BACKGROUND: The extent to which differences in results from Apixaban for Reduction in Stroke and Other Thromboembolic Events in Atrial Fibrillation (ARISTOTLE) and Rivaroxaban Once Daily Oral Direct Factor Xa Inhibition Compared with Vitamin K Antagonism for Prevention of Stroke and Embolism Trial (ROCKET) atrial fibrillation (AF)-the landmark trials for the approval of apixaban and rivaroxaban, respectively, for non-valvular AF-were influenced by differences in their protocols is debated. The potential influence of selection criteria on trial results was assessed by emulating these trials in data from the Global Anticoagulant Registry in the Field (GARFIELD)-AF registry. METHODS: Vitamin K antagonist (VKA) and non-vitamin K oral antagonist (NOAC) users from GARFIELD-AF were selected according to eligibility for the original ARISTOTLE or ROCKET AF trials. A propensity score overlap weighted Cox model was used to emulate trial randomisation between treatment groups. Adjusted HRs for stroke or systemic embolism (SE) within 2 years of enrolment were calculated for each NOAC versus VKA. RESULTS: Among patients on apixaban, rivaroxaban and VKA, 2570, 3560 and 8005 were eligible for ARISTOTLE, respectively, and 1612, 2005 and 4368, respectively, for ROCKET AF. When selecting for ARISTOTLE criteria, apixaban users had significantly lower stroke/SE risk versus VKA (HR 0.57; 95% CI 0.34 to 0.94) while no reduction was observed with rivaroxaban (HR 0.98; 95% CI 0.68 to 1.40). When selecting for ROCKET AF criteria, safety and efficacy versus VKA were similar across the NOACs. CONCLUSION: Apixaban and rivaroxaban showed similar results versus VKA in high-risk patients selected according to ROCKET AF criteria, whereas differences emerged when selecting for the more inclusive ARISTOTLE criteria. Our results highlight the importance of trial selection criteria in interpreting trial results and underline the problems faced in comparing treatments across rather than within clinical trials.

Amsterdam Public Health Personalized Medicine Amsterdam Netherlands

Cardiology Memorial Ankara Hospital Ankara Turkey

Cardiology National University Heart Centre Singapore

Cardiology Onze Lieve Vrouwe Gasthuis Amsterdam Netherlands

Cardiology St George's Hospital London Ohio USA

Cardiology University of Edinburgh and Royal Infirmary Edinburgh UK

Department of General Practice Amsterdam UMC location University of Amsterdam Amsterdam Netherlands

Department of Surgery University College London London UK

Haemostasis and Thrombosis Research Group Institute for Experimental Oncology and Therapy Research Formerly Technical University Munich Munich Germany

Medicine Alfred Hospital Monash University Melbourne Victoria Australia

Sir Ganga Ram Hospital New Delhi India

Thrombosis Research Institute London UK

Tokai University School of Medicine Graduate School of Medicine Isehara Kanagawa Japan

University Hospital Motol Prague Czech Republic

University of the Witwatersrand Johannesburg Johannesburg South Africa

See more in PubMed

Hindricks G, Potpara T, Dagres N. ESC guidelines for the diagnosis and management of atrial fibrillation developed in collaboration with the European Association of Cardio-Thoracic surgery (EACTS) Eur Heart J. 2021;42:546–7. doi: 10.1093/eurheartj/ehaa945. PubMed DOI

January CT, Wann LS, Calkins H, et al. AHA/ACC/HRS focused update of the 2014 AHA/ACC/HRS guideline for the management of patients with atrial fibrillation: a report of the American college of cardiology/American heart Association task force on clinical practice guidelines and the heart rhythm dociety. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2019;74:104–32. doi: 10.1016/j.jacc.2019.01.011. PubMed DOI

Perry M, Kemmis Betty S, Downes N, et al. Atrial fibrillation: diagnosis and management-summary of NICE guidance. BMJ. 2021;373:1150. doi: 10.1136/bmj.n1150. PubMed DOI

Camm AJ, Fox KAA, Peterson E. Challenges in comparing the non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants for atrial fibrillation-related stroke prevention. Europace. 2018;20:1–11. doi: 10.1093/europace/eux086. PubMed DOI

Granger CB, Alexander JH, McMurray JJV, et al. Apixaban versus warfarin in patients with atrial fibrillation. N Engl J Med. 2011;365:981–92. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1107039. PubMed DOI

Patel MR, Mahaffey KW, Garg J, et al. Rivaroxaban versus warfarin in Nonvalvular atrial fibrillation. N Engl J Med. 2011;365:883–91. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1009638. PubMed DOI

Kakkar AK, Mueller I, Bassand J-P, et al. International longitudinal Registry of patients with atrial fibrillation at risk of stroke: global anticoagulant registry in the FIELD (GARFIELD) Am Heart J. 2012;163:13–9. doi: 10.1016/j.ahj.2011.09.011. PubMed DOI

Fox KAA, Gersh BJ, Traore S, et al. Evolving quality standards for large-scale registries: the GARFIELD-AF experience. Eur Heart J Qual Care Clin Outcomes. 2017;3:114–22. doi: 10.1093/ehjqcco/qcw058. PubMed DOI

Lip GYH, Nieuwlaat R, Pisters R, et al. Refining clinical risk stratification for predicting stroke and thromboembolism in atrial fibrillation using a novel risk factor-based approach: the Euro heart survey on atrial fibrillation. Chest. 2010;137:263–72. doi: 10.1378/chest.09-1584. PubMed DOI

Pisters R, Lane DA, Nieuwlaat R, et al. A novel user-friendly score (HAS-BLED) to assess 1-year risk of major bleeding in patients with atrial fibrillation the Euro head survey. Chest. 2010;138:1093–100. doi: 10.1378/chest.10-0134. PubMed DOI

Fox KAA, Lucas JE, Pieper KS, et al. Improved risk stratification of patients with atrial fibrillation: an integrated GARFIELD-AF tool for the prediction of mortality, stroke and bleed in patients with and without anticoagulation. BMJ Open. 2017;7:e017157. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2017-017157. PubMed DOI PMC

Gage BF, Waterman AD, Shannon W, et al. Validation of clinical classification schemes for predicting stroke: results from the national registry of atrial fibrillation. JAMA. 2001;285:2864–70. doi: 10.1001/jama.285.22.2864. PubMed DOI

Fox KAA, Virdone S, Pieper KS, et al. GARFIELD-AF risk score for mortality, stroke and bleeding within 2 years in patients with atrial fibrillation. Eur Heart J Qual Care Clin Outcomes. 2022;8:214–27. doi: 10.1093/ehjqcco/qcab028. PubMed DOI PMC

Schulman S, Angerås U, Bergqvist D, et al. Definition of major bleeding in clinical investigations of antihemostatic medicinal products in surgical patients. J Thromb Haemost. 2010;8:202–4. doi: 10.1111/j.1538-7836.2009.03678.x. PubMed DOI

Thomas LE, Li F, Pencina MJ. Overlap weighting a propensity score method that mimics attributes of a randomized clinical trial. JAMA J Am Med Assoc. 2020;323:2417–8. doi: 10.1001/jama.2020.7819. PubMed DOI

Farjat AE, Virdone S, Thomas LE, et al. The importance of the design of observational studies in comparative effectiveness research: lessons from the GARFIELD-AF and ORBIT-AF registries. Am Heart J. 2022;243:110–21. doi: 10.1016/j.ahj.2021.09.003. PubMed DOI

Lee S, Monz BU, Clemens A, et al. Representativeness of the dabigatran, apixaban and rivaroxaban clinical trial populations to real-world atrial fibrillation patients in the United kingdom: a cross-sectional analysis using the general practice research database. BMJ Open. 2012;2:e001768. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2012-001768. PubMed DOI PMC

Hägg L, Johansson C, Jansson J-H, et al. External validity of the ARISTOTLE trial in real- life atrial fibrillation patients. Cardiovasc Ther. 2014;32:214–8. doi: 10.1111/1755-5922.12087. PubMed DOI

Desmaele S, Steurbaut S, Cornu P, et al. Clinical trials with direct oral anticoagulants for stroke prevention in atrial fibrillation: how representative are they for real life patients. Eur J Clin Pharmacol. 2016;72:1125–34. doi: 10.1007/s00228-016-2078-1. PubMed DOI

Fanning L, Ilomäki J, Bell JS, et al. The Representativeness of direct oral anticoagulant clinical trials to hospitalized patients with atrial fibrillation. Eur J Clin Pharmacol. 2017;73:1427–36. doi: 10.1007/s00228-017-2297-0. PubMed DOI

Ray WA, Chung CP, Stein CM, et al. Association of Rivaroxaban vs Apixaban with major ischemic or hemorrhagic events in patients with atrial fibrillation. JAMA. 2021;326:2395–404. doi: 10.1001/jama.2021.21222. PubMed DOI PMC

Camm AJ, Fox KAA. “Strengths and weaknesses of 'real-world' studies involving non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants”. Open Heart. 2018;5:e000788. doi: 10.1136/openhrt-2018-000788. PubMed DOI PMC

Lau WCY, Torre CO, Man KKC, et al. Comparative effectiveness and safety between apixaban, dabigatran, edoxaban, and rivaroxaban among patients with atrial fibrillation: a multinational population-based cohort study. Ann Intern Med. 2022;175:1515–24. doi: 10.7326/M22-0511. PubMed DOI

Cohen AT, Hill NR, Luo X, et al. A systematic review of network meta-analyses among patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation: a comparison of efficacy and safety following treatment with direct oral anticoagulants. Int J Cardiol. 2018;269:174–81. doi: 10.1016/j.ijcard.2018.06.114. PubMed DOI

Schneeweiss S, Gagne JJ, Patrick AR, et al. Comparative efficacy and safety of new oral anticoagulants in patients with atrial fibrillation. Circ Cardiovasc Qual Outcomes. 2012;5:480–6. doi: 10.1161/CIRCOUTCOMES.112.965988. PubMed DOI PMC

Camm AJ, Fox KAA, Virdone S, et al. Comparative effectiveness of oral anticoagulants in everyday practice. Heart. 2021;107:962–70. doi: 10.1136/heartjnl-2020-318420. PubMed DOI PMC

Haas S, Camm AJ, Bassand J-P, et al. Predictors of NOAC versus VKA use for stroke prevention in patients with newly diagnosed atrial fibrillation: results from GARFIELD-AF. Am Heart J. 2019;213:35–46. doi: 10.1016/j.ahj.2019.03.013. PubMed DOI

Fox KAA, Virdone S, Bassand J-P, et al. Do baseline characteristics and treatments account for geographical disparities in the outcomes of patients with newly diagnosed atrial fibrillation? The prospective GARFIELD-AF Registry. BMJ Open. 2022;12:e049933. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2021-049933. PubMed DOI PMC

Connolly SJ, Ezekowitz MD, Yusuf S, et al. Dabigatran versus warfarin in patients with atrial fibrillation. N Engl J Med. 2009;361:1139–51. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa0905561. PubMed DOI