ReviewDrug safety2016
Risk-Benefit Profile of Direct-Acting Oral Anticoagulants in Established Therapeutic Indications: An Overview of Systematic Reviews and Observational Studies.
Review in Drug safety, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
15 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Prevalence, contributory factors and severity of medication errors associated with direct-acting oral anticoagulants in adult patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis.European journal of clinical pharmacology · 2022Pooled it
- Comparative Effectiveness and Safety of Direct Oral Anticoagulants: Overview of Systematic Reviews.Drug safety · 2019Pooled it
- Interventions and Strategies to Improve Oral Anticoagulant Use in Patients with Atrial Fibrillation: A Systematic Review of Systematic Reviews.Clinical drug investigation · 2018Pooled it
- Risk of bleeding with dentoalveolar surgery in patients taking direct oral anticoagulants or vitamin K antagonists: A systematic review and meta-analysis.The Japanese dental science review · 2025Review
- Direct oral anticoagulants vs Vitamin-K antagonists in solid organ transplant recipients: A systematic review and meta-analysis.Pakistan journal of medical sciences · 2024Review
- Development and Application of an Attribute-Based Taxonomy on the Benefits of Oral Anticoagulant Switching in Atrial Fibrillation: A Delphi Study.Advances in therapy · 2024Article
- Dabigatran-related serious medication errors: an analysis using data from VigiBase.European journal of clinical pharmacology · 2024Article
- Article
- Cutaneous Ulcer Caused by Apixaban Treatment Is Resolved after Replacement with Dabigatran.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2022Article
- Bleeding Outcomes After Dental Extraction in Patients Under Direct-Acting Oral Anticoagulants vs. Vitamin K Antagonists: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2021Review
- Real-World Data on Characteristics and Management of Community Patients Receiving Anticoagulation Therapy Who Presented with Acute Bleeding to the Emergency Department at a Regional Australian Hospital: A Prospective Observational Study.Mediterranean journal of hematology and infectious diseases · 2021Article
- Patterns of anticoagulation therapy in atrial fibrillation: results from a large real-life single-center registry.Croatian medical journal · 2020Article
- Comparison of Safety Profiles of New Oral Anticoagulants with Warfarin Using the Japanese Spontaneous Reporting Database.Clinical drug investigation · 2019Article
- Non-bleeding Adverse Events with the Use of Direct Oral Anticoagulants: A Sequence Symmetry Analysis.Drug safety · 2018Article
- Treatment of atrial fibrillation in nursing homes: A place for direct acting oral anticoagulants?The journal of nursing home research sciences · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Since 2008, the direct-acting oral anticoagulants (DOACs) have expanded the therapeutic options of cardiovascular diseases with recognized clinical and epidemiological impact, such as non-valvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF) and venous thromboembolism (VTE), and also in the preventive setting of orthopedic surgical patients. The large body of evidence, not only from pivotal clinical trials but also from 'real-world' postmarketing observational findings (e.g. analytical epidemiological studies and registry data) gathered to date allow for a first attempt at verifying a posteriori whether or not the pharmacological advantages of the DOACs actually translate into therapeutic innovation, with relevant implications for clinicians, regulators and patients. This review aims to synthesize the risk-benefit profile of DOACs in the aforementioned consolidated indications through an 'evidence summary' approach gathering the existent evidence-based data, particularly systematic reviews with meta-analyses of randomized controlled trials, as well as observational studies, comparing DOACs with vitamin K antagonists. Clinical evidence will be discussed and compared with major international guidelines to identify whether an update is needed. Controversial clinically relevant safety issues will be also examined in order to highlight current challenges and unsettled questions (e.g. actual bleeding risk in susceptible populations). It is anticipated that the large number of publications on NVAF or VTE (44 systematic reviews with meta-analyses and 12 observational studies retained in our analysis) suggests the potential existence of overlapping studies and calls for common criteria to qualitatively and quantitatively assess discordances, thus guiding future research.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.