Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31329212›Full record

ArticleJAMA neurology2019

Clinical Effectiveness of Direct Oral Anticoagulants vs Warfarin in Older Patients With Atrial Fibrillation and Ischemic Stroke: Findings From the Patient-Centered Research Into Outcomes Stroke Patients Prefer and Effectiveness Research (PROSPER) Study.

Ying Xian, Haolin Xu, Emily C O'Brien, Shreyansh Shah, Laine Thomas, Michael J Pencina, Gregg C Fonarow, DaiWai M Olson, Lee H Schwamm, Deepak L Bhatt and 6 more

Registry-linked trialAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JAMA neurology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT04597593 (Correlation Between Bleeding Complication and Treatment Failure of DOAC and Its Predictions Based on Cipherome's Pharmacogenomic Technology), which is not on this map. Cited by 43 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
43citing papers in PubMed, 4 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.

NCT04597593 completednot on this mapstarted 2020, after this paper: background citation

Correlation Between Bleeding Complication and Treatment Failure of DOAC and Its Predictions Based on Cipherome's Pharmacogenomic Technology

TypeobservationalSponsorCipherome, Inc.Ran2020 to 2022Enrolled200ConditionsDrug-Related Side Effects and Adverse Reactions, Iatrogenic Disorder
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

43 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Guideline
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Review
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. 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

16 authors.

Ying XianDuke Clinical Research Institute, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, North Carolina.
Haolin XuDuke Clinical Research Institute, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, North Carolina.
Emily C O'BrienDuke Clinical Research Institute, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, North Carolina.
Shreyansh ShahDepartment of Neurology, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, North Carolina.
Laine ThomasDuke Clinical Research Institute, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, North Carolina.
Michael J PencinaDuke Clinical Research Institute, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, North Carolina.
Gregg C FonarowDivision of Cardiology, University of California, Los Angeles.
DaiWai M OlsonUniversity of Texas Southwestern, Dallas.
Lee H SchwammHarvard Medical School, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston.
Deepak L BhattBrigham and Women's Hospital Heart & Vascular Center, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts.
Eric E SmithHotchkiss Brain Institute, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada.
Deidre HannahPatient-Centered Research Into Outcomes Stroke Patients Prefer and Effectiveness Research Study, Durham, North Carolina.
Lesley MaischPatient-Centered Research Into Outcomes Stroke Patients Prefer and Effectiveness Research Study, Durham, North Carolina.
Barbara L LytleDuke Clinical Research Institute, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, North Carolina.
Eric D PetersonDuke Clinical Research Institute, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, North Carolina.
Adrian F HernandezDuke Clinical Research Institute, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, North Carolina.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

importanceCurrent guidelines recommend direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) over warfarin for stroke prevention in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) who are at high risk. Despite demonstrated efficacy in clinical trials, real-world data of DOACs vs warfarin for secondary prevention in patients with ischemic stroke are largely based on administrative claims or have not focused on patient-centered outcomes.

objectiveTo examine the clinical effectiveness of DOACs (dabigatran, rivaroxaban, or apixaban) vs warfarin after ischemic stroke in patients with AF. DESIGN, SETTING, AND

participantsThis cohort study included patients who were 65 years or older, had AF, were anticoagulation naive, and were discharged from 1041 Get With The Guidelines-Stroke-associated hospitals for acute ischemic stroke between October 2011 and December 2014. Data were linked to Medicare claims for long-term outcomes (up to December 2015). Analyses were completed in July 2018. EXPOSURES: DOACs vs warfarin prescription at discharge. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: The primary outcomes were home time, a patient-centered measure defined as the total number of days free from death and institutional care after discharge, and major adverse cardiovascular events. A propensity score-overlap weighting method was used to account for differences in observed characteristics between groups.

resultsOf 11 662 survivors of acute ischemic stroke (median [interquartile range] age, 80 [74-86] years), 4041 (34.7%) were discharged with DOACs and 7621 with warfarin. Except for National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale scores (median [interquartile range], 4 [1-9] vs 5 [2-11]), baseline characteristics were similar between groups. Patients discharged with DOACs (vs warfarin) had more days at home (mean [SD], 287.2 [114.7] vs 263.0 [127.3] days; adjusted difference, 15.6 [99% CI, 9.0-22.1] days) during the first year postdischarge and were less likely to experience major adverse cardiovascular events (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR], 0.89 [99% CI, 0.83-0.96]). Also, in patients receiving DOACs, there were fewer deaths (aHR, 0.88 [95% CI, 0.82-0.95]; P < .001), all-cause readmissions (aHR, 0.93 [95% CI, 0.88-0.97]; P = .003), cardiovascular readmissions (aHR, 0.92 [95% CI, 0.86-0.99]; P = .02), hemorrhagic strokes (aHR, 0.69 [95% CI, 0.50-0.95]; P = .02), and hospitalizations with bleeding (aHR, 0.89 [95% CI, 0.81-0.97]; P = .009) but a higher risk of gastrointestinal bleeding (aHR, 1.14 [95% CI, 1.01-1.30]; P = .03). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: In patients with acute ischemic stroke and AF, DOAC use at discharge was associated with better long-term outcomes relative to warfarin.

Identifiers

PMID31329212
PMCPMC6647003

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

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.