ArticleBritish journal of clinical pharmacology2021
Clinical outcomes of nonvitamin K oral anticoagulants and acenocoumarol for stroke prevention in contemporary practice: A population-based propensity-weighted cohort study.
Article in British journal of clinical pharmacology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- Effectiveness and Safety of Dabigatran Compared to Vitamin K Antagonists in Non-Asian Patients with Atrial Fibrillation: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Clinical drug investigation · 2021Pooled it
- Methodological Concerns Regarding a Recent Meta-Analysis of Direct Oral Anticoagulants Versus Vitamin K Antagonists in Non-Valvular Atrial Fibrillation.Clinical cardiology · 2026Article
- Comparative clinical outcomes of acenocoumarol versus direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) and warfarin in patients with atrial fibrillation: real-world-evidence (SIESTA-A study).Frontiers in pharmacology · 2025Article
- Time Trends in Patient Characteristics of New Rivaroxaban Users with Atrial Fibrillation in Germany and the Netherlands.Drugs - real world outcomes · 2023Article
- Effectiveness and safety of oral anticoagulants for non-valvular atrial fibrillation: a population-based cohort study in primary healthcare in Catalonia.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2023Article
- Effectiveness and safety of oral anticoagulant therapy in a real-world cohort with atrial fibrillation: The SIESTA-A study protocol.PloS one · 2023Article
- Effectiveness and Safety of Apixaban in over 3.9 Million People with Atrial Fibrillation: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Journal of clinical medicine · 2022Review
- Effectiveness and Safety of Non-Vitamin K Oral Anticoagulants in Non-Valvular Atrial Fibrillation Patients: Results of A Real-World Study in a Metropolitan Area of Northern Italy.Journal of clinical medicine · 2021Article
- Clinical outcomes of nonvitamin K oral anticoagulants and acenocoumarol for stroke prevention in contemporary practice: A population-based propensity-weighted cohort study.British journal of clinical pharmacology · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
aimsAcenocoumarol is a vitamin-K antagonist (VKA) primarily used in certain countries (e.g. India, Netherlands, Spain). The half-life of acenocoumarol is similar to that of non-VKA oral anticoagulants (NOAC), unlike warfarin, and this could affect comparative effectiveness and safety (CES). However, data on CES for NOAC come almost exclusively from studies using warfarin as the comparator. We aimed to assess outcomes of NOAC and acenocoumarol in people with non-valvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF) in real-world clinical practice.
methodsThis is a population-based retrospective cohort study. All new users of oral anticoagulants from November 2011 to December 2015 with NVAF were included (n = 41,560). Data were obtained by linking several health electronic records of the Valencia region, Spain. Incidence rates were estimated. We used the inverse probability of treatment weighted Cox analysis to control for indication bias when assessing the risk of effectiveness and safety outcomes for each NOAC compared with acenocoumarol. Several sensitivity analyses were performed.
resultsWe did not find differences in the risk of mortality, ischaemic stroke or any gastrointestinal bleeding. However, we did find a decreased risk of intracranial haemorrhage for dabigatran (HR: 0.34, 95% CI 0.20-0.56) and rivaroxaban (HR: 0.55, 95% CI 0.35-0.85) as compared to acenocoumarol. In subanalyses, apixaban showed a higher risk of ischaemic stroke in high-risk persons (≥75 years and CHA2DS2-VASC score ≥ 2).
conclusionsNo differences in clinical outcomes were found between NOAC and acenocoumarol overall, although dabigatran and rivaroxaban showed a lower risk of intracranial haemorrhage. Findings on the potential inferiority of specific NOAC in high-risk subgroups should be studied further.
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.