 years with PAD who were treated with lower-extremity revascularization were identified from Optum Clinformatics Data Mart claims database (01/2014–06/2019). The first lower extremity revascularization after PAD diagnosis was defined as the index date. Patients had ≥6 months of health plan enrollment before the index date. Patients were followed until the earliest of 1) end of enrollment or data; 2) diagnosis of atrial fibrillation or venous thromboembolism; or 3) oral anticoagulant use. All-cause healthcare resource use per-patient-year was compared before and after a major atherothrombotic vascular event post-revascularization among those with an event. Additionally, event-related healthcare costs per-patient-year were reported for each event type. Of the 38,439 PAD patients meeting the study criteria, 6,675 (17.4%) had a major atherothrombotic vascular event. On average, patients were observed for 7.3 months before an event and 6.2 months after an event. Patients with an event had significantly higher all-cause healthcare resource use versus similar metrics pre-event (e.g. inpatient visits among those with ALI: 3.5 ± 5.8 post-event vs. 2.0 ± 8.1 pre-event, p <.05). Event-related costs ranged from $57,825±$131,810 per-patient-year for ischemic stroke to $108,302±$150,168 for major non-traumatic lower-limb amputation. Data do not contain clinical information. Additionally, results are limited to commercially insured and Medicare Advantage beneficiaries. Patients with PAD who experience major atherothrombotic vascular events post-revascularization have considerably higher healthcare resource use and costs compared with similar metrics pre-event. Therefore, reducing the rate of such events could reduce overall healthcare costs for this population. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article presents research on the association of rivaroxaban drug with reduced inpatient costs than warfarin administered to non-valvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF) patients. Noted is the balance of the characteristics of matched cohorts. Research indicates the significant reduction of rivaroxaban hospitalization costs over those NVAF patients administered with warfarin.

The article discusses a study that evaluated real-world safety, effectiveness, and persistence associated with rivaroxaban and warfarin in nonvalvular atrial fibrillation patients. Topics discussed include the analysis of Healthcare claims from Symphony Health Solutions' Patient Transactional Datasets from May 2011 to July 2012, classification of patients with prior use of warfarin, and demographic and clinical attributes of rivaroxaban and warfarin users.

The article focuses on a study on the comparison of rivaroxaban and warfarin, used in the prevention of stokes in patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF). Topics include the attainment of the prothrombin time (PT) international normalized ratio (INR) goal through warfarin, the impact of warfarin on prolonged stay of patients in a hospital and the use of ROCKET-AF trial in the study to demonstrate the efficacy of rivaroxaban in patients with NVA, as of April 2014.