• Benjamin A Steinberg, Peter Shrader, Karen Pieper, Laine Thomas, Larry A Allen, Jack Ansell, Paul S Chan, Michael D Ezekowitz, Gregg C Fonarow, James V Freeman, Bernard J Gersh, Peter R Kowey, Kenneth W Mahaffey, Gerald V Naccarelli, James A Reiffel, Daniel E Singer, Eric D Peterson, Jonathan P Piccini, and Outcomes Registry for Better Informed Treatment of Atrial Fibrillation (ORBIT‐AF) II Investigators.
• Division of Cardiovascular Medicine, University of Utah Health Sciences Center, Salt Lake City, UT benjamin.steinberg@hsc.utah.edu.
• J Am Heart Assoc. 2018 Feb 16; 7 (4).

BackgroundNon-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants (NOACs) are indicated for stroke prevention in atrial fibrillation (AF) but require lower doses in certain patients. We sought to describe the frequency, appropriateness (according to Food and Drug Administration labeling), and outcomes of patients prescribed reduced doses of NOACs in community practice.Methods And ResultsWe analyzed data from the ORBIT-AF II (The Outcomes Registry for Better Informed Treatment of Atrial Fibrillation II) registry, a prospective, national, observational registry of AF patients. Among 7925 AF patients receiving NOACs, we assessed patterns of use of reduced NOAC doses and associated cardiovascular and bleeding outcomes at median follow-up of 1 year. Overall, 6636 patients (84%) received a NOAC at standard dose, which was consistent with US Food and Drug Administration labeling in 6376 (96%). Reduced NOAC dose was prescribed to 1289 (16% overall), which was consistent with Food and Drug Administration labeling in only 555 patients (43%). Compared with those whose NOAC dose was appropriately reduced, patients receiving inappropriate dose reductions were younger (median age 79 versus 84, P<0.0001) and had lower ORBIT bleeding risk scores (26% ≥4 versus 45%, P<0.0001). Compared with those appropriately receiving standard dosing, patients receiving inappropriately reduced-dose NOACs had higher unadjusted rates of thromboembolic events (2.11 versus 1.35 events per 100 patient years, hazard ratio 1.56, 95% confidence interval 0.92-2.67) and death (6.77 versus 2.60, hazard ratio 2.61, 95% confidence interval 1.86-3.67). After adjustment, outcomes were not significantly different but tended to favor patients dosed appropriately.ConclusionsThe majority of dose reductions of NOACs in AF are inconsistent with US Food and Drug Administration recommendations. There appear to be opportunities to improve current NOAC dosing in community practice.Clinical Trial RegistrationURL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT01701817.© 2018 The Authors. Published on behalf of the American Heart Association, Inc., by Wiley.

38 keywords...

hide…