Download PDF
Phlebologie 2013; 42(03): 139-148
DOI: 10.12687/phleb2146-3-2013
Originalarbeit
Schattauer GmbH

Klinische Studien zu neuen direkten oralen Antikoagulanzien

Mehrwert indirekter Vergleiche (Netzwerkanalysen) Article in several languages: deutsch | English
J. Harenberg
1   Abteilung für klinische Pharmakologie, Medizinische Fakultät Mannheim, Universität Heidelberg, Mannheim, Deutschland
,
C. Weiss
2   Abteilung für Biometrie und Statistik, Medizinische Fakultät Mannheim, Universität Heidelberg, Mannheim, Deutschland
,
S. Marx
1   Abteilung für klinische Pharmakologie, Medizinische Fakultät Mannheim, Universität Heidelberg, Mannheim, Deutschland
,
S. Zolfaghari
1   Abteilung für klinische Pharmakologie, Medizinische Fakultät Mannheim, Universität Heidelberg, Mannheim, Deutschland
› Author Affiliations
Further Information

Publication History

Publication Date:
04 January 2018 (online)

  PDF Download  Permissions and Reprints

Zusammenfassung

Um die Wirksamkeit und Verträglichkeit neuer direkter oraler Antikoagulanzien (DOAK) zu vergleichen, müssten idealerweise eine direkte Gegenüberstellung der Substanzen in klinischen Studien durchgeführt werden. Auf Grund des logistischen und finanziellen Aufwandes wird dies aber in absehbarer Zeit nicht geschehen. Indirekte Vergleiche, auch Netzwerkanalysen (NMA) genannt, lassen sich mit den vorliegenden Studien zwischen den DOAKs vornehmen. In der postoperativen Phase nach Knie- und Hüftgelenkersatz und bei Patienten mit Vorhofflimmern sind derzeit diese Vergleich möglich. Indirekte Vergleiche sind jedoch auch mit Einschränkungen behaftet.

Diese Arbeit gibt eine Übersicht der aktuell vorliegenden NMAs und versucht, deren Ergebnisse mit der Pharmakologie der DOAKs und den methodischen Problemen von NMAs zu beleuchten.

Schlüsselwörter

Antikoagulanzien - Apixaban - Dabigatran - Rivaroxaban - Edoxaban - Vorhofflimmern - postoperative Thromboembolieprophylaxe
 

  • Literatur

  • 1 Roskell NS, Lip GY, Noack H. et al. Treatments for stroke prevention in atrial fibrillation: a network meta-analysis and indirect comparisons versus dabigatran etexilate. Thromb Haemost 2010; 104: 1106-1115.
    Article in Thieme ConnectGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Hart RG, Pearce LA, Aguilar MI. Adjusted-dose warfarin versus aspirin for preventing stroke in patients with atrial fibrillation. Ann Intern Med 2007; 147: 590-592.
    Google Scholar
  • 3 Lip GY, Andreotti F, Fauchier L. et al. Bleeding risk assessment and management in atrial fibrillation patients. Thromb Haemost 2011; 106: 997-1011.
    Article in Thieme ConnectGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Ansell J, Hirsh J, Hylek E. et al. Pharmacology and management of the vitamin K antagonists: American College of Chest Physicians Evidence-Based Clinical Practice Guidelines (8th ed). Chest 2008; 133 (06) 160S-198S.
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Ogilvie IM, Newton N, Welner SA. et al. Underuse of oral anticoagulants in atrial fibrillation: a systematic review. Am J Med 2010; 123: 638-645.
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Tasker A, Harbord R, Bannister GC. Meta-analysis of low molecular weight heparin versus placebo in patients undergoing total hip replacement and post-operative morbidity and mortality since their introduction. Hip Int 2010; 20: 64-74.
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Falck-Ytter Y, Francis CW, Johanson NA. et al. Prevention of VTE in orthopedic surgery patients: Antithrombotic Therapy and Prevention of Thrombosis, 9th ed. American College of Chest Physicians Evidence-Based Clinical Practice Guidelines. Chest 2012; 141 (02) e278S-325S.
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Linkins LA, Dans AL, Moores LK. et al. Treatment and prevention of heparin-induced thrombocytopenia: Antithrombotic Therapy and Prevention of Thrombosis, 9th ed. American College of Chest Physicians Evidence-Based Clinical Practice Guidelines. Chest 2012; 141 (Suppl. 02) e495S-530S.
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Harenberg J, Wehling M. Current and future prospects for anticoagulant therapy: inhibitors of factor Xa and factor IIa. Semin Thromb Hemost 2008; 34: 39-57.
    Article in Thieme ConnectGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Connolly SJ, Ezekowitz MD, Yusuf S. et al. Dabigatran versus warfarin in patients with atrial fibrillation. N Engl J Med 2009; 361: 1139-1151.
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Connolly SJ, Ezekowitz MD, Yusuf S. et al. Newly identified events in the RE-LY trial. N Engl J Med 2010; 363: 1875-1876.
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Patel MR, Mahaffey KW, Garg J. et al. Rivaroxaban versus warfarin in nonvalvular atrial fibrillation. N Engl J Med 2011; 365: 883-891.
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 13 Granger CB, Alexander JH, McMurray JJ. et al. Apixaban versus warfarin in patients with atrial fibrillation. N Engl J Med 2011; 365: 981-992.
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 14 Glenny AM, Altman DG, Song F. et al. Indirect comparisons of competing interventions. Health Technol Assess 2005; 9: 1-134.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 15 Lumley T. Network meta-analysis for indirect treatment comparisons. Stat Med 2002; 21: 2313-2324.
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 16 Ades AE, Madan J, Welton NJ. Indirect and mixed treatment comparisons in arthritis research. Rheumatology 2011; 50 (Suppl. 04) Iv5-9.
    Google Scholar
  • 17 Cooper NJ, Sutton AJ, Morris D. et al. Addressing between-study heterogeneity and inconsistency in mixed treatment comparisons: application to stroke prevention treatments in individuals with nonrheumatic atrial fibrillation. Stat Med 2009; 28: 1861-1881.
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 18 Salanti G, Higgins JP, Ades AE, Ioannidis JP. Evaluation of networks of randomized trials. Stat Methods Med Res 2008; 17: 279-301.
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 19 Jansen JP, Fleurence R, Devine B. et al. Interpreting indirect treatment comparisons and network meta-analysis for health-care decision making: report of the ISPOR Task Force on Indirect Treatment Comparisons Good Research Practices: part 1. Value Health 2011; 14: 417-428.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 20 Hoaglin DC, Hawkins N, Jansen JP. et al. Conducting indirect-treatment-comparison and network-meta-analysis studies: report of the ISPOR Task Force on Indirect Treatment Comparisons Good Research Practices: part 2. Value Health 2011; 14: 429-437.
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 21 Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, Altman DG. Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. Ann Intern Med 2009; 151: 264-269.
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 22 Harenberg J, Marx S, Diener HC. et al. Comparison of efficacy and safety of dabigatran, rivaroxaban and apixaban in patients with atrial fibrillation using network meta-analysis. Int Angiol 2012; 31: 330-339.
    Google Scholar
  • 23 Lip GY, Larsen TB, Skjøth F. et al. Indirect comparisons of new oral anticoagulant drugs for efficacy and safety when used for stroke prevention in atrial fibrillation. J Am Coll Cardiol 2012; 60: 738-746.
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 24 Mantha S, Ansell J. An indirect comparison of dabigatran, rivaroxaban and apixaban for atrial fibrillation. Thromb Haemost 2012; 108: 476-484.
    Article in Thieme ConnectGoogle Scholar
  • 25 Wells GA, Coyle D, Cameron C. et al. Safety, effectiveness, and cost-effectiveness of new oral anticoagulants compared with warfarin in preventing stroke and other cardiovascular events in patients with atrial fibrillation. www.cadth.ca/media/pdf/NOAC_Therapeutic_Review_final_report.pdf (assessed Dec 22, 2012)
    Google Scholar
  • 26 Harenberg J, Marx S, Wehling M. Head-to-head or indirect comparisons of the novel oral anticoagulants in atrial fibrillation: what’s next?. Thromb Haemost 2012; 108: 407-409.
    Article in Thieme ConnectGoogle Scholar
  • 27 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: 480-486.
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 28 Camm AJ, Kirchhof P, Lip GY. et al. Guidelines for the management of atrial fibrillation: The task force for the management of atrial fibrillation of the European Society of Cardiology. Europace 2010; 12: 1360-1420.
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 29 You JJ, Singer DE, Howard PA. et al. Antithrombotic therapy for atrial fibrillation: Antithrombotic therapy and prevention of thrombosis, 9th ed: American college of chest physicians evidence-based clinical practice guidelines. Chest 2012; 141: e531S-575S.
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 30 Harenberg J, Lip GY. Differences between indirect comparison studies of the oral anticoagulants for stroke prevention in atrial fibrillation: where do we go next?. QJM 2013; 106: 95-96.
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 31 Testa L, Agnifili M, Latini RA. et al. Adjusted indirect comparison of new oral anticoagulants for stroke prevention in atrial fibrillation. QJM 2012; 105: 949-957.
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 32 Miller CS, Grandi SM, Shimony A. et al. Meta-analysis ofefficacy and safety of new oral anticoagulants (dabigatran, rivaroxaban, apixaban) versus warfarin in patients with atrial fibrillation. Am J Cardiol 2012; 110: 453-460.
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 33 Dentali F, Riva N, Crowther M. et al. Efficacy and safety of the novel oral anticoagulants in atrial fibrillation: a systematic review and meta-analysis of the Literature. Circulation 2012; 126: 2381-2391.
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 34 Rasmussen LH, Larsen TB, Graungaard T. et al. Primary and secondary prevention with new oral anticoagulant drugs for stroke prevention in atrial fibrillation: indirect comparison analysis. BMJ 2012; 345: e7097
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 35 Alonso-Coello P, Zhou Q, Guyatt G. Home-monitoring of oral anticoagulation vs. dabigatran. An indirect comparison. Thromb Haemost 2012; 108: 647-653.
    Article in Thieme ConnectGoogle Scholar
  • 36 Trkulja V, Kolundzic R. Rivaroxaban vs dabigatran for thromboprophylaxis after joint-replacement surgery: exploratory indirect comparison based on meta-analysis of pivotal clinical trials. Croat Med J 2010; 51: 113-123.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 37 Lereun C, Wells P, Diamantopoulos A. et al. An indirect comparison, via enoxaparin, of rivaroxaban with dabigatran in the prevention of venous thromboembolism after hip or knee replacement. J Med Econ 2011; 14: 238-244.
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 38 Loke YK, Kwok CS. Dabigatran and rivaroxaban for prevention of venous thromboembolism-systematic review and adjusted indirect comparison. J Clin Pharm Ther 2011; 36: 111-124.
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 39 Cohen A, Drost P, Marchant N. et al. The Efficacy and Safety of Pharmacological Prophylaxis of Venous Thromboembolism Following Elective Knee or Hip Replacement. Clin Appl Thromb Hemost 2012; 18: 611-627.
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 40 Dahl OE, Quinlan DJ, Bergqvist D. et al. A critical appraisal of bleeding events reported in venous thromboembolism prevention trials of patients undergoing hip and knee arthroplasty. J Thromb Haemost 2010; 8: 1966-1975.
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 41 Maratea D, Fadda V, Trippoli S, Messori A. Prevention of venous thromboembolism after major orthopedic surgery. J Thromb Haemost 2011; 9: 1868-1870.
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 42 Gómez-Outes A. et al. Dabigatran, rivaroxaban, or apixaban versus enoxaparin for thromboprophylaxis after total hip or knee replacement. BMJ 2012; 344: e3675
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 43 Harenberg J, Marx S, Dahl OE. et al. Interpretation of endpoints in a network meta-analysis of new oral anticoagulants following total hip or total knee replacement surgery. Thromb Haemost 2012; 108: 903-912.
    Article in Thieme ConnectGoogle Scholar
  • 44 Hamid JS, Meaney C, Crowcroft NS, Granerod J, Beyene J. UK Etiology of Encephalitis Study Group. BMC Infect Dis 2010; 10: 364-374.
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 45 Song EK. et al. Symptom clusters predict event-free survival in patients with heart failure. J Cardiovasc Nurs 2010; 25: 284-291.
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 46 McLachlan GJ. Cluster analysis and related techniques in medical research. Stat Methods Med Res 1992; 1: 27-48.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 47 Schulman S. Is the network meta-analysis (NETMA) bringing us closer to the truth?. Thromb Haemost 2012; 108: 872-875.
    Article in Thieme ConnectGoogle Scholar
  • 48 Fox BD, Kahn SR, Langleben D. et al. Efficacy and safety of novel oral anticoagulants for treatment of acute venous thromboembolism: direct and adjusted indirect meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials. BMJ 2012; 345: e7498
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 49 Freeman JV, Zhu RP, Owens DK. et al. Cost-effectiveness of dabigatran compared with warfarin for stroke prevention in atrial fibrillation. Ann Int Med 2011; 154: 1-11.
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 50 Kansal AR, Sorensen SV, Gani R. et al. Cost-effectiveness of dabigatran etexilate for the prevention of stroke and systemic embolism in UK patients with atrial fibrillation. Heart 2012; 98: 573-578.
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 51 Lee S, Anglade MW, Pham D. et al. Cost-effectiveness of rivaroxaban compared to warfarin for stroke prevention in atrial fibrillation. Am J Cardiol 2012; 110: 845-851.
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 52 Deitelzweig S. et al. Medical cost reductions associated with the usage of novel oral anticoagulants vs warfarin among atrial fibrillation patients, based on the RE-LY, ROCKET-AF, and ARISTOTLE trials. J Med Econ 2012; 15: 776-785.
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 53 Krejczy M, Harenberg J, Marx S. et al. Comparison of cost-effectiveness of anticoagulation with dabigatran, rivaroxaban and apixaban in patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation across countries. Blood 2012; 120 Suppl P1164
    Google Scholar
  • 54 Harenberg J, Weiss C. Clinical trials with new oral anticoagulants. Additive value of indirect comparisons also named network meta-analyses. Hamostaseologie 2013; 33: 62-70.
    Article in Thieme ConnectGoogle Scholar
  • 55 MacLean S. et al. American College of Chest Physicians. Patient values and preferences in decision making for antithrombotic therapy: a systematic review: Antithrombotic Therapy and Prevention of Thrombosis, 9th ed: American College of Chest Physicians Evidence-Based Clinical Practice Guidelines. Chest 2012; 141 (Suppl. 02) e1S-23S.
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 56 Camm AJ. et al. ESC Committee for Practice Guidelines-CPG; Document Reviewers. 2012 focused update of the ESC Guidelines for the management of atrial fibrillation: an update of the 2010 ESC Guidelines for the management of atrial fibrillation. Europace 2012; 14 (10) 1385-1413.
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar