Search

WOS: 000432489900040, PubMed: 29525076, Background: The New Approach Rivaroxaban Inhibition of Factor Xa in a Global Trial vs. ASA to Prevent Embolism in Embolic Stroke of Undetermined Source (NAVIGATE-ESUS) trial is a randomized phase-III trial comparing rivaroxaban versus aspirin in patients with recent ESUS. Aims: We aimed to describe the baseline characteristics of this large ESUS cohort to explore relationships among key subgroups. Methods: We enrolled 7213 patients at 459 sites in 31 countries. Prespecified subgroups for primary safety and efficacy analyses included age, sex, race, global region, stroke or transient ischemic attack prior to qualifying event, time to randomization, hypertension, and diabetes mellitus. Results: Mean age was 66.9 +/- 9.8 years; 24% were under 60 years. Older patients had more hypertension, coronary disease, and cancer. Strokes in older subjects were more frequently cortical and accompanied by radiographic evidence of prior infarction. Women comprised 38% of participants and were older than men. Patients from East Asia were oldest whereas those from Latin America were youngest. Patients in the Americas more frequently were on aspirin prior to the qualifying stroke. Acute cortical infarction was more common in the United States, Canada, and Western Europe, whereas prior radiographic infarctions were most common in East Asia. Approximately forty-five percent of subjects were enrolled within 30 days of the qualifying stroke, with earliest enrollments in Asia and Eastern Europe. Conclusions: NAVIGATE-ESUS is the largest randomized trial comparing antithrombotic strategies for secondary stroke prevention in patients with ESUS. The study population encompasses a broad array of patients across multiple continents and these subgroups provide ample opportunities for future research., Bayer AGBayer AG; Janssen Research and Development; Canadian Stroke Prevention Intervention Network, Grant support: Sponsored by Bayer AG and Janssen Research and Development; partial funding for the Biomarker, Genetics, Gene Expression Substudy from the Canadian Stroke Prevention Intervention Network.

BACKGROUND: Coronary artery disease is a major cause of morbidity and mortality worldwide, and is a consequence of acute thrombotic events involving activation of platelets and coagulation proteins. Factor Xa inhibitors and aspirin each reduce thrombotic events but have not yet been tested in combination or against each other in patients with stable coronary artery disease.METHODS: In this multicentre, double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled, outpatient trial, patients with stable coronary artery disease or peripheral artery disease were recruited at 602 hospitals, clinics, or community centres in 33 countries. This paper reports on patients with coronary artery disease. Eligible patients with coronary artery disease had to have had a myocardial infarction in the past 20 years, multi-vessel coronary artery disease, history of stable or unstable angina, previous multi-vessel percutaneous coronary intervention, or previous multi-vessel coronary artery bypass graft surgery. After a 30-day run in period, patients were randomly assigned (1:1:1) to receive rivaroxaban (2·5 mg orally twice a day) plus aspirin (100 mg once a day), rivaroxaban alone (5 mg orally twice a day), or aspirin alone (100 mg orally once a day). Randomisation was computer generated. Each treatment group was double dummy, and the patients, investigators, and central study staff were masked to treatment allocation. The primary outcome of the COMPASS trial was the occurrence of myocardial infarction, stroke, or cardiovascular death. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01776424, and is closed to new participants.FINDINGS: Between March 12, 2013, and May 10, 2016, 27 395 patients were enrolled to the COMPASS trial, of whom 24 824 patients had stable coronary artery disease from 558 centres. The combination of rivaroxaban plus aspirin reduced the primary outcome more than aspirin alone (347 [4%] of 8313 vs 460 [6%] of 8261; hazard ratio [HR] 0·74, 95% CI 0·65-0·86, pINTERPRETATION: In patients with stable coronary artery disease, addition of rivaroxaban to aspirin lowered major vascular events, but increased major bleeding. There was no significant increase in intracranial bleeding or other critical organ bleeding. There was also a significant net benefit in favour of rivaroxaban plus aspirin and deaths were reduced by 23%. Thus, addition of rivaroxaban to aspirin has the potential to substantially reduce morbidity and mortality from coronary artery disease worldwide.FUNDING: Bayer AG.

Background Gastrointestinal (GI) bleeding is a common complication of oral anticoagulation. Objectives This study evaluated GI bleeding in patients who received at least 1 dose of the study drug in the on-treatment arm of 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. Methods The primary outcome was adjudicated GI bleeding reported from first to last drug dose + 2 days. Multivariable modeling was performed with pre-specified candidate predictors. Results Of 14,236 patients, 684 experienced GI bleeding during follow-up. These patients were older (median age 75 years vs. 73 years) and less often female. GI bleeding events occurred in the upper GI tract (48%), lower GI tract (23%), and rectum (29%) without differences between treatment arms. There was a significantly higher rate of major or nonmajor clinical GI bleeding in rivaroxaban- versus warfarin-treated patients (3.61 events/100 patient-years vs. 2.60 events/100 patient-years; hazard ratio: 1.42; 95% confidence interval: 1.22 to 1.66). Severe GI bleeding rates were similar between treatment arms (0.47 events/100 patient-years vs. 0.41 events/100 patient-years; p = 0.39; 0.01 events/100 patient-years vs. 0.04 events/100 patient-years; p = 0.15, respectively), and fatal GI bleeding events were rare (0.01 events/100 patient-years vs. 0.04 events/100 patient-years; 1 fatal events vs. 5 fatal events total). Independent clinical factors most strongly associated with GI bleeding were baseline anemia, history of GI bleeding, and long-term aspirin use. Conclusions In the ROCKET AF trial, rivaroxaban increased GI bleeding compared with warfarin. The absolute fatality rate from GI bleeding was low and similar in both treatment arms. Our results further illustrate the need for minimizing modifiable risk factors for GI bleeding in patients on oral anticoagulation.

Despite the global burden of cardiovascular disease, investment in cardiovascular drug development has stagnated over the past 2 decades, with relative underinvestment compared with other therapeutic areas. The reasons for this trend are multifactorial, but of primary concern is the high cost of conducting cardiovascular outcome trials in the current regulatory environment that demands a direct assessment of risks and benefits, using clinically-evident cardiovascular endpoints. To work toward consensus on improving the environment for cardiovascular drug development, stakeholders from academia, industry, regulatory bodies, and government agencies convened for a think tank meeting in July 2014 in Washington, DC. This paper summarizes the proceedings of the meeting and aims to delineate the current adverse trends in cardiovascular drug development, understand the key issues that underlie these trends within the context of a recognized need for a rigorous regulatory review process, and provide potential solutions to the problems identified.

Background Patients with peripheral artery disease (PAD) undergoing a lower-extremity revascularization are at heightened risk for ischemic cardiac and limb events. Although intensification of antithrombotic therapy after revascularization has demonstrated benefit in coronary disease populations, this approach has not been well studied or shown consistent benefit in PAD. Recent trial evidence demonstrated that a treatment strategy of rivaroxaban added to background antiplatelet therapy reduced ischemic risk in patients following recent acute coronary syndromes, as well as in patients with stable atherosclerotic vascular disease. Whether these benefits extend to the population of patients with symptomatic lower-extremity PAD undergoing revascularization is the objective of the VOYAGER PAD trial. Study design VOYAGER PAD is an international randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial to evaluate the efficacy and safety of rivaroxaban in symptomatic PAD patients undergoing a peripheral surgical and/or endovascular revascularization. Patients are randomized in a 1:1 ratio to either rivaroxaban 2.5 mg twice daily or placebo, on a background of low-dose aspirin (100 mg daily). In addition, the use of a limited course of P2Y12 inhibition is allowed at the discretion of the site investigator. The primary efficacy end point is a novel composite of myocardial infarction, ischemic stroke, cardiovascular death, acute limb ischemia, and major amputation of vascular etiology. The primary safety end point is major bleeding according to the Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction definition. Enrolment began in August 2015 and will complete randomization of at least 6,500 patients by January 2018. This event-driven trial is expected to observe outcomes over a mean patient follow-up of 30 months. Conclusions VOYAGER PAD is evaluating the efficacy of rivaroxaban added to background antiplatelet therapy to reduce major cardiovascular and limb ischemic vascular outcomes in the high-risk population of PAD patients undergoing peripheral revascularization.

Background Although implantation of cardiac implantable electronic devices ( CIED s) in patients receiving warfarin is well studied, limited data are available on the use of oral factor Xa inhibitors in this setting. Methods and Results Using 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 CIED s 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 CIED s. 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. Conclusions Bleeding 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 Registration URL : http://www.clinicaltrials.gov . Unique identifier: NCT 00403767.

The safety of intravenous thrombolysis in patients taking rivaroxaban has not been well established. We retrospectively analyzed the outcomes of all patients who received thrombolytic therapy in 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). A review of medical and adverse event records for patients receiving thrombolytic therapy while enrolled in ROCKET AF was performed to determine their baseline characteristics, indications for thrombolysis, and type of agent used. Safety end points were 30-day post-thrombolytic rates of stroke, bleeding, and mortality. A total of 28 patients in ROCKET AF received thrombolytic therapy, with 19 patients on rivaroxaban and 9 patients on warfarin. Ischemic stroke was the most common indication for thrombolysis (n = 10), and alteplase was the most commonly used fibrinolytic agent (n = 14). Of the 19 patients in the rivaroxaban group, there were 2 nonfatal bleeding events and 2 deaths, mostly occurring when thrombolytic therapy was administered within 48 hours of the last rivaroxaban dose. Of the 9 patients in the warfarin group, there was 1 nonfatal bleeding event and 3 deaths, most occurring when thrombolytic therapy was administered outside of 48 hours from the last warfarin dose. In conclusion, these observations suggest that careful assessment of the time since the last dose may be of clinical significance in patients on novel oral anticoagulants who require emergent thrombolysis.

Patients with impaired renal function have higher rates of bleeding and thromboembolism.1 Our group recently described the impact of worsening renal function on patients in the ROCKET AF study (Rivaroxaban Once-Daily, Oral, Direct Factor Xa Inhibition Compared With Vitamin K Antagonism for Prevention of Stroke and Embolism Trial in Atrial Fibrillation) (ClinicalTrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT00403767).2 In the process of publishing these findings, questions arose from reviewers regarding the influence of baseline creatinine clearance (CrCl) on trial outcomes in ROCKET AF.3 Bohula et al4 demonstrated higher relative rates of thromboembolism in those with CrCl >95 mL/min treated with edoxaban in the ENGAGE TIMI-AF 48 trial (Effective Anticoagulation with Factor Xa Next Generation in Atrial Fibrillation -Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction 48). We present the findings of an analysis using data from ROCKET AF3 to evaluate the consistency of treatment effect of rivaroxaban versus warfarin across the full range of baseline CrCl included in the trial. ROCKET AF included 14 264 patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation (AF). Patients were randomly assigned to 20 mg rivaroxaban once daily (15 mg once daily in patients with a CrCl of 30–49 mL/min) or dose-adjusted warfarin (target international normalized ratio 2.5, range 2.0–3.0). Further description of the ROCKET AF results and design has been published previously.3,5 All patients provided written informed consent, and approval by appropriate ethics committees was obtained at all sites. We included 14 221 patients with CrCl data who received the study drug. We examined the primary efficacy end point of stroke or systemic embolism (SE); the principal safety end point of major or nonmajor clinically relevant bleeding; the secondary efficacy outcomes of ischemic stroke, hemorrhagic stroke, …

Background: Patient-reported outcomes and satisfaction are important in both trials and clinical practice and may be associated with treatment adherence. Methods: ROCKET-AF was a randomized, double-blind trial of rivaroxaban versus warfarin for prevention of thromboembolism in patients with atrial fibrillation. In a substudy, we compared treatment satisfaction scores: Anti-Clot Treatment Scale (ACTS) and Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire for Medication version II (TSQM II). Patient-driven discontinuation included stopping study drugs due to withdrawal of consent, non-compliance, or loss to follow-up. Rates of discontinuation were calculated for participants above and below the median scores for each scale. Results: Of 14,264 patients in ROCKET AF, 1,181 (8.3%; median age 75 years; 34% women) patients completed both the ACTS and TSQM II questionnaires 4 weeks after starting the study drug. Over a median follow-up of 1.6 years, 450 premature study drug discontinuations occurred, 116 (26%) patient-driven. Patients less satisfied with treatment by the ACTS Benefits and Burdens and TSQM II scales had higher rates of study drug discontinuation ( Table ). Conclusions: Patient-reported satisfaction was lower in patients with study drug discontinuation, suggesting that collecting patient-reported outcomes early in clinical trials may guide interventions that improve adherence and clinical outcomes.

Non-dihydropyridine calcium channel blockers (non-DHP CCBs) possess combined P-glycoprotein and moderate CYP3A4 inhibition, which may lead to increased exposure of medications that are substrates for these metabolic pathways, such as rivaroxaban. We evaluated the use and outcomes of non-DHP CCBs in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) in 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). We assessed clinical outcomes in patients who received non-DHP CCBs and the impact on the efficacy and safety of rivaroxaban compared with warfarin. Stroke or noncentral nervous system (CNS) systemic embolism (SE), major or nonmajor clinically relevant (NMCR) bleeding, all-cause death, and major bleeding were compared according to non-DHP CCB use. At randomization, 1,308 patients (9.2%) were taking a non-DHP CCB. They were more likely to be women, have diabetes and COPD, and less likely to have heart failure and had a lower mean CHADS2 score (3.3 vs 3.5). Non-DHP CCB use was not associated with an increased risk of stroke/non-CNS SE (p = 0.11) or the composite outcome of NMCR or major bleeding (p = 0.087). Non-DHP CCB use was associated with an increased risk of major bleeding (adjusted hazard ratio 1.50, 95% CI 1.11 to 2.04) and intracranial hemorrhage (adjusted hazard ratio 2.84, 95% CI 1.53 to 5.29). No significant difference was observed in the primary efficacy (stroke or non-CNS SE; adjusted interaction p value = 0.38) or safety outcome (NMCR or major bleeding; adjusted interaction p value = 0.14) between rivaroxaban and warfarin with non-DHP CCB use. In conclusion, although the overall use of non-DHP CCBs was associated with an increased risk of major bleeding and intracranial hemorrhage, the use was not associated with a significant change in the safety or efficacy of rivaroxaban compared with warfarin observed in ROCKET AF.

The ROCKET AF study evaluated once-daily rivaroxaban versus dose-adjusted warfarin for the prevention of stroke and systemic embolism in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF). In this analysis, we compared rivaroxaban with warfarin in patients with AF from China, East Asia, and the rest of the world (ROW).We assessed baseline demographics and interaction of treatment effects of rivaroxaban versus warfarin among patients from mainland China, other East Asian countries, and ROW. Of the 14,236 patients enrolled in the per-protocol population, 495 were from mainland China, 433 from other East-Asian regions, and 13,308 from the rest of the world (ROW). At baseline, patients from China had significantly higher rates of previous stroke/transient ischemic attack (TIA) compared with patients from other East Asian regions and ROW (79.6%, 44.6%, 51.6% respectively; p0.0001) and lower rates of VKA use (33.7%, 66.7%, 63.4%, respectively; p0.0001). The rates of stroke or systemic embolism among those on warfarin while on treatment was 5.23% in patients from China, 1.82% in those from other East Asian regions, and 2.07% from ROW; on rivaroxaban, the rates were 2.29% in patients from China, 1.86% in those from other east Asian regions, and 1.67% from ROW. There were no significant treatment-by-region interactions for any efficacy or safety outcome (all p0.12). Numerically higher rates of intracranial bleeding were seen in patients from China receiving warfarin versus rivaroxaban.In patients from China, rates of intracranial hemorrhage were numerically lower among those receiving rivaroxaban and consistent with the overall trial.URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov/. Unique identifier: NCT00403767.

Summary Background Patients with venous thromboembolism and cancer have a substantial risk of recurrent venous thromboembolism and bleeding during anticoagulant therapy. Although monotherapy with low-molecular-weight heparin is recommended in these patients, in clinical practice many patients with venous thromboembolism and cancer do not receive this treatment. We aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of a single-drug regimen with oral rivaroxaban compared with enoxaparin followed by vitamin K antagonists, in the subgroup of patients with cancer enrolled in the EINSTEIN-DVT and EINSTEIN-PE randomised controlled trials. Methods We did a subgroup analysis of patients with active cancer (either at baseline or diagnosed during the study), a history of cancer, or no cancer who were enrolled in the EINSTEIN-DVT and EINSTEIN-PE trials. Eligible patients with deep-vein thrombosis (EINSTEIN-DVT) or pulmonary embolism (EINSTEIN-PE) were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive rivaroxaban (15 mg twice daily for 21 days, followed by 20 mg once daily) or standard therapy (enoxaparin 1·0 mg/kg twice daily and warfarin or acenocoumarol; international normalised ratio 2·0–3·0). Randomisation with a computerised voice-response system was stratified according to country and intended treatment duration (3, 6, or 12 months). The prespecified primary efficacy and safety outcomes of both the trials and this subanalysis were symptomatic recurrent venous thromboembolism and clinically relevant bleeding, respectively. We did efficacy and mortality analyses in the intention-to-treat population, and bleeding analyses for time spent receiving treatment plus 2 days in the safety population (all patients who received at least one dose of study drug). The EINSTEIN-DVT and EINSTEIN-PE studies are registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, numbers NCT00440193 and NCT00439777. Findings In patients with active cancer (diagnosed at baseline or during treatment), recurrent venous thromboembolism occurred in 16 (5%) of 354 patients allocated to rivaroxaban and 20 (7%) of 301 patients allocated to enoxaparin and vitamin K antagonist (hazard ratio [HR] 0·67, 95% CI 0·35 to 1·30). Clinically relevant bleeding occurred in 48 (14%) of 353 patients receiving rivaroxaban and in 49 (16%) of 298 patients receiving standard therapy (HR 0·80, 95% CI 0·54 to 1·20). Major bleeding occurred in eight (2%) of 353 patients receiving rivaroxaban and in 15 (5%) of 298 patients receiving standard therapy (HR 0·42, 95% CI 0·18 to 0·99). The overall frequency of recurrent venous thromboembolism in patients with only a history of cancer (five [2%] of 233 patients in the rivaroxaban group vs five [2%] of 236 in the standard therapy group; HR 0·98, 95% CI 0·28–3·43) was similar to that of patients without cancer (65 [2%] of 3563 vs 70 [2%] of 3594, respectively; HR 0·93, 95% CI 0·66–1·30), but the frequency was increased in patients with active cancer at baseline (six [2%] of 258 vs eight [4%] of 204, respectively; HR 0·62, 95% CI 0·21–1·79) and most markedly increased in patients whose diagnosis of cancer was made during the study (ten [10%] of 96 vs 12 [12%] of 97, respectively; HR 0·80, 95% CI 0·34–1·88). The overall frequency of major bleeding in patients with only a history of cancer (one [ vs four [2%] patients in the standard therapy group; HR 0·23, 95% CI 0·03–2·06) was similar to that of patients without cancer (31 [1%] vs 53 [1%], respectively; HR 0·58, 95% CI 0·37–0·91), but was increased in patients with active cancer at baseline (five [2%] vs eight [4%], respectively; HR 0·47, 95% CI 0·15–1·45) and was highest in those with cancer diagnosed during the study (three [3%] vs seven [7%], respectively; HR 0·33, 95% CI 0·08–1·31). Interpretation In patients with active cancer and venous thromboembolism, rivaroxaban had similar efficacy to prevent recurrence of venous thromboembolism and reduced the number major bleeding events compared with treatment with enoxaparin and a vitamin K antagonist, although there was no difference between groups for clinically relevant bleeding. Based on these results, a head-to-head comparison of rivaroxaban with long-term low-molecular-weight heparin in patients with cancer is warranted. Funding Bayer HealthCare Pharmaceuticals and Janssen Research & Development.

Aim Anticoagulation prophylaxis for stroke is recommended for at-risk patients with either persistent or paroxysmal atrial fibrillation (AF). We compared outcomes in patients with persistent vs. paroxysmal AF receiving oral anticoagulation. Methods and results Patients randomized in 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) trial ( n = 14 264) were grouped by baseline AF category: paroxysmal or persistent. Multivariable adjustment was performed to compare thrombo-embolic events, bleeding, and death between groups, in high-risk subgroups, and across treatment assignment (rivaroxaban or warfarin). Of 14 062 patients, 11 548 (82%) had persistent AF and 2514 (18%) had paroxysmal AF. Patients with persistent AF were marginally older (73 vs. 72, P = 0.03), less likely female (39 vs. 45%, P < 0.0001), and more likely to have previously used vitamin K antagonists (64 vs. 56%, P < 0.0001) compared with patients with paroxysmal AF. In patients randomized to warfarin, time in therapeutic range was similar (58 vs. 57%, P = 0.94). Patients with persistent AF had higher adjusted rates of stroke or systemic embolism (2.18 vs. 1.73 events per 100-patient-years, P = 0.048) and all-cause mortality (4.78 vs. 3.52, P = 0.006). Rates of major bleeding were similar (3.55 vs. 3.31, P = 0.77). Rates of stroke or systemic embolism in both types of AF did not differ by treatment assignment (rivaroxaban vs. warfarin, P interaction = 0.6). Conclusion In patients with AF at moderate-to-high risk of stroke receiving anticoagulation, those with persistent AF have a higher risk of thrombo-embolic events and worse survival compared with paroxysmal AF.

Background and Purpose— In Rivaroxaban Once Daily Oral Direct Factor Xa Inhibitor Compared With Vitamin K Antagonism for Prevention of Stroke and Embolism Trial in Atrial Fibrillation (ROCKET AF) trial, rivaroxaban was noninferior to dose-adjusted warfarin in preventing stroke or systemic embolism among patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation at moderate to high stroke risk. Because of differences in patient demographics, epidemiology, and stroke risk management in East Asia, outcomes and relative effects of rivaroxaban versus warfarin were assessed to determine consistency among East Asians versus other ROCKET AF participants. Methods— Baseline demographics and interaction of treatment effects of rivaroxaban and warfarin among patients within East Asia and outside were assessed. Results— A total of 932 (6.5%) ROCKET AF participants resided in East Asia. At baseline, East Asians had lower weight, creatinine clearance, and prior vitamin K antagonist use; higher prevalence of prior stroke; and less congestive heart failure and prior myocardial infarction than other participants. Despite higher absolute event rates for efficacy and safety outcomes in East Asians, the relative efficacy of rivaroxaban (20 mg once daily; 15 mg once daily for creatinine clearance of 30–49 mL/min) versus warfarin with respect to the primary efficacy end point (stroke/systemic embolism) was consistent among East Asians and non–East Asians (interaction P =0.666). Relative event rates for the major or nonmajor clinically relevant bleeding in patients treated with rivaroxaban and warfarin were consistent among East Asians and non–East Asians (interaction P =0.867). Conclusions— Observed relative efficacy and safety of rivaroxaban versus warfarin were similar among patients within and outside East Asia. Rivaroxaban, 20 mg once daily, is an alternative to warfarin for stroke prevention in East Asians with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation. Clinical Trial Registration— URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov . Unique identifier: NCT00123456.

Antiarrhythmic drugs (AADs) and anticoagulation are mainstays of atrial fibrillation (AF) treatment.To study the use and outcomes of AAD therapy in anticoagulated patients with AF.Patients in the Rivaroxaban Once Daily Oral Direct Factor Xa Inhibition Compared with Vitamin K Antagonism for Prevention of Stroke and Embolism Trial in Atrial Fibrillation trial (N = 14,264) were stratified by AAD use at baseline: amiodarone, other AAD, or no AAD. Multivariable adjustment was performed to compare stroke, bleeding, and death across AAD groups as well as across treatment assignment (rivaroxaban or warfarin).Of 14,264 patients randomized, 1681 (11.8%) were treated with an AAD (1144 [8%] with amiodarone and 537 [3.8%] with other AADs). Amiodarone-treated patients were less often female (38% vs 48%), had more persistent AF (64% vs 40%), and more concomitant heart failure (71% vs 41%) than were patients receiving other AADs. Patients receiving no AAD more closely resembled amiodarone-treated patients. Time in therapeutic range was significantly lower in warfarin-treated patients receiving amiodarone than in those receiving no AAD (50% vs 58%; P.0001). Compared with no AAD, neither amiodarone (adjusted hazard ratio [HR] 0.98; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.74-1.31; P = .9) nor other AADs (adjusted HR 0.66; 95% CI 0.37-1.17; P = .15) were associated with increased mortality. Similar results were observed for embolic and bleeding outcomes. Treatment effects of rivaroxaban vs warfarin in patients receiving no AAD were consistent with results from the overall trial (primary end point: adjusted HR 0.82; 95% CI 0.68-0.98; Pinteraction = .06; safety end point: adjusted HR 1.12; 95% CI 0.90-1.24; Pinteraction = .33).Treatment with AADs was not associated with increased morbidity or mortality in anticoagulated patients with AF. The effect of amiodarone on outcomes in patients receiving rivaroxaban requires further investigation.

Aims There are no data regarding management and outcomes of major bleeding events in patients treated with oral factor Xa inhibitors. Methods and results Using data from ROCKET AF, we analysed the management and outcomes of major bleeding overall and according to the randomized treatment. During a median follow-up of 1.9 years, 779 (5.5%) patients experienced major bleeding at a rate of 3.52 events/100 patient-years with a similar event rate in each arm ( n = 395 rivaroxaban vs. n = 384 warfarin). The median number of transfused packed red blood cells (PRBC) per episode was similar in both arms [2 (25th, 75th: 2, 4) units]. Overall, few transfusions of whole blood ( n = 14), platelets ( n = 10), or cryoprecipitate ( n = 2) were used. Transfusion of fresh frozen plasma (FFP) was significantly less in the rivaroxaban arm ( n = 45 vs. n = 81 units) after adjustment for covariates [odds ratio (OR) 0.43 (95% CI 0.29–0.66); P < 0.0001]. Prothrombin complex concentrates (PCC) were administered less in the rivaroxaban arm ( n = 4 vs. n = 9). Outcomes after major bleeding, including stroke or non-central nervous system embolism (4.7% rivaroxaban vs. 5.4% warfarin; HR 0.89; 95% CI 0.42–1.88) and all-cause death (20.4% rivaroxaban vs. 26.1% warfarin; HR 0.69, 95% CI 0.46–1.04) were similar in patients treated with rivaroxaban and warfarin (interaction P = 0.51 and 0.11). Conclusion Among high-risk patients with atrial fibrillation who experienced major bleeding in ROCKET AF, the use of FFP and PCC was less among those allocated rivaroxaban compared with warfarin. However, use of PRBCs and outcomes after bleeding were similar among patients randomized to rivaroxaban or to warfarin.

Objectives This study sought to report additional safety results 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). Background The ROCKET AF trial demonstrated similar risks of stroke/systemic embolism and major/nonmajor clinically relevant bleeding (principal safety endpoint) with rivaroxaban and warfarin. Methods The risk of the principal safety and component bleeding endpoints with rivaroxaban versus warfarin were compared, and factors associated with major bleeding were examined in a multivariable model. Results The principal safety endpoint was similar in the rivaroxaban and warfarin groups (14.9 vs. 14.5 events/100 patient-years; hazard ratio: 1.03; 95% confidence interval: 0.96 to 1.11). Major bleeding risk increased with age, but there were no differences between treatments in each age category ( Conclusions Rivaroxaban and warfarin had similar risk for major/nonmajor clinically relevant bleeding. Age, sex, DBP, prior GI bleeding, prior acetylsalicylic acid use, and anemia were associated with the risk of major bleeding. (An Efficacy and Safety Study of Rivaroxaban With Warfarin for the Prevention of Stroke and Non-Central Nervous System Systemic Embolism in Patients With Non-Valvular Atrial Fibrillation: NCT00403767)

Bennett Levitan,1 Zhong Yuan,1 Alexander GG Turpie,2 Richard J Friedman,3 Martin Homering,4 Jesse A Berlin,1 Scott D Berkowitz,5 Rachel B Weinstein,1 Peter M DiBattiste61Janssen Research & Development, LLC, Titusville, NJ, USA; 2Hamilton Health Sciences McMaster Clinic, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada; 3Charleston Orthopaedic Associates, Charleston, SC, USA; 4Bayer HealthCare, Berlin, Germany; 5Bayer HealthCare Pharmaceuticals, Whippany, NJ, USA; 6Janssen Research & Development, Raritan, NJ, USAPurpose: Venous thromboembolism is a common complication after major orthopedic surgery. When prescribing anticoagulant prophylaxis, clinicians weigh the benefits of thromboprophylaxis against bleeding risk and other adverse events. Previous benefit–risk analyses of the REgulation of Coagulation in ORthopaedic surgery to prevent Deep vein thrombosis and pulmonary embolism (RECORD) randomized clinical studies of rivaroxaban versus enoxaparin after total hip (THA) or knee (TKA) arthroplasty generally used pooled THA and TKA results, counted fatal bleeding as both an efficacy and a safety event, and included the active and placebo-controlled portions of RECORD2, which might confound benefit–risk assessments. We conducted a post hoc analysis without these constraints to assess benefit–risk for rivaroxaban versus enoxaparin in the RECORD studies.Patients and methods: Data from the safety population of the two THA and two TKA studies were pooled separately. The primary analysis compared the temporal course of event rates and rate differences between rivaroxaban and enoxaparin prophylaxis for symptomatic venous thromboembolism plus all-cause mortality (efficacy events) versus nonfatal major bleeding (safety events). Additionally, these rates were used to derive measures of net clinical benefit, number needed to treat (NNT), and number needed to harm (NNH) for these two end points.Results: After THA or TKA, and compared with enoxaparin, rivaroxaban therapy resulted in more efficacy events prevented than safety events caused, with benefits exceeding harms early and throughout treatment and follow-up. Relative to enoxaparin, rivaroxaban treatment prevented six efficacy events per harm event caused for THA, with NNT =262/NNH =1,711. For TKA, rivaroxaban treatment prevented four to five efficacy events per harm event caused, with NNT =102/NNH =442. Sensitivity analysis that included surgical-site bleeding resulted in NNH =345 for THA and NNH =208 for TKA.Conclusion: In the RECORD studies, considering death, symptomatic venous thromboembolism, and major bleeding, rivaroxaban resulted in greater benefits than harms compared with enoxaparin. When incorporating surgical-site bleeding, rivaroxaban also results in greater benefit than harm for TKA and is balanced with enoxaparin for THA.Keywords: VTE, DVT, PE, thromboprophylaxis, total hip arthroplasty, total knee arthroplasty

Background: Up to 70% of patients who undergo total hip or total knee arthroplasty receive blood transfusions. Using data from more than 12,000 patients assessed in the Phase-III RECORD (Regulation of Coagulation in Orthopedic Surgery to Prevent Deep Venous Thrombosis and Pulmonary Embolism) studies, we investigated whether allogeneic blood transfusion increases the risk of postoperative infection compared with autologous blood transfusion or no transfusion. Methods: A post hoc analysis of the pooled RECORD data stratified patients into three groups according to the type of blood transfusion that they received: no transfusion (n = 6313), autologous blood transfusion (n = 1902), and allogeneic blood transfusion with or without autologous blood transfusion (n = 3962). The types of postoperative infection were recorded and included lower or upper respiratory tract and lung infection, bone and joint infection, wound inflammation or infection, urinary tract infection, and other infections. Results: The rates of infection in patients receiving no transfusion or autologous blood transfusion were similar; therefore, data from these two groups were combined. The rate of any infection was 9.9% (392 of 3962) in patients receiving allogeneic blood transfusion and 7.9% (646 of 8215) in patients not receiving allogeneic blood transfusion with or without autologous blood transfusion (p = 0.003). The rates of lower or upper respiratory tract and lung infection (2.1% [eighty-five of 3962] versus 1.3% [109 of 8215]; p = 0.002) and of wound inflammation or infection (2.4% [ninety-four of 3962] versus 1.7% [138 of 8215]; p = 0.046) were significantly higher in patients receiving allogeneic blood transfusion compared with patients not receiving allogeneic blood transfusion. When comparing patients who had received allogeneic blood transfusion with those who had not received allogeneic blood transfusion, the rates of bone and joint infection (0.4% [fourteen of 3962] versus 0.2% [eighteen of 8215]; p = 0.056), of urinary tract infection (3.1% [123 of 3962] versus 2.5% [209 of 8215]; p = 0.551), and of other infections (3.0% [120 of 3962] versus 2.7% [225 of 8215]; p = 0.308) were not significantly different. Conclusions: The rates of any infection, lower or upper respiratory tract and lung infection, and wound inflammation or infection were significantly increased after elective total hip or total knee arthroplasty in patients receiving allogeneic blood transfusion compared with those receiving autologous blood transfusion or no blood transfusion. Level of Evidence: Prognostic Level III. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Aims Adding rivaroxaban to aspirin in patients with stable atherosclerotic disease reduces the recurrence of cardiovascular disease (CVD) but increases the risk of major bleeding. The aim of this study was to estimate the individual lifetime treatment benefit and harm of adding low-dose rivaroxaban to aspirin in patients with stable cardiovascular disease. Methods and results Patients with established CVD from the COMPASS trial (n = 27 390) and SMART prospective cohort study (n = 8139) were used. Using the pre-existing lifetime SMART-REACH model for recurrent CVD, and a newly developed Fine and Gray competing risk-adjusted lifetime model for major bleeding, individual treatment effects from adding low-dose rivaroxaban to aspirin in patients with stable CVD were estimated, expressed in terms of (i) life-years free of stroke or myocardial infarction (MI) gained; and (ii) life-years free from major bleeding lost. Calibration of the SMART-REACH model for prediction of recurrent CVD events in the COMPASS study was good. The major bleeding risk model as derived in the COMPASS trial showed good external calibration in the SMART cohort. Predicted individual gain in life expectancy free of stroke or MI from added low-dose rivaroxaban had a median of 16 months (range 1–48 months), while predicted individualized lifetime lost in terms of major bleeding had a median of 2 months (range 0–20 months). Conclusion There is a wide distribution in lifetime gain and harm from adding low-dose rivaroxaban to aspirin in individual patients with stable CVD. Using these lifetime models, benefits and bleeding risk can be weighed for each individual patient, which could facilitate treatment decisions in clinical practice.

Importance The NAVIGATE ESUS randomized clinical trial found that 15 mg of rivaroxaban per day does not reduce stroke compared with aspirin in patients with embolic stroke of undetermined source (ESUS); however, it substantially reduces stroke risk in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF). Objective To analyze whether rivaroxaban is associated with a reduction of recurrent stroke among patients with ESUS who have an increased risk of AF. Design, Setting, and Participants Participants were stratified by predictors of AF, including left atrial diameter, frequency of premature atrial contractions, and HAVOC score, a validated scheme using clinical features. Treatment interactions with these predictors were assessed. Participants were enrolled between December 2014 and September 2017, and analysis began March 2018. Intervention Rivaroxaban treatment vs aspirin. Main Outcomes and Measures Risk of ischemic stroke. Results Among 7112 patients with a mean (SD) age of 67 (9.8) years, the mean (SD) HAVOC score was 2.6 (1.8), the mean (SD) left atrial diameter was 3.8 (1.4) cm (n = 4022), and the median (interquartile range) daily frequency of premature atrial contractions was 48 (13-222). Detection of AF during follow-up increased for each tertile of HAVOC score: 2.3% (score, 0-2), 3.0% (score, 3), and 5.8% (score, >3); however, neither tertiles of the HAVOC score nor premature atrial contractions frequency impacted the association of rivaroxaban with recurrent ischemic stroke (P for interaction = .67 and .96, respectively). Atrial fibrillation annual incidence increased for each tertile of left atrial diameter (2.0%, 3.6%, and 5.2%) and for each tertile of premature atrial contractions frequency (1.3%, 2.9%, and 7.0%). Among the predefined subgroup of patients with a left atrial diameter of more than 4.6 cm (9% of overall population), the risk of ischemic stroke was lower among the rivaroxaban group (1.7% per year) compared with the aspirin group (6.5% per year) (hazard ratio, 0.26; 95% CI, 0.07-0.94;Pfor interaction = .02). Conclusions and Relevance The HAVOC score, left atrial diameter, and premature atrial contraction frequency predicted subsequent clinical AF. Rivaroxaban was associated with a reduced risk of recurrent stroke among patients with ESUS and moderate or severe left atrial enlargement; however, this needs to be independently confirmed before influencing clinical practice.

Morbid obesity has been shown to be a risk factor for increased complications after THA and TKA; however, large studies that would determine the effect size are lacking.The purposes of this study were to determine whether morbid obesity increased the risk of: (1) venous thromboembolism (VTE), (2) bleeding, (3) other adverse events, and (4) infections during the early postoperative period (up to 6 to 8 weeks) after THA or TKA?Data from the REgulation of Coagulation in ORthopaedic surgery to prevent Deep vein thrombosis and pulmonary embolism (RECORD) clinical trial program of rivaroxaban for prevention of VTE after THA or TKA were analyzed retrospectively. Data for 12,355 patients were reviewed to identify complication rates in morbidly obese patients (BMI≥40 kg/m2) compared with patients with a BMI less than 40 kg/m2. Explorative analyses compared the rates of asymptomatic deep vein thrombosis (DVT), symptomatic DVT, symptomatic pulmonary embolism, bleeding, and other adverse events by BMI group.There were no significant differences in asymptomatic DVT, symptomatic DVT, symptomatic pulmonary embolism, or bleeding, but there were increases in other adverse events (including receipt of blood transfusion, erythema, peripheral edema, diarrhea, gastrointestinal or abdominal pain) and infections (including respiratory tract or lung infections, wound inflammation or infection, and extrasurgical-site infections), in patients with a BMI of 40 kg/m2 or greater compared with patients with a BMI less than 40 kg/m2.After THA or TKA, morbid obesity is not associated with an increased risk of VTE or bleeding but is associated with increased early postoperative complications, including erythema, peripheral edema, diarrhea and gastrointestinal or abdominal pain, wound inflammation or infection, extrasurgical-site infections, and respiratory tract or lung infections.Level III, therapeutic study. See Guidelines for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Background— To evaluate the previously reported excess of thromboembolic events during the 30 days after the end of study (EOS) visit when participants transitioned from blinded therapy to open-label vitamin K antagonist. Methods and Results— At the EOS visit, open-label vitamin K antagonist was recommended, and the international normalized ratio (INR) was not to be measured until 3 days later to preserve blinding. We analyzed transition strategies, clinical outcomes, and INR values. Event rates are per 100 patient-years. A total of 9248 (65%) participants were taking study drug at EOS, and, between days 3 and 30, an excess of stroke and systemic embolic events were observed in participants assigned to rivaroxaban (rivaroxaban 22 events, event rate 6.42; warfarin 6 events, event rate 1.73; hazard ratio, 3.72; 95% confidence interval, 1.51–9.16; P =0.0044). No INR values were reported for ≈5% of participants transitioned to warfarin. By 30 days after EOS, 83% of the warfarin group and 52% of the rivaroxaban group had ≥1 therapeutic INR value. Median time to first therapeutic INR was 3 days in the warfarin group and 13 days in the rivaroxaban group. Conclusions— The excess of events at EOS was likely because of a period of inadequate anticoagulation in rivaroxaban participants switched to vitamin K antagonist therapy. If transition from rivaroxaban to vitamin K antagonist is needed, timely monitoring and careful dosing should be used to ensure consistent and adequate anticoagulation.

Background— In 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), rivaroxaban was noninferior to warfarin for the prevention of stroke and systemic embolic events and significantly reduced intracranial bleeding in patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation. We explore the safety and efficacy of rivaroxaban in patients with heart failure (HF). Methods and Results— A total of 9033 (63.7%) patients had HF. The primary efficacy analysis was rates of stroke or systemic embolism (per 100 patient-years) by intention to treat. The safety outcomes were major or nonmajor clinically relevant bleeding and hemorrhagic stroke during treatment. Patients with HF were younger (72 versus 74 years), more likely to have persistent atrial fibrillation (83.0% versus 77.6%), and had higher mean CHADS 2 scores (3.7 versus 3.1). The efficacy of rivaroxaban compared with warfarin was similar in patients with HF (1.90 versus 2.09) and without HF (2.10 versus 2.54; P -interaction=0.62). The risk of major or nonmajor clinically relevant bleeding with rivaroxaban was similar to warfarin in patients with HF (14.22 versus 14.02) and without HF (16.12 versus 15.35; P -interaction=0.99). A reduction in hemorrhagic stroke was observed with rivaroxaban in patients with HF as in the overall trial (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.38; 95% confidence interval, 0.19–0.76; P -interaction=0.067). Among patients with HF, the efficacy of rivaroxaban was similar, irrespective of ejection fraction P -interaction=0.38), New York Heart Association class I-II versus III-IV ( P -interaction=0.68), HF preserved or reduced ejection fraction ( P -interaction=0.35), or CHADS 2 score 2 versus ≥3 ( P -interaction=0.48). Conclusions— Treatment-related outcomes were similar in patients with and without HF and across HF subgroups. These findings support the use of rivaroxaban as an alternative to warfarin in patients with atrial fibrillation and HF. Clinical Trial Registration— URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov . Unique identifier: NCT00403767.

The development of rivaroxaban (XARELTO®) is an important new medical advance in the field of oral anticoagulation. Thrombosis-mediated conditions constitute a major burden for patients, healthcare systems, and society. For more than 60 years, the prevention and treatment of these conditions have been dominated by oral vitamin K antagonists (such as warfarin) and the injectable heparins. Thrombosis can lead to several conditions, including deep vein thrombosis, pulmonary embolism, myocardial infarction, stroke, and/or death. Prevention and treatment of thrombosis with an effective, convenient-to-use oral anticoagulant with a favorable safety profile is critical, especially in an aging society in which the risk of thrombosis, and the potential for bleeding complications, is increasing. Rivaroxaban acts to prevent and treat thrombosis by potently inhibiting coagulation Factor Xa in the blood. Factor Xa converts prothrombin to thrombin, which initiates the formation of blood clots by converting fibrinogen to clot-forming fibrin and leads to platelet activation. After a large and novel clinical development program in over 75,000 patients to date, rivaroxaban has received approval for multiple indications in the United States, European Union, and other countries worldwide to prevent and treat several thrombosis-mediated conditions. This review will highlight some of the unique aspects of the rivaroxaban development program.

Objectives The purpose of this study was to understand the possible risk of discontinuation in the context of clinical care. Background Rivaroxaban is noninferior to warfarin for preventing stroke in atrial fibrillation patients. Concerns exist regarding possible increased risk of stroke and non–central nervous system (CNS) thromboembolic events early after discontinuation of rivaroxaban. Methods We undertook a post-hoc analysis of 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, n = 14,624) for stroke or non-CNS embolism within 30 days after temporary interruptions of 3 days or more, early permanent study drug discontinuation, and end-of-study transition to open-label therapy. Results Stroke and non-CNS embolism occurred at similar rates after temporary interruptions (rivaroxaban: n = 9, warfarin: n = 8, 6.20 vs. 5.05/100 patient-years, hazard ratio [HR]: 1.28, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.49 to 3.31, p = 0.62) and after early permanent discontinuation (rivaroxaban: n = 42, warfarin: n = 36, 25.60 vs. 23.28/100 patient-years, HR: 1.10, 95% CI: 0.71 to 1.72, p = 0.66). Patients transitioning to open-label therapy at the end of the study had more strokes with rivaroxaban (n = 22) versus warfarin (n = 6, 6.42 vs. 1.73/100 patient-years, HR: 3.72, 95% CI: 1.51 to 9.16, p = 0.0044) and took longer to reach a therapeutic international normalized ratio with rivaroxaban versus warfarin. All thrombotic events within 30 days of any study drug cessation (including stroke, non-CNS embolism, myocardial infarction, and vascular death) were similar between groups (HR: 1.02, 95% CI: 0.83 to 1.26, p = 0.85). Conclusions In atrial fibrillation patients who temporarily or permanently discontinued anticoagulation, the risk of stroke or non-CNS embolism was similar with rivaroxaban or warfarin. An increased risk of stroke and non-CNS embolism was observed in rivaroxaban-treated patients compared with warfarin-treated patients after the end of the study, underscoring the importance of therapeutic anticoagulation coverage during such a transition.

Background Patients receiving anticoagulants could be at higher risk of compressive haematoma with neuraxial anaesthesia use. The phase III RECORD programme compared rivaroxaban with enoxaparin for prevention of venous thromboembolism after total hip or knee replacement surgery in more than 12,500 patients. This observational analysis evaluated the risk of neuraxial haematoma after neuraxial anaesthesia in patients receiving rivaroxaban or enoxaparin using pooled RECORD1–4 data. Methods The incidences of intraspinal bleeding or haemorrhagic puncture were recorded as part of the criteria for major bleeding (the primary safety outcome in the RECORD studies). Incidences of allogeneic transfusion and venous thromboembolism by type of anaesthesia were also recorded. Results No compressive haematomas occurred in rivaroxaban-treated patients (10 mg once daily started 6–8 h after surgery) who underwent neuraxial anaesthesia (n = 4086). Among enoxaparin-treated patients (n = 4090), one compressive spinal haematoma requiring laminectomy occurred after epidural catheter removal in an elderly female patient with renal insufficiency undergoing total knee replacement. Total venous thromboembolism rates did not differ according to type of anaesthesia. Conclusion Although no issues were observed with the use of neuraxial anaesthesia in this population of 4086 patients receiving rivaroxaban after total hip or knee replacement, it is important to remain aware of the risk of compressive haematoma. This may be of particular concern in elderly patients with renal insufficiency receiving an anticoagulant predominantly eliminated via the kidneys.

We investigated stroke outcomes in normal weight (body mass index [BMI] 18.50 to 24.99 kg/m2), overweight (BMI 25.00 to 29.99 kg/m2), and obese (BMI ≥30 kg/m2) patients with atrial fibrillation treated with rivaroxaban and warfarin. We compared the incidence of stroke and systemic embolic events as well as bleeding events in normal weight (n = 3,289), overweight (n = 5,535), and obese (n = 5,206) patients in a post hoc analysis of the Rivaroxaban Once Daily Oral Direct Factor Xa Inhibition Compared with Vitamin K Antagonism for Prevention of Stroke and Embolism Trial in Atrial Fibrillation trial. Stroke and systemic embolic event rates per 100 patient-years were 2.93 in the normal weight group (reference group), 2.28 in the overweight group (adjusted hazard ratio [HR] 0.81, 95% CI 0.66 to 0.99, p = 0.04) and 1.88 in the obese group (adjusted HR 0.69, 95% CI 0.55 to 0.86, p

Background: Despite rapid clinical adoption of novel anticoagulants, it is unknown whether outcomes differ among patients with worsening renal function (WRF) taking these new drugs compared with warfarin. We aimed to determine whether the primary efficacy (stroke or systemic embolism) and safety (major bleeding and nonmajor clinically relevant bleeding) end points from the ROCKET AF trial (Rivaroxaban Once-Daily, Oral, Direct Factor Xa Inhibition Compared With Vitamin K Antagonism for Prevention of Stroke and Embolism Trial in Atrial Fibrillation trial) differed among participants with WRF taking rivaroxaban and those taking warfarin. Methods: After excluding patients without at least 1 follow-up creatinine measurement (n=1624), we included all remaining patients (n=12 612) randomly assigned to either rivaroxaban or dose-adjusted warfarin. On-treatment WRF (a decrease of >20% from screening creatinine clearance measurement at any time point during the study) was evaluated as a time-dependent covariate in Cox proportional hazards models. Results: Baseline characteristics were generally similar between patients with stable renal function (n=9292) and WRF (n=3320). Rates of stroke or systemic embolism, myocardial infarction, and bleeding were also similar, but WRF patients experienced a higher incidence of vascular death versus stable renal function (2.21 versus 1.41 events per 100 patient-years; P =0.026). WRF patients who were randomized to receive rivaroxaban had a reduction in stroke or systemic embolism compared with those taking warfarin (1.54 versus 3.25 events per 100 patient-years) that was not seen in patients with stable renal function who were randomized to receive rivaroxaban ( P =0.050 for interaction). There was no difference in major or nonmajor clinically relevant bleeding among WRF patients randomized to warfarin versus rivaroxaban. Conclusions: Among patients with on-treatment WRF, rivaroxaban was associated with lower rates of stroke and systemic embolism compared with warfarin, without an increase in the composite bleeding end point. Clinical Trial Registration: URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov . Unique identifier: NCT00403767.

WOS: 000445997000001, PubMed: 31008276, Background: Embolic strokes of undetermined source comprise up to 20% of ischemic strokes. The stroke recurrence rate is substantial with aspirin, widely used for secondary prevention. The New Approach riVaroxaban Inhibition of Factor Xa in a Global trial versus ASA to prevenT Embolism in Embolic Stroke of Undetermined Source international trial will compare the efficacy and safety of rivaroxaban, an oral factor Xa inhibitor, versus aspirin for secondary prevention in patients with recent embolic strokes of undetermined source. Main hypothesis: In patients with recent embolic strokes of undetermined source, rivaroxaban 15 mg once daily will reduce the risk of recurrent stroke (both ischemic and hemorrhagic) and systemic embolism (primary efficacy outcome) compared with aspirin 100 mg once daily. Design: Double-blind, randomized trial in patients with embolic strokes of undetermined source, defined as nonlacunar cryptogenic ischemic stroke, enrolled between seven days and six months from the qualifying stroke. The planned sample size of 7000 participants will be recruited from approximately 480 sites in 31 countries between 2014 and 2017 and followed for a mean of about two years until at least 450 primary efficacy outcome events have occurred. The primary safety outcome is major bleeding. Two substudies assess (1) the relative effect of treatments on MRI-determined covert brain infarcts and (2) the biological underpinnings of embolic strokes of undetermined source using genomic and biomarker approaches. Summary: The New Approach riVaroxaban Inhibition of Factor Xa in a Global trial versus ASA to prevenT Embolism in Embolic Stroke of Undetermined Source trial is evaluating the benefits and risks of rivaroxaban for secondary stroke prevention in embolic strokes of undetermined source patients. Main results are anticipated in 2018., Bayer Pharma AG; Janssen Research and Development LLC; Canadian Stroke Prevention Intervention Network, The author(s) disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: Bayer Pharma AG and Janssen Research and Development LLC; partial funding for the Biomarker, Genetics, Gene Expression Substudy from the Canadian Stroke Prevention Intervention Network.

Thromboembolic conditions present a considerable challenge to healthcare services because they are associated with substantial morbidity and mortality. The mainstays of prevention and treatment are anticoagulants and antiplatelet agents. Established anticoagulants have drawbacks that make their use difficult to manage and sustain. This has stimulated the search for new oral anticoagulants that are more convenient and yet still effective. This paper describes the development and future potential of rivaroxaban (Xarelto; Bayer Schering Pharma AG, Berlin, Germany)-the first oral, direct Factor Xa inhibitor to be approved for clinical use in the prevention of venous thromboembolism in adult patients undergoing elective hip or knee replacement surgery.

Summary Background Prophylaxis for venous thromboembolism is recommended for at least 10 days after total knee arthroplasty; oral regimens could enable shorter hospital stays. We aimed to test the efficacy and safety of oral rivaroxaban for the prevention of venous thromboembolism after total knee arthroplasty. Methods In a randomised, double-blind, phase III study, 3148 patients undergoing knee arthroplasty received either oral rivaroxaban 10 mg once daily, beginning 6–8 h after surgery, or subcutaneous enoxaparin 30 mg every 12 h, starting 12–24 h after surgery. Patients had mandatory bilateral venography between days 11 and 15. The primary efficacy outcome was the composite of any deep-vein thrombosis, non-fatal pulmonary embolism, or death from any cause up to day 17 after surgery. Efficacy was assessed as non-inferiority of rivaroxaban compared with enoxaparin in the per-protocol population (absolute non-inferiority limit −4%); if non-inferiority was shown, we assessed whether rivaroxaban had superior efficacy in the modified intention-to-treat population. The primary safety outcome was major bleeding. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00362232. Findings The primary efficacy outcome occurred in 67 (6·9%) of 965 patients given rivaroxaban and in 97 (10·1%) of 959 given enoxaparin (absolute risk reduction 3·19%, 95% CI 0·71–5·67; p=0·0118). Ten (0·7%) of 1526 patients given rivaroxaban and four (0·3%) of 1508 given enoxaparin had major bleeding (p=0·1096). Interpretation Oral rivaroxaban 10 mg once daily for 10–14 days was significantly superior to subcutaneous enoxaparin 30 mg given every 12 h for the prevention of venous thromboembolism after total knee arthroplasty. Funding Bayer Schering Pharma AG, Johnson & Johnson Pharmaceutical Research & Development.

Background: Non-dihydropyridine calcium channel blockers (non-DHP CCBs) are agents commonly used for ventricular rate control in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF). The agents have the property of combined cytochrome 3A4 and P-glycoprotein (P-gp) inhibition which may lead to increased drug exposure for oral anticoagulants that are substrates for these pathways. We investigated the safety and efficacy of rivaroxaban versus warfarin according to use of these agents. Objectives: This post-hoc analysis examined patient characteristics and compared outcomes between rivaroxaban and warfarin using Cox proportional hazards modeling according to the use of non-DHP CCBs at baseline in ROCKET AF (n=14,264). Methods and Results: At the time of randomization, 1308 patients (9.2%) were taking a non-DHP CCBs. Patients taking a non-DHP CCB were more likely to be female (45% vs. 39%), have diabetes (43% vs. 40%), and have a medical history of COPD (21% vs. 9%) while they were less likely to have a medical history of heart failure (49% vs. 64%), myocardial infarction (14% vs.18%) and had a lower mean CHADS 2 score (3.3 vs. 3.5). Non-DHP CCB use was not associated with an increased risk of stroke or non-CNS embolism (P=0.11) or the composite outcome of non-major clinically relevant or major bleeding (P=0.087). No significant difference was observed in the primary efficacy (stroke or non-CNS embolism; adjusted interaction P value=0.38) or primary safety outcome (non-major clinically relevant bleeding or major bleeding; adjusted interaction P value=0.14) between rivaroxaban and warfarin with non-DHP CCB use (Table). Conclusion: Non-DHP CCBs are commonly used medications for rate control in patients with AF. In spite of having the properties of combined P-gp and moderate CYP3A4 inhibition, use of these agents was not associated with a significant change in the efficacy or safety of rivaroxaban compared with warfarin in the ROCKET AF trial.

Introduction: ROCKET AF demonstrated the noninferiority of rivaroxaban vs. warfarin in preventing stroke and systemic embolism (SE) in patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation (AF). It is unknown whether outcomes differ among patients with worsening renal function (WRF) on rivaroxaban compared with warfarin. Methods: After excluding patients with insufficient data to calculate creatinine clearance (CrCl, Cockcroft-Gault; n=1624), we included all remaining patients (n=12,612) randomly assigned to either rivaroxaban or dose-adjusted warfarin. The primary efficacy endpoint was the composite of stroke or SE; the primary safety endpoint was the composite of major bleeding and clinically relevant non-major bleeding. On-treatment WRF, as defined in recent cardiovascular studies as a decrease of ≥20% from screening CrCl, was evaluated as a time-dependent covariate in Cox proportional hazards models. Results: Baseline characteristics were generally similar between patients who maintained stable renal function (SRF) (n=9292) and patients with WRF (n=3320). Overall rates of stroke or SE, myocardial infarction, and bleeding were also similar, but WRF patients had an increase in vascular death (1.41 events/100 pt-years for SRF to 2.21 for WRF p=0.026). WRF patients on rivaroxaban had a reduction in stroke or SE compared with WRF patients on warfarin (1.54 events/100 pt-years for rivaroxaban to 3.25 for warfarin) that was not seen in SRF patients (p=0.050 for interaction; Figure). WRF patients on rivaroxaban had a greater incidence of hemoglobin fall ≥2 g/dL (3.56 events/100 pt-years for rivaroxaban to 1.85 for warfarin), that was not seen in SRF patients (p=0.047 for interaction). However, there was no difference in major or clinically relevant non-major bleeding. Conclusions: Among patients with on-treatment WRF, rivaroxaban was associated with lower rates of stroke and SE compared with warfarin without an increase in the composite bleeding endpoint.

AIMS: The high costs associated with treatment for atrial fibrillation (AF) are primarily due to hospital care, but there are limited data to understand the reasons for and predictors of hospitalization in patients with AF.METHODS AND RESULTS: The ROCKET AF trial compared rivaroxaban with warfarin for stroke prophylaxis in AF. We described the frequency of and reasons for hospitalization during study follow-up and utilized Cox proportional hazards models to assess for baseline characteristics associated with all-cause hospitalization. Of 14 171 patients, 14% were hospitalized at least once. Of 2614 total hospitalizations, 41% were cardiovascular including 4% for AF; of the remaining, 12% were for bleeding. Compared with patients not hospitalized, hospitalized patients were older (74 vs. 72 years), and more frequently had diabetes (46 vs. 39%), prior MI (23 vs. 16%), and paroxysmal AF (19 vs. 17%), but less frequently had prior transient ischaemic attack/stroke (49 vs. 56%). After multivariable adjustment, lung disease [hazard ratio (HR) 1.46, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.29-1.66], diabetes [1.22, (1.11-1.34)], prior MI [1.27, (1.13-1.42)], and renal dysfunction [HR 1.07 per 5 unit GFR < 65 mL/min, (1.04-1.10)] were associated with increased hospitalization risk. Treatment assignment was not associated with differential rates of hospitalization.CONCLUSION: Nearly 1 in 7 of the moderate-to-high-risk patients with AF enrolled in this trial was hospitalized within 2 years, and both AF and bleeding were rare causes of hospitalization. Further research is needed to determine whether care pathways directed at comorbid conditions among AF patients could reduce the need for and costs associated with hospitalization.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the characteristics and outcomes of patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) and aortic stenosis (AS) with patients with AF with mitral regurgitation (MR) or aortic regurgitation (AR) and patients without significant valve disease (no SVD).METHODS: Using 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) data, we analysed efficacy and safety outcomes, adjusting hazard ratios (HRs) for potential confounders using Cox regression analysis.RESULTS: Among 14 119 intention-to-treat ROCKET AF trial patients, a trial that excluded patients with mitral stenosis or artificial valve prosthesis, 214 had AS with or without other valve abnormalities, 1726 had MR or AR and 12 179 had no SVD. After adjusting for prognostic factors, the composite of stroke, systemic embolism or vascular death increased approximately twofold in patients with AS (AS 10.84, MR or AR 4.54 and no SVD 4.31 events per 100 patient-years, p=0.0001). All-cause death also significantly increased (AS 11.22, MR or AR 4.90 and no SVD 4.39 events per 100 patient-years, p=0.0003). Major bleeding occurred more frequently in AS (adjusted HR 1.61, confidence intervals (CI) 1.03 to 2.49, pCONCLUSIONS: We found that patients with AF and AS on oral anticoagulants may have distinctly different efficacy and safety outcomes than patients with MR or AR or no SVD.TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT00403767; Post-results.

Gastrointestinal (GI) bleeding is a common complication of oral anticoagulation.This study evaluated GI bleeding in patients who received at least 1 dose of the study drug in the on-treatment arm of 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.The primary outcome was adjudicated GI bleeding reported from first to last drug dose + 2 days. Multivariable modeling was performed with pre-specified candidate predictors.Of 14,236 patients, 684 experienced GI bleeding during follow-up. These patients were older (median age 75 years vs. 73 years) and less often female. GI bleeding events occurred in the upper GI tract (48%), lower GI tract (23%), and rectum (29%) without differences between treatment arms. There was a significantly higher rate of major or nonmajor clinical GI bleeding in rivaroxaban- versus warfarin-treated patients (3.61 events/100 patient-years vs. 2.60 events/100 patient-years; hazard ratio: 1.42; 95% confidence interval: 1.22 to 1.66). Severe GI bleeding rates were similar between treatment arms (0.47 events/100 patient-years vs. 0.41 events/100 patient-years; p = 0.39; 0.01 events/100 patient-years vs. 0.04 events/100 patient-years; p = 0.15, respectively), and fatal GI bleeding events were rare (0.01 events/100 patient-years vs. 0.04 events/100 patient-years; 1 fatal events vs. 5 fatal events total). Independent clinical factors most strongly associated with GI bleeding were baseline anemia, history of GI bleeding, and long-term aspirin use.In the ROCKET AF trial, rivaroxaban increased GI bleeding compared with warfarin. The absolute fatality rate from GI bleeding was low and similar in both treatment arms. Our results further illustrate the need for minimizing modifiable risk factors for GI bleeding in patients on oral anticoagulation.

This white paper provides a summary of presentations and discussions that were held at an Anticoagulant-Induced Bleeding and Reversal Agents Think Tank co-sponsored by the Cardiac Safety Research Consortium and the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) at the FDA's White Oak Headquarters on April 22, 2014. Attention focused on a development pathway for reversal agents for the novel oral anticoagulants (NOACs). This is important because anticoagulation is still widely underused for stroke prevention in patients with atrial fibrillation. Undertreatment persists, although NOACs, in general, overcome some of the difficulties associated with anticoagulation provided by vitamin K antagonists. One reason for the lack of a wider uptake is the absence of NOAC reversal agents. As there are neither widely accepted academic and industry standards nor a definitive regulatory policy on the development of such reversal agents, this meeting provided a forum for leaders in the fields of cardiovascular clinical trials and cardiovascular safety to discuss the issues and develop recommendations. Attendees included representatives from pharmaceutical companies; regulatory agencies; end point adjudication specialist groups; contract research organizations; and active, academically based physicians. There was wide and solid consensus that NOACs overall offer improvements in convenience, efficacy, and safety compared with warfarin, even without reversal agents. Still, it was broadly accepted that it would be helpful to have reversal agents available for clinicians to use. Because it is not feasible to do definitive outcomes studies demonstrating a reversal agent's clinical benefits, it was felt that these agents could be approved for use in life-threatening bleeding situations if the molecules were well characterized preclinically, their pharmacodynamic and pharmacokinetic profiles were well understood, and showed no harmful adverse events in early human testing. There was also consensus that after such approval, efforts should be made to augment the available clinical information until such time as there is a body of evidence to demonstrate real-world clinical outcomes with the reversal agents. No recommendations were made for more generalized use of these agents in the setting of non–life-threatening situations. This article reflects the views of the authors and should not be construed to represent FDA's views or policies.

Digoxin is a widely used drug for ventricular rate control in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF), despite a scarcity of randomised trial data. We studied the use and outcomes of digoxin in patients in 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).For this retrospective analysis, we included and classified patients from ROCKET AF on the basis of digoxin use at baseline and during the study. Patients in ROCKET AF were recruited from 45 countries and had AF and risk factors putting them at moderate-to-high risk of stroke, with or without heart failure. We used Cox proportional hazards regression models adjusted for baseline characteristics and drugs to investigate the association of digoxin with all-cause mortality, vascular death, and sudden death. ROCKET AF was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00403767.In 14,171 randomly assigned patients, digoxin was used at baseline in 5239 (37%). Patients given digoxin were more likely to be female (42% vs 38%) and have a history of heart failure (73% vs 56%), diabetes (43% vs 38%), and persistent AF (88% vs 77%; p0·0001 for each comparison). After adjustment, digoxin was associated with increased all-cause mortality (5·41 vs 4·30 events per 100 patients-years; hazard ratio 1·17; 95% CI 1·04-1·32; p=0·0093), vascular death (3·55 vs 2·69 per 100 patient-years; 1·19; 1·03-1·39, p=0·0201), and sudden death (1·68 vs 1·12 events per 100 patient-years; 1·36; 1·08-1·70, p=0·0076).Digoxin treatment was associated with a significant increase in all-cause mortality, vascular death, and sudden death in patients with AF. This association was independent of other measured prognostic factors, and although residual confounding could account for these results, these data show the possibility of digoxin having these effects. A randomised trial of digoxin in treatment of AF patients with and without heart failure is needed.Janssen ResearchDevelopment and Bayer HealthCare AG.

In a previous study of the prevention of venous thromboembolism after total knee replacement, the efficacy of ximelagatran, an oral direct thrombin inhibitor that does not require monitoring of coagulation or dose adjustment, was found to be similar to that of warfarin at a dose of 24 mg of ximelagatran twice daily. The purpose of the present study was to determine whether a higher dose of ximelagatran is superior to warfarin.This randomized, double-blind trial compared a regimen of 7 to 12 days of oral ximelagatran, at a dose of 24 or 36 mg twice daily, starting the morning after surgery, with warfarin therapy started the evening of the day of surgery. The composite end point of venous thromboembolism and death from all causes and the incidence of bleeding were the primary outcome measures.Among the 1851 patients in the efficacy analysis, oral ximelagatran at a dose of 36 mg twice daily was superior to warfarin with respect to the primary composite end point of venous thromboembolism and death from all causes (20.3 percent vs. 27.6 percent; P=0.003). There were no significant differences between these two groups with respect to major bleeding (incidence, 0.8 percent and 0.7 percent, respectively), perioperative indicators of bleeding, wound characteristics, or the composite secondary end point of proximal deep-vein thrombosis, pulmonary embolism, and death (2.7 percent vs. 4.1 percent; P=0.17).The efficacy of oral ximelagatran, administered starting the morning after total knee replacement, was superior to that of warfarin for prevention of venous thromboembolism. Rates of hemorrhagic complications with the two drugs were similar.

Summary. Background: Prophylaxis is recommended following total joint replacement because of the high risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE). Postoperative low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) reduces the incidence of venographically detected deep vein thrombosis (DVT) to about 10–15% in total hip replacement (THR) patients. Ximelagatran is a novel, oral direct thrombin inhibitor that selectively and competitively inhibits both free and clot-bound thrombin. We compared the efficacy and safety of ximelagatran with those of enoxaparin for the prevention of VTE in patients undergoing THR. Methods: This was a prospective, randomized, multicenter, double-blind study conducted principally in the USA and Canada. Patients received fixed-dose oral ximelagatran 24 mg bid or subcutaneous enoxaparin 30 mg bid and matched placebo for 7–12 days; both regimens were initiated the morning after surgery. The incidence of VTE (by postoperative day 12) included thrombosis determined by mandatory venography of the leg on which surgery was performed and symptomatic, objectively proven DVT or pulmonary embolism (PE). VTE and bleeding events were interpreted by an independent central adjudication committee for primary analysis. Results: Of the 1838 patients randomized, 1557 had either adequate venography or symptomatic, proven VTE (efficacy population). Overall rate of venography acceptable for evaluation was 85.4%. Overall rates of total VTE were 7.9% (62 of 782 patients) in the ximelagatran group and 4.6% (36 of 775 patients) in the enoxaparin group, with an absolute difference of 3.3% and a 95% confidence interval for the difference of 0.9% to 5.7%. Proximal DVT and/or PE occurred in 3.6% (28 of 782 patients) in the ximelagatran group and 1.2% (nine of 774 patients) in the enoxaparin group. Major bleeding events were observed in 0.8% (seven of 906) of the ximelagatran-treated patients and in 0.9% (eight of 910) of the enoxaparin-treated patients (P > 0.95). Non-inferiority of ximelagatran 24 mg bid based on a prespecified margin of 5% was not met, resulting in superiority of the enoxaparin regimen. Conclusions: Both ximelagatran and enoxaparin decreased the overall rate of VTE compared with that reported historically. However, in this study, enoxaparin 30 mg bid was more effective than ximelagatran 24 mg bid for prevention of VTE in THR. Oral ximelagatran was used without coagulation monitoring, was well tolerated, and had bleeding rates comparable to those of enoxaparin. Further refinement by testing a higher dose of ximelagatran in the patients undergoing THR is warranted.

Background This study analyzed relationships among heparin dosage, patient characteristics, and 30-day outcome because optimal unfractionated-heparin dosing in acute coronary syndromes remains uncertain. Methods Patients (n = 5335) randomized to heparin therapy in the Global Use of Strategies to Open Occluded Coronary Arteries (GUSTO) IIb trial were studied. The heparin dose was adjusted to a target activated partial thromboplastin time (aPTT) and normalized for the patient's weight. Mortality and cardiac (re)infarction within 30 days and their association with patient characteristics and heparin dosing were evaluated. Results The lowest mortality rate appeared with a heparin dose of approximately 14 U/kg/h or an aPTT of approximately 70 seconds. Heparin dosing was a significant predictor of outcome after adjusting for presenting coronary syndrome; a trend remained after adjusting for other baseline differences. This association was lost when adjusted for the aPTT result. Patients who died early appeared to have lower heparin dosing than those with later mortality ( P =.012). Heparin "resistance" with relatively high heparin dosages and low aPTT values did not increase the risk for adverse outcome. Conclusions There is a defined, dose-associated benefit of unfractionated heparin in acute coronary syndromes similar to that seen previously in thrombolytic-treated infarctions. Heparin therapy is complicated by its complex biologic interactions and relatively crude measures of its effect. Better measures of heparin effectiveness and strategies need to be developed with either better antithrombin agents or adjunctive therapies such as antiplatelet regimens to treat patients who require benefits beyond that supplied by unfractionated heparin. (Am Heart J 2002;144:73-80.)

Context: Unfractionated heparin remains widely utilized in the treatment of acute coronary syndromes (ACS). However, limited data exist on optimal dosing and range of activated partial thromboplastin time (aPTT) in this setting. A large trial of thrombolysis for acute myocardial infarction has reported an association between longer aPTTs and adverse outcomes. Objectives: Estimate the optimal heparin-dosing regimen in achieving early therapeutic aPTTs (50 to 75 seconds) and determine the association of aPTT and death, reinfarction, and bleeding in population with ACS. Design: Subgroup analysis within a randomized, controlled trial of 5861 patients given unfractionated heparin who had aPTTs at 6, 12, or 24 hours, with outcome analyses by weight categories. Setting: In 373 hospitals in 13 countries from May 1994 to October 1995. Patients: A total of 12,142 patients admitted for ACS, stratified by the presence (n = 4131) or absence (n = 8011) of ST-segment elevation, and randomized to 72 hours of unfractionated heparin. Results: In a simulated weight-adjusted model, based on retrospective grouping by weight, a simulated dose of 60-U/kg bolus and 12-U/kg/h infusion resulted in the highest proportion of therapeutic aPTTs. After adjustment for baseline variables, longer 12-hour aPTT was associated with the composite of 30-day death or reinfarction in patients not treated with thrombolytic therapy (odds ratio, 1.10; 95% CI, 1.00 to 1.22; P = 0.047). Longer aPTT at 6 hours was associated with increased moderate or severe bleeding for the entire cohort. There was also a significant, nonlinear correlation of the 12-hour aPTT with moderate or severe bleeding in thrombolysis-treated patients. Conclusions: For ACS patients who are treated with heparin, aPTT is highly associated with body weight. Longer aPTT within the first 12 hours is associated with adverse outcomes in ACS. Heparin dosing for ACS should be weight based.

Background: Rivaroxaban is widely used for stroke prevention in patients with atrial fibrillation, yet the safety of thrombolysis in anticoagulated patients is uncertain. Methods: We analyzed the characteristics, indications, and 30-day rates of stroke, mortality, and bleeding in patients who

Background: Hypertension (HTN) is a risk factor for stroke and bleeding in atrial fibrillation (AF). Yet, the association between HTN stage and stroke and bleeding risk in AF is unknown. Methods: The study population included 14,256 of the patients randomized in the ROCKET AF trial. Baseline systolic blood pressure (SBP) and history of HTN were determined and categorized as follows: (1) no history of HTN, (2) controlled HTN (SBP Results: Of the 90.5% of patients in ROCKET AF with HTN, 55.9% were controlled and 34.6% had stage 1 or 2 HTN. Compared with those with HTN, those without HTN had lower mean CHADS 2 scores (2.8 vs. 3.5), lower rates of prior myocardial infarction (11% vs. 18%), and lower mean age (69 vs. 73 years). Compared with those with no history of HTN, there was a trend towards an increased adjusted risk of stroke or SE in patients with controlled HTN (HR 1.22, 95% CI 0.89-1.66) and stage 1 or 2 HTN (HR 1.42, 95% CI 1.03-1.95) (p=0.06). A similar trend in adjusted risk of hemorrhagic stroke (controlled HTN: HR 2.50, 95% CI 0.89-7.05; stage 1 or 2 HTN: HR 3.04, 95% CI 1.06-8.71) (p=0.11) was observed. The effect of HTN stage on stroke risk did not vary by baseline CHADS 2 score (p interaction=0.70). The adjusted risk of major bleeding was not different between groups (HR 0.96, 95% CI 0.74-1.23; HR 1.00, 95% CI 0.77-1.30) (p=0.84). The benefit of rivaroxaban versus warfarin in preventing stroke or SE was consistent among patients regardless of baseline SBP (p interaction=0.69). Conclusion: One-third of patients in a clinical trial of AF had uncontrolled SBP at baseline. Uncontrolled SBP showed a trend towards a higher risk of stroke or SE, but not bleeding. Uncontrolled SBP may be an important factor in reducing the overall risk of stroke, and specifically hemorrhagic stroke, in patients with AF.

Background and Purpose— Intracranial hemorrhage (ICH) is a life-threatening complication of anticoagulation. Methods— We investigated the rate, outcomes, and predictors of ICH in 14 264 patients with atrial fibrillation 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). Cox proportional hazards modeling was used. Results— During 1.94 years (median) of follow-up, 172 patients (1.2%) experienced 175 ICH events at a rate of 0.67% per year. The significant, independent predictors of ICH were race (Asian: hazard ratio, 2.02; 95% CI, 1.39–2.94; black: hazard ratio, 3.25; 95% CI, 1.43–7.41), age (1.35; 1.13–1.63 per 10-year increase), reduced serum albumin (1.39; 1.12–1.73 per 0.5 g/dL decrease), reduced platelet count below 210×10 9 /L (1.08; 1.02–1.13 per 10×10 9 /L decrease), previous stroke or transient ischemic attack (1.42; 1.02–1.96), and increased diastolic blood pressure (1.17; 1.01–1.36 per 10 mm Hg increase). Predictors of a reduced risk of ICH were randomization to rivaroxaban (0.60; 0.44–0.82) and history of congestive heart failure (0.65; 0.47–0.89). The ability of the model to discriminate individuals with and without ICH was good ( C -index, 0.69; 95% CI, 0.64–0.73). Conclusions— Among patients with atrial fibrillation treated with anticoagulation, the risk of ICH was higher among Asians, blacks, the elderly, and in those with previous stroke or transient ischemic attack, increased diastolic blood pressure, and reduced platelet count or serum albumin at baseline. The risk of ICH was significantly lower in patients with heart failure and in those who were randomized to rivaroxaban instead of warfarin. The external validity of these findings requires testing in other atrial fibrillation populations.