Abstract:Stroke prevention guidance for patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) uses evidence generated from randomised controlled trials (RCTs). However, applicability to patient groups excluded from trials remains unknown. Real-world patient data provide an opportunity to evaluate outcomes in a trial analogous population of direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) users and in patients otherwise excluded from RCTs; however, there remains uncertainty on the validity of methods and suitability of the data. Successful reference trial emulation can support the generation of evidence around treatment effects in groups excluded or underrepresented in trials. We used linked United Kingdom primary care data to investigate whether we could emulate the pivotal ARISTOTLE trial (apixaban versus warfarin) and extend the analysis to investigate the impact of warfarin time in therapeutic range (TTR) on results. Patients with AF in the UK Clinical Practice Research Datalink (CPRD Aurum) prescribed apixaban or warfarin from 1 January 2013 to 31 July 2019 were selected. ARISTOTLE eligibility criteria were applied to this population and matched to the RCT apixaban arm on baseline characteristics creating a trial-analogous apixaban cohort; this was propensity-score matched to warfarin users in the CPRD Aurum. ARISTOTLE outcomes were assessed using Cox proportional hazards regression stratified by prior warfarin exposure status during 2.5 years of patient follow-up and results benchmarked against the trial results before treatment effectiveness was further evaluated based on (warfarin) TTR. The dataset comprised 8,734 apixaban users and propensity-score matched 8,734 warfarin users. Results [hazard ratio (95% confidence interval)] confirmed apixaban noninferiority for stroke or systemic embolism (SE) [CPRD 0.98 (0.82,1.19) versus trial 0.79 (0.66,0.95)] and death from any cause [CPRD 1.03 (0.93,1.14) versus trial 0.89 (0.80,0.998)] but did not indicate apixaban superiority. Absolute event rates for stroke/SE were similar for apixaban in CPRD Aurum and ARISTOTLE (1.27%/year), whereas a lower event rate was observed for warfarin (CPRD Aurum 1.29%/year, ARISTOTLE 1.60%/year). Analysis by TTR suggested similar effectiveness of apixaban compared with poorly controlled warfarin (TTR < 0.75) for stroke/SE [0.91 (0.73, 1.14)], all-cause death [0.94 (0.84, 1.06)], and superiority for major bleeding [0.74 (0.63, 0.86)]. However, when compared with well-controlled warfarin (TTR ≥ 0.75), apixaban was associated with an increased hazard for all-cause death [1.20 (1.04, 1.37)], and there was no significant benefit for major bleeding [1.08 (0.90, 1.30)]. The main limitation of the study's methodology are the risk of residual confounding, channelling bias and attrition bias in the warfarin arm, and selection bias and misclassification in the analysis by TTR. Analysis of noninterventional data generated results demonstrating noninferiority of apixaban versus warfarin consistent with prespecified benchmarking criteria. Unlike in ARISTOTLE, superiority of apixaban versus warfarin was not seen, possible due to the lower proportion of Asian patients and higher proportion of patients with well-controlled warfarin compared to ARISTOTLE. This methodological template can be used to investigate treatment effects of oral anticoagulants in patient groups excluded from or underrepresented in trials and provides a framework that can be adapted to investigate treatment effects for other conditions.

Using real-world evidence to complement evidence from randomized controlled trials on oral anticoagulants for stroke prevention

Use of real-world evidence in meta-analyses and cost-effectiveness models

Comparison of oral anticoagulants for stroke prevention in atrial fibrillation using the UK clinical practice research Datalink Aurum: A reference trial (ARISTOTLE) emulation study

Direct Oral Anticoagulants for Stroke Prevention in Patients with Device-Detected Atrial Fibrillation: A Study-Level Meta-Analysis of the NOAH-AFNET 6 and ARTESiA Trials

Comparing the Real-World and Clinical Trial Bleeding Rates Associated with Oral Anticoagulation Treatment for Atrial Fibrillation

Real-world evidence of direct oral anticoagulants in patients with atrial fibrillation and cancer: A meta-analysis

Practice-derived data on non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulant therapy to complement observations from randomized trials

When Direct Oral Anticoagulants Should Not Be Standard Treatment

Comparison of Direct Oral Anticoagulant Use for the Treatment of Non-Valvular Atrial Fibrillation in Pivotal Clinical Trials vs. the Real-World Setting: A Population-Based Study from Southern Italy

Fitting the right non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulant to the right patient with non-valvular atrial fibrillation: an evidence-based choice

Advancing Pharmacoequity in Atrial Fibrillation

Comparative effectiveness and safety of oral anticoagulants for atrial fibrillation in real-world practice: a population-based cohort study protocol

Direct oral anticoagulants for stroke prevention in patients with device-detected atrial fibrillation: assessing net clinical benefit

Real-World Insights Using Natural Language Processing and Machine Learning

Effectiveness and safety in non-valvular atrial fibrillation patients switching from warfarin to direct oral anticoagulants in US healthcare claims

Patient Perspectives on Factors Affecting Direct Oral Anticoagulant Use for Stroke Prevention in Atrial Fibrillation

Direct Acting Oral Anticoagulant vs. Warfarin in the Prevention of Thromboembolism in Patients With Non-valvular Atrial Fibrillation With Valvular Heart Disease—A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Direct-Acting Oral Anticoagulants and Potential Inconsistencies with FDA-Approved Dosing for Non-Valvular Atrial Fibrillation: A Retrospective Real-World Analysis Across Nine US Healthcare Systems

Anticoagulant and Antiplatelet therapy for the prevention of stroke in AF with arterial origin stroke: a meta-analysis.

Ten years of direct oral anticoagulants: lessons learned and challenges ahead

Comparative effectiveness and safety of direct oral anticoagulants versus vitamin K antagonists in nonvalvular atrial fibrillation: a Canadian multicentre observational cohort study