Effect of Rivaroxaban vs Enoxaparin on Major Cardiac Adverse Events and Bleeding Risk in the Acute Phase of Acute Coronary Syndrome: The H-REPLACE Randomized Equivalence and Noninferiority Trial
Shenghua Zhou,Yichao Xiao,Chonglun Zhou,Zhaofen Zheng,Weihong Jiang,Qiang Shen,Can Zhu,Hongwei Pan,Changhui Liu,Gaofeng Zeng,Liangqing Ge,Yumin Zhang,Zewei Ouyang,Guang Fu,Gang Pan,Feng Chen,Lihong Huang,Qiming Liu
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2022.55709
2023-01-01
JAMA Network Open
Abstract:ImportanceParenteral enoxaparin is a preferred anticoagulant used in the acute phase for patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS). The safety and efficacy of short-term low-dose rivaroxaban in this clinical setting remain unknown. ObjectiveTo compare the safety and efficacy of rivaroxaban vs enoxaparin in the acute phase of ACS. Design, Setting, and ParticipantsThis multicenter, prospective, open-label, active-controlled, equivalence and noninferiority trial was conducted from January 2017 through May 2021 with a 6-month follow-up at 21 hospitals in China. Participants included patients with ACS missing the primary reperfusion window or before selective revascularization. Data were analyzed from November 2021 to November 2022. InterventionsParticipants were randomized 1:1:1 to oral rivaroxaban 2.5 mg or 5 mg or 1 mg/kg subcutaneous enoxaparin twice daily in addition to dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT; aspirin 100 mg and clopidogrel 75 mg once daily) for a mean of 3.7 days. Main Outcomes and MeasuresThe primary safety end point was bleeding events, as defined by the International Society on Thrombosis and Haemostasis, and the primary efficacy end point was major adverse cardiovascular events (MACEs), including cardiac death, myocardial infarction, rerevascularization, or stroke during the 6-month follow-up. ResultsOf 2055 enrolled patients, 2046 (99.6%) completed the trial (mean [SD] age 65.8 [8.2] years, 1443 [70.5%] male) and were randomized to enoxaparin (680 patients), rivaroxaban 2.5 mg (683 patients), or rivaroxaban 5 mg (683 patients). Bleeding rates were 46 patients (6.8%) in the enoxaparin group, 32 patients (4.7%) in the rivaroxaban 2.5 mg group, and 36 patients (5.3%)in the rivaroxaban 5 mg group (rivaroxaban 2.5 mg vs enoxaparin: noninferiority hazard ratio [HR], 0.68; 95% CI, 0.43 to 1.07; P=.005; rivaroxaban 5 mg vs enoxaparin: noninferiority HR, 0.88; 95% CI, 0.70 to 1.09; P=.001). The incidence of MACEs was similar among groups, and noninferiority was reached in the rivaroxaban 5 mg group (HR, 0.60; 95% CI, 0.31 to 1.16, P=.02) but not in the rivaroxaban 2.5 mg group (HR, 0.68; 95% CI, 0.36 to 1.30; P=.05) compared with the enoxaparin group. Conclusions and RelevanceIn this equivalence and noninferiority trial, oral rivaroxaban 5 mg showed noninferiority to subcutaneous enoxaparin (1 mg/kg) for patients with ACS treated with DAPT during the acute phase. Results of this feasibility study provide useful information for designing future randomized clinical trials with sufficient sample sizes. Trial RegistrationClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03363035