The comparison of non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants versus well-managed warfarin with a lower INR target of 1.5 to 2.5 in Asians patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation.

Abstract

BackgroundPrevious studies indicated low-intensity warfarin (INR target of 1.5-2.5) achieved reduced hemorrhage without increasing thromboembolism for Asians with non-valvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF). Whether non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulant (NOAC) is superior to warfarin with good time in the therapeutic range (TTR) based on lower INR target among Asians with NVAF remains unknown.MethodsIn this retrospective study collected from Taiwan Chang Gung Memorial Hospital Database, there were 5,197, 3,396, and 9,898 consecutive patients taking warfarin, NOAC, and no-treatment, respectively, from January 1, 2000 to December 31, 2015. Propensity-score weighting was used across the study groups. Patients were followed until the first occurrence of study outcome or end date of study.ResultsAmong those patients taking warfarin, the mean"artificial" TTR (aTTR) based on a lower INR target of 1.5-2.5 was 44.4±33.3%. Total 79.2% (n = 2,690) patients took low-dose NOACs. Patients with aTTR in the range from 70%(24.9%) showed decremental risks of efficacy and composite outcome compared with no-treatment. The risk of major bleeding didn't increase among patients with top aTTR>70% compared to no-treatment. The NOAC group showed a comparable risk of composite outcome to the warfarin subgroup with aTTR of >70% (P = 0.485). The NOAC group had a lower risk of composite outcome than warfarin subgroup with TTR of>70% based on the INR target of 2.0-3.0 (P = 0.004).ConclusionsNOACs showed a comparable risk of efficacy, safety, and composite outcome to well-managed warfarin based on a lower INR target of 1.5-2.5 in Asians with NVAF taking oral anticoagulants.