Displaying all 8 publications

Abstract:
Sort:
  1. Hasan SS, Kow CS, Curley LE, Baines DL, Babar ZU
    Expert Rev Pharmacoecon Outcomes Res, 2018 08;18(4):371-377.
    PMID: 29741099 DOI: 10.1080/14737167.2018.1474101
    INTRODUCTION: Anticoagulants refer to a variety of agents that inhibit one or more steps in the coagulation cascade. Generally, clinical conditions that require the prescribing of an oral anticoagulant increase in frequency with age. However, a major challenge of anticoagulation use among older patients is that this group of patients also experience the highest bleeding risk. To date, economic evaluation of prescribing of anticoagulants that includes the novel or newer oral anticoagulants (NOACs) in older adults has not been conducted and is warranted.

    AREAS COVERED: A review of articles that evaluated the cost of prescribing conventional (e.g. vitamin K antagonists) and NOACs (e.g. direct thrombin inhibitors and direct factor Xa inhibitors) in older adults.

    EXPERT COMMENTARY: While the use of NOACs significantly increases the cost of the initial treatment for thromboembolic disorders, they are still considered cost-effective relative to warfarin since they offer reduced risk of intracranial haemorrhagic events. The optimum anticoagulation with warfarin can be achieved by providing specialised care; clinics managed by pharmacists have been shown to be cost-effective relative to usual care. There are suggestions that genotyping the CYP2C9 and VKORC1 genes is useful for determining a more appropriate initial dose and thereby increasing the effectiveness and safety of warfarin.

    Matched MeSH terms: Factor Xa Inhibitors/administration & dosage*; Factor Xa Inhibitors/adverse effects; Factor Xa Inhibitors/economics
  2. Moayyedi P, Eikelboom JW, Bosch J, Connolly SJ, Dyal L, Shestakovska O, et al.
    Gastroenterology, 2019 09;157(3):682-691.e2.
    PMID: 31152740 DOI: 10.1053/j.gastro.2019.05.056
    BACKGROUND & AIMS: Proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) are effective at treating acid-related disorders. These drugs are well tolerated in the short term, but long-term treatment was associated with adverse events in observational studies. We aimed to confirm these findings in an adequately powered randomized trial.

    METHODS: We performed a 3 × 2 partial factorial double-blind trial of 17,598 participants with stable cardiovascular disease and peripheral artery disease randomly assigned to groups given pantoprazole (40 mg daily, n = 8791) or placebo (n = 8807). Participants were also randomly assigned to groups that received rivaroxaban (2.5 mg twice daily) with aspirin (100 mg once daily), rivaroxaban (5 mg twice daily), or aspirin (100 mg) alone. We collected data on development of pneumonia, Clostridium difficile infection, other enteric infections, fractures, gastric atrophy, chronic kidney disease, diabetes, chronic obstructive lung disease, dementia, cardiovascular disease, cancer, hospitalizations, and all-cause mortality every 6 months. Patients were followed up for a median of 3.01 years, with 53,152 patient-years of follow-up.

    RESULTS: There was no statistically significant difference between the pantoprazole and placebo groups in safety events except for enteric infections (1.4% vs 1.0% in the placebo group; odds ratio, 1.33; 95% confidence interval, 1.01-1.75). For all other safety outcomes, proportions were similar between groups except for C difficile infection, which was approximately twice as common in the pantoprazole vs the placebo group, although there were only 13 events, so this difference was not statistically significant.

    CONCLUSIONS: In a large placebo-controlled randomized trial, we found that pantoprazole is not associated with any adverse event when used for 3 years, with the possible exception of an increased risk of enteric infections. ClinicalTrials.gov Number: NCT01776424.

    Matched MeSH terms: Factor Xa Inhibitors/administration & dosage*; Factor Xa Inhibitors/adverse effects
  3. Eikelboom JW, Connolly SJ, Bosch J, Dagenais GR, Hart RG, Shestakovska O, et al.
    N Engl J Med, 2017 10 05;377(14):1319-1330.
    PMID: 28844192 DOI: 10.1056/NEJMoa1709118
    BACKGROUND: We evaluated whether rivaroxaban alone or in combination with aspirin would be more effective than aspirin alone for secondary cardiovascular prevention.

    METHODS: In this double-blind trial, we randomly assigned 27,395 participants with stable atherosclerotic vascular disease to receive rivaroxaban (2.5 mg twice daily) plus aspirin (100 mg once daily), rivaroxaban (5 mg twice daily), or aspirin (100 mg once daily). The primary outcome was a composite of cardiovascular death, stroke, or myocardial infarction. The study was stopped for superiority of the rivaroxaban-plus-aspirin group after a mean follow-up of 23 months.

    RESULTS: The primary outcome occurred in fewer patients in the rivaroxaban-plus-aspirin group than in the aspirin-alone group (379 patients [4.1%] vs. 496 patients [5.4%]; hazard ratio, 0.76; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.66 to 0.86; P<0.001; z=-4.126), but major bleeding events occurred in more patients in the rivaroxaban-plus-aspirin group (288 patients [3.1%] vs. 170 patients [1.9%]; hazard ratio, 1.70; 95% CI, 1.40 to 2.05; P<0.001). There was no significant difference in intracranial or fatal bleeding between these two groups. There were 313 deaths (3.4%) in the rivaroxaban-plus-aspirin group as compared with 378 (4.1%) in the aspirin-alone group (hazard ratio, 0.82; 95% CI, 0.71 to 0.96; P=0.01; threshold P value for significance, 0.0025). The primary outcome did not occur in significantly fewer patients in the rivaroxaban-alone group than in the aspirin-alone group, but major bleeding events occurred in more patients in the rivaroxaban-alone group.

    CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with stable atherosclerotic vascular disease, those assigned to rivaroxaban (2.5 mg twice daily) plus aspirin had better cardiovascular outcomes and more major bleeding events than those assigned to aspirin alone. Rivaroxaban (5 mg twice daily) alone did not result in better cardiovascular outcomes than aspirin alone and resulted in more major bleeding events. (Funded by Bayer; COMPASS ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01776424 .).

    Matched MeSH terms: Factor Xa Inhibitors/adverse effects; Factor Xa Inhibitors/therapeutic use*
  4. Hassan Y, Awaisu A, Aziz NA, Aziz NH, Ismail O
    J Clin Pharm Ther, 2007 Dec;32(6):535-44.
    PMID: 18021330
    To highlight therapeutic controversies, and present a critical review of the most recent evidence on the management of heparin-induced thrombocytopenia (HIT).
    Matched MeSH terms: Factor Xa Inhibitors
  5. Kubas MA, Shabaruddin FH, Mazlan-Kepli W, Jagan N, Mohamed S, Mohamed Nazar NI, et al.
    J Pharm Bioallied Sci, 2020 Nov;12(Suppl 2):S781-S786.
    PMID: 33828378 DOI: 10.4103/jpbs.JPBS_381_19
    Introduction: Non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants (NOACs), such as dabigatran and rivaroxaban, are now available for stroke prevention in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) and are often clinically preferred over vitamin K antagonists (VKAs), such as warfarin. Data describing adherence and persistence to NOACs in real-life clinical practice in Malaysia are scarce. This study aimed to assess adherence and persistence to NOACs in patients with AF in two tertiary-care referral centers: Hospital Kuala Lumpur (HKL) and Hospital Serdang (HSDG).

    Materials and Methods: This was a retrospective cohort study that included all patients with AF who were treated with NOACs (dabigatran or rivaroxaban) in HKL and HSDG. Data were obtained from medical records and pharmacy databases. Adherence was assessed using proportion of days covered (PDC) over a 1-year duration. High adherence was defined as PDC ≥80%. A gap of >60 days between two consecutive refills was used to define non-persistence.

    Result: There were 281 patients who met the inclusion criteria, with 54.1% (n = 152) male. There were 75.1% (n = 211) patients on dabigatran and others on rivaroxaban. Only 66.9% (n = 188) of patients achieved high adherence with PDC ≥80% and 69.8% (n = 196) were persistence with >60-day gap over 12 months. Adherence and persistence were both influenced by treatment center, whereas polypharmacy only influenced adherence.

    Conclusion: Overall adherence and persistence to NOACs were suboptimal and varied between treatment centers, potentially due to institution-specific administrative and clinical practice differences. Clinical care and outcomes can potentially be optimized by identifying factors affecting adherence and persistence and by implementing interventions to improving them.

    Matched MeSH terms: Factor Xa Inhibitors
  6. Connolly SJ, Eikelboom JW, Bosch J, Dagenais G, Dyal L, Lanas F, et al.
    Lancet, 2018 01 20;391(10117):205-218.
    PMID: 29132879 DOI: 10.1016/S0140-6736(17)32458-3
    BACKGROUND: Coronary artery disease is a major cause of morbidity and mortality worldwide, and is a consequence of acute thrombotic events involving activation of platelets and coagulation proteins. Factor Xa inhibitors and aspirin each reduce thrombotic events but have not yet been tested in combination or against each other in patients with stable coronary artery disease.

    METHODS: In this multicentre, double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled, outpatient trial, patients with stable coronary artery disease or peripheral artery disease were recruited at 602 hospitals, clinics, or community centres in 33 countries. This paper reports on patients with coronary artery disease. Eligible patients with coronary artery disease had to have had a myocardial infarction in the past 20 years, multi-vessel coronary artery disease, history of stable or unstable angina, previous multi-vessel percutaneous coronary intervention, or previous multi-vessel coronary artery bypass graft surgery. After a 30-day run in period, patients were randomly assigned (1:1:1) to receive rivaroxaban (2·5 mg orally twice a day) plus aspirin (100 mg once a day), rivaroxaban alone (5 mg orally twice a day), or aspirin alone (100 mg orally once a day). Randomisation was computer generated. Each treatment group was double dummy, and the patients, investigators, and central study staff were masked to treatment allocation. The primary outcome of the COMPASS trial was the occurrence of myocardial infarction, stroke, or cardiovascular death. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01776424, and is closed to new participants.

    FINDINGS: Between March 12, 2013, and May 10, 2016, 27 395 patients were enrolled to the COMPASS trial, of whom 24 824 patients had stable coronary artery disease from 558 centres. The combination of rivaroxaban plus aspirin reduced the primary outcome more than aspirin alone (347 [4%] of 8313 vs 460 [6%] of 8261; hazard ratio [HR] 0·74, 95% CI 0·65-0·86, p<0·0001). By comparison, treatment with rivaroxaban alone did not significantly improve the primary outcome when compared with treatment with aspirin alone (411 [5%] of 8250 vs 460 [6%] of 8261; HR 0·89, 95% CI 0·78-1·02, p=0·094). Combined rivaroxaban plus aspirin treatment resulted in more major bleeds than treatment with aspirin alone (263 [3%] of 8313 vs 158 [2%] of 8261; HR 1·66, 95% CI 1·37-2·03, p<0·0001), and similarly, more bleeds were seen in the rivaroxaban alone group than in the aspirin alone group (236 [3%] of 8250 vs 158 [2%] of 8261; HR 1·51, 95% CI 1·23-1·84, p<0·0001). The most common site of major bleeding was gastrointestinal, occurring in 130 [2%] patients who received combined rivaroxaban plus aspirin, in 84 [1%] patients who received rivaroxaban alone, and in 61 [1%] patients who received aspirin alone. Rivaroxaban plus aspirin reduced mortality when compared with aspirin alone (262 [3%] of 8313 vs 339 [4%] of 8261; HR 0·77, 95% CI 0·65-0·90, p=0·0012).

    INTERPRETATION: In patients with stable coronary artery disease, addition of rivaroxaban to aspirin lowered major vascular events, but increased major bleeding. There was no significant increase in intracranial bleeding or other critical organ bleeding. There was also a significant net benefit in favour of rivaroxaban plus aspirin and deaths were reduced by 23%. Thus, addition of rivaroxaban to aspirin has the potential to substantially reduce morbidity and mortality from coronary artery disease worldwide.

    FUNDING: Bayer AG.
    Matched MeSH terms: Factor Xa Inhibitors/administration & dosage; Factor Xa Inhibitors/adverse effects; Factor Xa Inhibitors/therapeutic use*
  7. Abdualkader AM, Ghawi AM, Alaama M, Awang M, Merzouk A
    Indian J Pharm Sci, 2013 Mar;75(2):127-37.
    PMID: 24019559
    Hematophagous animals including leeches have been known to possess biologically active compounds in their secretions, especially in their saliva. The blood-sucking annelids, leeches have been used for therapeutic purposes since the beginning of civilization. Ancient Egyptian, Indian, Greek and Arab physicians used leeches for a wide range of diseases starting from the conventional use for bleeding to systemic ailments, such as skin diseases, nervous system abnormalities, urinary and reproductive system problems, inflammation, and dental problems. Recently, extensive researches on leech saliva unveiled the presence of a variety of bioactive peptides and proteins involving antithrombin (hirudin, bufrudin), antiplatelet (calin, saratin), factor Xa inhibitors (lefaxin), antibacterial (theromacin, theromyzin) and others. Consequently, leech has made a comeback as a new remedy for many chronic and life-threatening abnormalities, such as cardiovascular problems, cancer, metastasis, and infectious diseases. In the 20(th) century, leech therapy has established itself in plastic and microsurgery as a protective tool against venous congestion and served to salvage the replanted digits and flaps. Many clinics for plastic surgery all over the world started to use leeches for cosmetic purposes. Despite the efficacious properties of leech therapy, the safety, and complications of leeching are still controversial.
    Matched MeSH terms: Factor Xa Inhibitors
  8. Goldhaber SZ, Ageno W, Casella IB, Chee KH, Schellong S, Singer DE, et al.
    Am J Med, 2020 08;133(8):936-945.
    PMID: 32325043 DOI: 10.1016/j.amjmed.2020.03.036
    BACKGROUND: The safety and efficacy of nonvitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants (NOACs) for the treatment of venous thromboembolism (VTE) have been established in randomized controlled trials, but limited data are available on their use in clinical practice across geographical regions.

    METHODS: In the international RE-COVERY DVT/PE observational study (enrollment January 2016 to May 2017), we sought to characterize the patient population and describe the prescribed anticoagulant. Patient characteristics and anticoagulants administered after objective diagnosis of VTE were recorded at the baseline visit and again at hospital discharge or at 14 days after the diagnosis, whichever was later.

    RESULTS: A total of 6095 patients were included, 50.2% were male, and the mean age was 61.5 years. The most common comorbidities were hypertension (35%), diabetes mellitus (11%), cancer (11%), prior VTE(11%), and trauma/surgery (7%). Overall, 77% of patients received oral anticoagulants, with 54% on NOACs and 23% on vitamin K antagonists (VKAs); 20% received parenteral anticoagulation only. NOACs comprised about 60% of anticoagulant treatment in Europe and Asia but substantially less in Latin America (29%) and the Middle East (21%). For NOAC therapies, the distribution (as a percentage of the total cohort) was rivaroxaban 25.6%, dabigatran 15.5%, apixaban 11.3%, and edoxaban 1.7%. Treatment with NOACs was less frequent in patients who had cancer, chronic renal disease, heart failure, or stroke.

    CONCLUSIONS: These findings enhance our understanding of baseline characteristics and the initial management of patients with VTE in routine practice.

    Matched MeSH terms: Factor Xa Inhibitors/therapeutic use*
Filters
Contact Us

Please provide feedback to Administrator (afdal@afpm.org.my)

External Links