Abstract
Aim. Many new oral anticoagulants (NOACs; dabigatran, rivaroxaban, and apixaban) are currently available to treat thromboembolic disease. There are no head-to-head trials comparing these agents. To assess the efficacy and safety of NOACs for prevention of recurrent venous thromboembolism (VTE), we performed a network meta-analysis.
Methods. Medline, Embase, and the Cochrane-controlled trial register were searched, without language restriction, to identify trials. Studies were evaluated according to a priori inclusion criteria and appraised using established internal validity criteria. Adjusted indirect comparisons between agents were performed using well-established methods.
Results. Three trials meeting inclusion criteria were identified. Direct comparison between apixaban 2.5 mg twice daily (BID) versus apixaban 5 mg BID showed no difference for any outcome. Clinically relevant non-major bleeding occurred less with both apixaban 2.5 mg BID (OR 0.23,95% CI 0.08-0.62, P=0.004) and apixaban 5 mg BID [OR 0.31, 95% CI 0.11-0.82, P=0.019] compared to rivaroxaban 20 mg daily. Apixaban 2.5 mg BID showed less clinically relevant non-major bleeding than dabigatran 150 mg BID [OR 0.4,95% CI 0.16-0.9, P=0.04], but not apixaban 5 mg BID. There were no differences between rivaroxaban 20 mg daily and dabigatran 150 mg BID. No differences in risk for recurrent VTE, major bleeding, or mortality were observed for any comparison between any pair of NOACs.
Conclusion. There were no significant differences in risk for recurrent VTE, major bleeding, or all-cause mortality between the NOACs. However, apixaban 2.5 mg BID was associated with less clinically significant non-major bleeding than either rivaroxaban 20 mg daily or dabigatran 150 mg BID.