PDF icon PDF herunterladen
Thromb Haemost 2014; 111(05): 933-942
DOI: 10.1160/TH13-09-0734
Cardiovascular Biology and Cell Signalling
Schattauer GmbH

Patient outcomes using the European label for dabigatran

A post-hoc analysis from the RE-LY database
Gregory Y. H. Lip
1   University of Birmingham, Centre for Cardiovascular Sciences, City Hospital, Birmingham, UK
,
Andreas Clemens
2   Medical Data Services, Boehringer Ingelheim Pharma GmbH & Co. KG, Ingelheim am Rhein, Germany
,
Herbert Noack
3   Global Clinical Development and Medical Affairs, Boehringer Ingelheim GmbH&Co.KG, Ingelheim am Rhein, Germany
,
Jorge Ferreira
4   Cardiology Department, Hospital de Santa Cruz, Carnaxide, Portugal
,
Stuart J. Connolly
5   Population Health Research Institute, McMaster University and Hamilton Health Sciences, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada
,
Salim Yusuf
5   Population Health Research Institute, McMaster University and Hamilton Health Sciences, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada
› Institutsangaben
Financial support: The study was funded by Boehringer Ingelheim and was coordinated by the Population Health Research Institute in Hamilton, Ontario, Canada, which independently managed the database and performed the data analyses in the RE-LY trial. An Operations Committee, with assistance of an International Steering Committee, was responsible for study design, conduct, and reporting. The analysis of this post-hoc evaluation was technically performed by the Sponsor.
Weitere Informationen

Publikationsverlauf

Received: 05. September 2013

Accepted after major revision: 22. November 2013

Publikationsdatum:
30. November 2017 (online)

   Lizenzen und Reprints
Preview

Summary

In the RE-LY trial dabigatran 150 mg twice daily (D150) showed significantly fewer strokes, and 110 mg (D110) significantly fewer major bleeding events (MBE) compared to well-controlled warfarin in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF). The European (EU) label currently recommends the use of D150 in AF patients who are aged < 80 years without an increased risk for bleeding (e.g. HAS-BLED score <3) and not on concomitant verapamil. In other patients, D110 is recommended. In this post-hoc analysis of the RE-LY dataset, we simulated how dabigatran (n=6,004) would compare to well-controlled warfarin (n=6,022) used according to the EU label. “EU label simulated dabigatran treatment” was associated with significant reductions in stroke and systemic embolism (hazard ratio [HR] 0.74; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.60–0.91), haemorrhagic stroke (HR 0.22; 95%CI 0.11–0.44), death (HR 0.86; 95%CI 0.75–0.98), and vascular death (HR 0.80; 95%CI 0.68–0.95) compared to warfarin. Dabigatran was also associated with less major bleeding (HR 0.85; 95%CI 0.73–0.98), life-threatening bleeding (HR 0.72; 95%CI 0.58–0.91), intracranial haemorrhage (HR 0.28; 95%CI 0.17–0.45), and “any bleeds” (HR 0.86; 95%CI 0.81–0.92), but not gastrointestinal major bleeding (HR 1.23; 95%CI 0.96–1.59). The net clinical benefit was significantly better for dabigatran compared to warfarin. In conclusion, this post-hoc simulation of dabigatran usage based on RE-LY trial dataset indicates that “EU label simulated dabigatran treatment” may be associated with superior efficacy and safety compared to warfarin, and are in support of the EU label and the 2012 European Society of Cardiology AF guideline recommendations. Thus, adherence to European label/guideline use results in a clinically relevant benefit for dabigatran over warfarin, for both efficacy and safety.

Note: The editorial process for this paper was fully handled by Prof Christian Weber, Editor in Chief.

Keywords

Atrial fibrillation - dabigatran - net clinical benefit - warfarin