Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31240630›Full record

ArticleDrugs - real world outcomes2019

Re-evaluating Safety and Effectiveness of Dabigatran Versus Warfarin in a Nationwide Data Environment: A Prevalent New-User Design Study.

Hui-Min Diana Lin, Chao-Lun Lai, Yaa-Hui Dong, Yu-Kang Tu, K Arnold Chan, Samy Suissa

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Drugs - real world outcomes, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Core Concepts in Pharmacoepidemiology: New-User Designs.Pharmacoepidemiology and drug safety · 2024
    Review
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Prescribing Trends of Oral Anticoagulants from 2010 to 2020 in Shanghai, China: A Retrospective Study.Clinical and applied thrombosis/hemostasis : official journal of the International Academy of Clinical and Applied Thrombosis/Hemostasis
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Hui-Min Diana LinDepartment of Medical Research, National Taiwan University Hospital, No.7, Chung Shan South Road, Taipei, Taiwan.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8397-0413
Chao-Lun LaiInstitute of Epidemiology and Preventive Medicine, College of Public Health, National Taiwan University, Room 501, No. 17, Xu-Zhou Road, Taipei, Taiwan.
Yaa-Hui DongFaculty of Pharmacy, National Yang-Ming University, No.155, Section 2, Linong Street, Taipei, Taiwan.
Yu-Kang TuDepartment of Medical Research, National Taiwan University Hospital, No.7, Chung Shan South Road, Taipei, Taiwan.
K Arnold ChanDepartment of Medical Research, National Taiwan University Hospital, No.7, Chung Shan South Road, Taipei, Taiwan. kachan@ntu.edu.tw.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8161-1986
Samy SuissaDepartment of Epidemiology, Biostatistics, and Occupational Health, McGill University, Purvis Hall, 1020 Pine Avenue West, Montreal, Canada.

Funding

National Taiwan University Hospital, Hsin-Chu Branch 105-HCH003National Taiwan University Hospital, Hsin-Chu Branch 105-HCH016
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionThe new user cohort design is widely used to assess the effects of a new drug, such as dabigatran, but inherently excludes some users due to prior use of the comparator drug, for example warfarin. The prevalent new-user design offers a solution that includes all eligible users of the new drug.

objectiveTo evaluate the safety and effectiveness of dabigatran versus warfarin in non-valvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF) patients with prevalent new-user design.

methodsTaiwan National Health Insurance and mortality data from 2011 through 2015 were utilized. From an incident NVAF cohort, we identified dabigatran initiators as either incident or prevalent (switchers from warfarin) new users. Time- and prescription-based exposure sets were formed for dabigatran initiators to account for prior warfarin prescriptions. A comparable warfarin user was matched on the time-conditional propensity score to the dabigatran initiator in each set. The matched patients were followed for clinical outcomes, with Cox proportional hazards model used to estimate hazard ratios (HRs).

resultsThere were 10,811 dabigatran initiators, including 22% prevalent new users (switchers), who formed the exposure sets and were matched 1:1 to warfarin users. Dabigatran use was associated with lower risks of intracranial hemorrhage (HR 0.51; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.39, 0.66) and gastrointestinal bleeding (HR 0.81; 95% CI 0.70, 0.92), compared with warfarin use. These effects were similar between the incident and prevalent new users.

conclusionUsing a design that includes both incident and prevalent new users of dabigatran, the use of dabigatran is associated with lower major bleeding risk than warfarin use among patients with incident NVAF.

Identifiers

PMID31240630
PMCPMC6702531

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.