Patient-reported health preferences of anticoagulant-related outcomes

Reducing bleeding risk in patients on oral anticoagulation therapy

INTRODUCTION

Oral anticoagulation (OAC) significantly mitigates thromboembolism risks in atrial fibrillation (AF) and venous thromboembolism (VTE) patients yet concern about major bleeding events persist. In fact, clinically relevant hemorrhages can be life-threatening. Bleeding risk is dynamic and influenced by factors such as age, new comorbidities, and drug therapies, and should not be assessed solely based on static baseline factors.

AREAS COVERED

We comprehensively review the bleeding risk associated with OAC therapy. Emphasizing the importance of assessing both thromboembolic and bleeding risks, we present clinical tools for estimating stroke and systemic embolism (SSE) and bleeding risk in AF and VTE patients. We also address overlapping risk factors and the dynamic nature of bleeding risk.

EXPERT OPINION

The OAC management is undergoing constant transformation, motivated by the primary objective of mitigating thromboembolism and bleeding hazards, thereby amplifying patient safety throughout the course of treatment. The future of OAC embraces personalized approaches and innovative therapies, driven by advanced pathophysiological insights and technological progress. This holds promise for improving patient outcomes and revolutionizing anticoagulation practices.

Assessment and mitigation of bleeding risk in atrial fibrillation and venous thromboembolism: A Position Paper from the ESC Working Group on Thrombosis, in collaboration with the European Heart Rhythm Association, the Association for Acute CardioVascular Care and the Asia-Pacific Heart Rhythm Society

Whilst there is a clear clinical benefit of oral anticoagulation (OAC) in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) and venous thromboembolism (VTE) in reducing the risks of thromboembolism, major bleeding events (especially intracranial bleeds) may still occur and be devastating. The decision to initiate and continue anticoagulation is often based on a careful assessment of both the thromboembolism and bleeding risk. The more common and validated bleeding risk factors have been used to formulate bleeding risk stratification scores, but thromboembolism and bleeding risk factors often overlap. Also, many factors that increase bleeding risk are transient and modifiable, such as variable international normalized ratio values, surgical procedures, vascular procedures, or drug-drug and food-drug interactions. Bleeding risk is also not a static 'one off' assessment based on baseline factors but is dynamic, being influenced by ageing, incident comorbidities, and drug therapies. In this Consensus Document, we comprehensively review the published evidence and propose a consensus on bleeding risk assessments in patients with AF and VTE, with the view to summarizing 'best practice' when approaching antithrombotic therapy in these patients. We address the epidemiology and size of the problem of bleeding risk in AF and VTE, review established bleeding risk factors, and summarize definitions of bleeding. Patient values and preferences, balancing the risk of bleeding against thromboembolism are reviewed, and the prognostic implications of bleeding are discussed. We propose consensus statements that may help to define evidence gaps and assist in everyday clinical practice.

Assessment and Mitigation of Bleeding Risk in Atrial Fibrillation and Venous Thromboembolism: Executive Summary of a European and Asia-Pacific Expert Consensus Paper

While there is a clear clinical benefit of oral anticoagulation in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) and venous thromboembolism (VTE) in reducing the risks of thromboembolism, major bleeding events (especially intracranial bleeds) may still occur and be devastating. The decision for initiating and continuing anticoagulation is often based on a careful assessment of both thromboembolism and bleeding risk. The more common and validated bleeding risk factors have been used to formulate bleeding risk stratification scores, but thromboembolism and bleeding risk factors often overlap. Also, many factors that increase bleeding risk are transient and modifiable, such as variable international normalized ratio values, surgical procedures, vascular procedures, or drug-drug and food-drug interactions. Bleeding risk is also not a static "one-off" assessment based on baseline factors but is dynamic, being influenced by aging, incident comorbidities, and drug therapies. In this executive summary of a European and Asia-Pacific Expert Consensus Paper, we comprehensively review the published evidence and propose a consensus on bleeding risk assessments in patients with AF and VTE, with a view to summarizing "best practice" when approaching antithrombotic therapy in these patients. We address the epidemiology and size of the problem of bleeding risk in AF and VTE, and review established bleeding risk factors and summarize definitions of bleeding. Patient values and preferences, balancing the risk of bleeding against thromboembolism, are reviewed, and the prognostic implications of bleeding are discussed. We propose consensus statements that may help to define evidence gaps and assist in everyday clinical practice.

A systematic review of patient-reported outcomes associated with the use of direct-acting oral anticoagulants

AIMS

Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) are a distinctive method of evaluating patient response to health care or treatment. This systematic review aimed to analyse the impact of PROs in patients on direct oral anticoagulant (DOAC) treatment, prescribed for any indication (e.g. venous thromboembolism treatment or atrial fibrillation) using controlled trials (CT) and real-world observational studies (OS).

METHODS

A systematic search of articles was conducted according to PRISMA guidelines using databases, with the last update in November 2018. The Cochrane Collaboration tool for assessing bias in randomized CTs and the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale adapted for cross-sectional studies were used. Outcomes evaluated were related to health-related quality of life (HRQoL), satisfaction, adherence and compliance.

RESULTS

Twenty-one original studies (6 CT, 15 OS) were included. HRQoL was assessed by 6 (1 CT, 5 OS) studies and reported that HRQoL scores were similar in patients on DOACs and warfarin. Patients prescribed DOACs presented higher HRQoL scores which were attributed to lack of intense monitoring required compared with warfarin but this was not statistically significant. The majority of studies (5 CT, 9 OS) investigated patient-reported satisfaction, indicating greater satisfaction with DOACs with significantly lower burden and increased benefit scores for patients on DOACs. Patient-reported expectations, compliance and adherence were similar for patients on DOACs and warfarin.

CONCLUSION

Patients appear to prefer treatment with DOACs vs warfarin. This is shown by the higher quality of life, satisfaction and adherence described in the studies. However, heterogeneity in the analysed studies does not allow firm conclusions.

Differences in utility elicitation methods in cardiovascular disease: a systematic review

AIMS

Utility values inform estimates of the cost-effectiveness of treatment for cardiovascular disease (CVD), but values can vary depending on the method used. The aim of this systematic literature review (SLR) was to explore how methods of elicitation impact utility values for CVD.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This review identified English-language articles in Embase, MEDLINE, and the gray literature published between September 1992 and August 2015 using keywords for "utilities" and "stroke", "heart failure", "myocardial infarction", or "angina". Variability in utility values based on the method of elicitation, tariff, or type of respondent was then reported.

RESULTS

This review screened 4,341 citations; 290 of these articles qualified for inclusion in the SLR because they reported utility values for one or more of the cardiovascular conditions of interest listed above. Of these 290, the 41 articles that provided head-to-head comparisons of utility methods for CVD were reviewed. In this sub-set, it was found that methodological differences contributed to variation in utility values. Direct methods often yielded higher scores than did indirect methods. Within direct methods, there were no clear trends in head-to-head studies (standard gamble [SG] vs time trade-off); but general population respondents often provided lower scores than did patients with the disease when evaluating the same health states with SG methods. When comparing indirect methods, the EQ-5D typically yielded higher values than the SF-6D, but also showed more sensitivity to differences in health states.

CONCLUSIONS

When selecting CVD utility values for an economic model, consideration of the utility elicitation method is important, as this review demonstrates that methodology of choice impacts utility values in CVD.

Patient Preferences for Oral Anticoagulation Therapy in Atrial Fibrillation: A Systematic Literature Review

OBJECTIVES

Since the introduction of non-vitamin K antagonist (VKA) oral anticoagulants (NOACs), an additional treatment option, apart from VKAs, has become available for stroke prevention in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF). For various reasons, it is important to consider patients' preferences regarding type of medication, particularly in view of the established relationship between preferences towards treatment, associated burden of treatment, and treatment adherence. This review aimed to systematically analyse the scientific literature assessing the preferences of AF patients with regard to long-term oral anticoagulant (OAC) treatment.

METHODS

We searched the MEDLINE, Scopus and EMBASE databases (from 1980 to 2015), added records from reference lists of publications found, and conducted a systematic review based on all identified publications. Outcomes of interest included any quantitative information regarding the opinions or preferences of AF patients towards OAC treatment, ideally specified according to different clinical or convenience attributes describing different OAC treatment options.

RESULTS

Overall, 27 publications describing the results of studies conducted in 12 different countries were included in our review. Among these, 16 studies analysed patient preferences towards OACs in general. These studies predominantly assessed which benefits (mainly lower stroke risk) AF patients would require to tolerate harms (mainly higher bleeding risk) associated with an OAC. Most studies showed that patients were willing to accept higher bleeding risks if a certain threshold in stroke risk reduction could be reached. Nevertheless, most of the publications also showed that the preferences of AF patients towards OACs may differ from the perspective of clinical guidelines or the perspective of physicians. The remaining 11 studies included in our review assessed the preferences of AF patients towards specific OAC medication options, namely NOACs versus VKAs. Our review showed that AF patients prefer easy-to-administer treatments, such as treatments that are applied once daily without any food/drug interactions and without the need for bridging and frequent blood controls.

CONCLUSION

Stroke risk reduction and a moderate increase in the risk of bleeding are the most important attributes for an AF patient when deciding whether they are for or against OAC treatment. If different anticoagulation options have similar clinical characteristics, convenience attributes matter to patients. In this review, AF patients favour attribute levels that describe NOAC treatment.

Patient Preferences for Oral Anticoagulation Therapy in Atrial Fibrillation: A Systematic Literature Review

OBJECTIVES

Since the introduction of non-vitamin K antagonist (VKA) oral anticoagulants (NOACs), an additional treatment option, apart from VKAs, has become available for stroke prevention in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF). For various reasons, it is important to consider patients' preferences regarding type of medication, particularly in view of the established relationship between preferences towards treatment, associated burden of treatment, and treatment adherence. This review aimed to systematically analyse the scientific literature assessing the preferences of AF patients with regard to long-term oral anticoagulant (OAC) treatment.

METHODS

We searched the MEDLINE, Scopus and EMBASE databases (from 1980 to 2015), added records from reference lists of publications found, and conducted a systematic review based on all identified publications. Outcomes of interest included any quantitative information regarding the opinions or preferences of AF patients towards OAC treatment, ideally specified according to different clinical or convenience attributes describing different OAC treatment options.

RESULTS

Overall, 27 publications describing the results of studies conducted in 12 different countries were included in our review. Among these, 16 studies analysed patient preferences towards OACs in general. These studies predominantly assessed which benefits (mainly lower stroke risk) AF patients would require to tolerate harms (mainly higher bleeding risk) associated with an OAC. Most studies showed that patients were willing to accept higher bleeding risks if a certain threshold in stroke risk reduction could be reached. Nevertheless, most of the publications also showed that the preferences of AF patients towards OACs may differ from the perspective of clinical guidelines or the perspective of physicians. The remaining 11 studies included in our review assessed the preferences of AF patients towards specific OAC medication options, namely NOACs versus VKAs. Our review showed that AF patients prefer easy-to-administer treatments, such as treatments that are applied once daily without any food/drug interactions and without the need for bridging and frequent blood controls.

CONCLUSION

Stroke risk reduction and a moderate increase in the risk of bleeding are the most important attributes for an AF patient when deciding whether they are for or against OAC treatment. If different anticoagulation options have similar clinical characteristics, convenience attributes matter to patients. In this review, AF patients favour attribute levels that describe NOAC treatment.

Anticoagulation in Heart Failure: a Review

Heart failure (HF) with reduced left ventricular function inflicts a large and growing burden of morbidity and mortality in the US and across the globe. One source of this burden is stroke. While it appears that HF itself may impose some risk of stroke, it is in the presence of other risk factors, like atrial fibrillation, that the greatest risks are observed. Therapeutic anticoagulation is the mainstay of risk reduction strategies in this population. While warfarin was the only available therapy for anticoagulation for many decades, there are now four direct oral anticoagulants available. In three of these four, outcomes in the specific subgroup of patients with heart failure have been examined. In this review, we provide some pathophysiologic basis for the risk of stroke in heart failure. In addition, the available therapeutic options for stroke risk prevention in heart failure are described in detail including how these options are incorporated into relevant professional society guidelines.