ArticleClinical pharmacology and therapeutics2025
Impact of Age and Factor Xa Inhibitor Concentrations on Bleeding Risk in Patients with Atrial Fibrillation.
Article in Clinical pharmacology and therapeutics, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Development and Clinical Application of a Real-World Population Pharmacokinetic Model of Rivaroxaban in Asian Patients with Atrial Fibrillation.Clinical pharmacokinetics · 2026Observational
- Real-World Edoxaban Concentrations in Older Patients Receiving Reduced-Dose Regimens.Clinical pharmacology and therapeutics · 2026Article
- Therapeutic Drug Monitoring of Direct Oral Anticoagulants and Its Association with Clinical Outcomes: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Pharmaceuticals (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Pharmacist-Led Intervention to Enhance Direct Oral Anticoagulant Adherence and Treatment Outcomes in Atrial Fibrillation: A Pragmatic Clinical Trial.Patient preference and adherence · 2026Article
- Prevalence of Major Bleeding in Elderly Patients on Oral Anticoagulants for Non-Valvular Atrial Fibrillation: A Single-Center 12-Year Retrospective Review.Geriatrics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
This study aimed to analyze differences in the exposure-response relationship for factor Xa inhibitors (FXaI) between patients aged ≥ 80 and < 80 years. Patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) taking rivaroxaban, apixaban, or edoxaban were enrolled, and a single steady-state trough concentration was measured. FXaI concentrations were compared with the expected range reported in clinical trials to define high or low drug levels. The primary outcome was major bleeding, and the secondary outcome was ischemic stroke or transient ischemic attack (IS/TIA). From 2016 to 2023, 1,037 patients aged from 30 to 105 years were enrolled (average, 75.4 ± 10.0 years; 33.8% were aged ≥ 80 years). During a median follow-up of 2.35 years, 48 major bleeding events and 32 IS/TIA events were observed. Although drug concentrations were similar between the two age groups, those aged ≥ 80 years with high FXaI levels experienced a greater increase in major bleeding risk compared to those aged < 80 years with high levels (aHR 6.47 [2.07, 20.28] vs. 3.45 [1.15, 10.30]). Additionally, patients aged ≥ 80 years without elevated FXaI levels also had a higher risk of major bleeding compared to those aged < 80 years without elevated levels (aHR 2.39 [1.20, 4.76]). While low FXaI concentrations were associated with IS/TIA, the risk was not significantly different across age groups. In conclusion, despite similar FXaI concentrations, patients aged ≥ 80 years have a higher baseline risk of major bleeding and experience a greater increase in bleeding risk at high drug levels compared to those aged < 80 years.
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.