Treating patients with venous thromboembolism: initial strategies and long-term secondary prevention

Therapy for venous thromboembolism (VTE) currently involves a minimum of 3 months of anticoagulation. After cessation of therapy, however, recurrent venous thrombosis occurs at rates of 6 to 9% per year. Clinical trials have demonstrated the benefits of extending anticoagulation beyond 3 months for the prevention of recurrent VTE events. Despite this, many eligible patients do not receive the required thromboprophylaxis and the incidence of recurrent VTE remains too high for a preventable condition. A reason for failure to use prophylaxis is the fear of bleeding complications with current oral anticoagulants such as warfarin. Warfarin has an unpredictable pharmacokinetic profile and a variable dose-response relationship that requires frequent coagulation monitoring and dose adjustments to maintain a target intensity that is both safe and effective. Alternative strategies for long-term prophylaxis, which may potentially provide more consistent anticoagulant responses and reduce coagulation monitoring requirements, include the use of low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH), treatment with warfarin at a lower intensity, and the introduction of novel anticoagulants. The long-term use of LMWH has been found to be a particularly favorable treatment option for cancer patients in whom it is difficult to control the intensity of anticoagulation. In clinical trials, LMWH significantly reduced the risk of recurrent VTE without increasing bleeding risk. The parenteral administration of the LMWHs, however, is a drawback for long-term use in the outpatient setting. A clinical trial assessing the efficacy and safety of long-term low-intensity warfarin treatment found this therapy to be better than placebo, but another study showed that conventional intensity warfarin was significantly more efficacious than low-intensity warfarin. New therapies in development that may offer improved safety-efficacy profiles are the synthetic pentasaccharides fondaparinux and idraparinux and the oral direct thrombin inhibitor ximelagatran. Parenterally administered fondaparinux has been shown to be as effective as LMWH for the acute treatment (5 to 7 days) of symptomatic deep vein thrombosis. Idraparinux, with once-weekly parenteral dosing, is currently being assessed in phase III clinical trials for the long-term secondary prevention of VTE. Ximelagatran is the first oral agent in the new class direct thrombin inhibitors. With a fast onset of action and oral administration, ximelagatran is a candidate for both acute and chronic therapy. The Thrombin Inhibitor in Venous Thromboembolism (THRIVE) clinical trial program has demonstrated that this agent has a favorable benefit-risk profile compared with standard therapy for the initial treatment (6 months) and secondary prevention (up to 18 months) of VTE. However, in a substantial proportion (6 to 13%) of patients given extended ximelagatran therapy, elevated serum transaminase enzymes developed, typically in the first 2 to 4 months of treatment. Even though these elevations usually abated without clinical sequelae whether or not treatment was continued, their clinical relevance remains unclear. In addition, locally reported coronary events occurred more frequently in ximelagatran-treated patients during the initial 6 months of treatment, the reason for which is yet unclear. The consistent anticoagulant response and fixed oral dosing without coagulation monitoring allows ximelagatran to overcome many of the limitations inherent to current treatment options for VTE treatment and secondary prevention, provided the problem of liver enzyme elevation and coronary events is resolved.     

Ximelagatran for treatment and prophylaxis of recurrent events in deep vein thrombosis.

The treatment of acute venous thromboembolism and prophylaxis of recurrent events with heparin/low molecular weight heparin followed by vitamin K antagonists is limited by several factors. Oral direct thrombin inhibitors (ODTIs) showed a better pharmacological activity and might be an alternative in the treatment of venous thromboembolism. The Thrombin Inhibition in Venous Thromboembolism (THRIVE) program performed some studies developing the ODTI ximelagatran for this indication, and it is presented in the overview. The aim of the THRIVE I study was the dose finding, and that of the THRIVE IV study the applicability in hemodynamic stabile pulmonary embolism. A prospective, randomized, double blind trial was performed to compare oral ximelagatran with enoxaparin/warfarin for a 6-month treatment of acute venous thrombosis (THRIVE II and V). A second double blind study compared ximelagatran with placebo over 18 months after a 6-month anticoagulant therapy of acute deep vein thrombosis. The efficacy and safety of treatment of patients with acute deep venous thrombosis who received 2 infinity 36 mg ximelagatran was not inferior to that of patients who received a conventional anticoagulant for prophylaxis of recurrent events over 6 months. Ximelagatran 2 infinity 24 mg significantly reduced recurrent thromboembolic events compared to placebo without increasing the risk for hemorrhage. A reversible symptomless increase of alanine aminotransferase occurs in 6% to 9.6% of patients between months 2 and 4. The results of the follow-up studies suggest that thromboembolic events may recur in patients with acute venous thromboembolism after termination of treatment with both vitamin K antagonists and ximelagatran.     

Prevention of stroke in patients with atrial fibrillation

Nonvalvular atrial fibrillation (AF) is an independent risk factor for stroke that becomes increasingly prevalent as populations age. More than half a dozen clinical trials have demonstrated that anticoagulation with the vitamin K antagonist warfarin is the most effective therapy for stroke prophylaxis in AF. The narrow therapeutic index of warfarin requires that the intensity of anticoagulation be maintained within the international normalized ratio (INR) range of 2.0 to 3.0 to optimize efficacy while minimizing bleeding risk. The pharmacokinetics of warfarin are subject to variability due to interactions with multiple drugs and foods, making maintenance of the INR within this range difficult to achieve in clinical practice without close coagulation monitoring and frequent dose adjustments. Current guidelines recommend oral anticoagulation for high-risk individuals with AF but these inherent limitations lead to substantial underprescribing, particularly in elderly patients at greatest risk. This has stimulated the development of new agents with improved benefit-risk profiles, such as ximelagatran, the first of the oral direct thrombin inhibitors, which has a wider therapeutic margin and low potential for drug interactions, allowing fixed dosing without anticoagulation monitoring. Ximelagatran has been evaluated for stroke prevention in AF in the Stroke Prevention using an Oral Direct Thrombin Inhibitor in Atrial Fibrillation (SPORTIF) program, the largest clinical trials of antithrombotic therapy for stroke prevention in AF to date. The phase III trials of ximelagatran in AF, SPORTIF III and V, found a fixed oral dose of ximelagatran (36 mg twice daily) comparable to dose-adjusted warfarin (INR 2.0 to 3.0) in preventing stroke and systemic thromboembolic complications among high-risk patients with AF. Results from the population of over 7000 patients in SPORTIF III and V demonstrate noninferiority of ximelagatran compared with warfarin. Data from SPORTIF III show an absolute reduction in stroke and systemic embolic events with ximelagatran compared with warfarin of 1.6% per year versus 2.3% per year, respectively ( P = 0.10). SPORTIF V further supports noninferiority between the two agents with an absolute risk reduction of 0.45%, well within the predefined noninferiority margin (95% confidence interval -0.13, 1.03; P = 0.13). Although event rates for major bleeding did not differ significantly with ximelagatran versus warfarin in either study, combined rates for major and minor bleeding were significantly reduced with ximelagatran. The overall net clinical benefit, taking into account effects on stroke or systemic embolic events, major bleeding, and death, was also greater with ximelagatran compared with warfarin in both studies. Elevated serum transaminase enzymes were observed in approximately 6% of patients given ximelagatran in these trials. These typically occurred 1 to 6 months after initiating treatment and usually abated without clinical sequelae whether or not treatment was continued. Given the consistency of response, the favorable overall benefit-risk ratio and the convenience of fixed oral dosing, ximelagatran may increase the number of patients with AF eligible for anticoagulation and amplify the potential for prophylaxis against stroke.     

Ximelagatran: a new oral anticoagulant

Although there have been many significant advances over the last 50 years with regards to anticoagulant therapy, warfarin remains the definitive standard for the long-term prevention of thromboembolic events in many patients at risk for these complications. Although effective, warfarin has a narrow therapeutic window, necessitating frequent laboratory monitoring for anticoagulant effect. Ximelagatran is an investigational anticoagulant that directly inhibits thrombin, unlike heparin or warfarin, which are indirect inhibitors. Although indirect thrombin inhibitors are mainly only effective at inhibiting circulating thrombin, direct thrombin inhibitors are able to inhibit both free and clot-bound thrombin, thereby producing more effective anticoagulation. Ximelagatran is the first orally available direct thrombin inhibitor to reach phase 3 clinical trials. Ximelagatran is a prodrug for the active metabolite melagatran, and has been demonstrated to have a relatively wide therapeutic window in terms of bleeding and antithrombotic effect compared with warfarin. Clinical studies have demonstrated ximelagatran to be comparable in efficacy to warfarin and low-molecular-weight heparins (LMWH) for prophylaxis of venous thromboembolism, comparable to warfarin for stroke prevention in the setting of atrial fibrillation, and, when combined with aspirin, possible more effective than aspirin alone at preventing major adverse cardiovascular events in patients with a recent myocardial infarction. Adverse effects with ximelagatran primarily involve bleeding complications, which are more frequent than with placebo, but appear comparable to those occurring with standard anticoagulant treatment (ie, warfarin and LMWH). Ximelagatran has also been demonstrated to cause transient increases in liver enzymes, the significance of which will need to be addressed in ongoing phase 3 studies. Should ongoing trials prove ximelagatran to have at least similar therapeutic efficacy and safety as warfarin, ximelagatran may become a first-line anticoagulant due to its ease of administration and lack of a need for drug monitoring. The results of these trials are eagerly awaited in helping to defining the place in therapy for this promising new agent.     

Ximelagatran versus warfarin for stroke prevention in patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation. SPORTIF II: a dose-guiding,tolerability, and safety study

OBJECTIVES: We sought to compare the tolerability and safety of three fixed doses of ximelagatran versus warfarin in patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF). BACKGROUND: Anticoagulants such as warfarin lower the risk of stroke in patients with NVAF. Ximelagatran is a novel, oral direct thrombin inhibitor with predictable pharmacokinetics and no known food or pharmacokinetic drug interactions. METHODS: This was a 12-week, randomized, parallel-group, dose-guiding study of NVAF patients with at least one additional risk factor for stroke. The primary end point was the number of thromboembolic events and bleedings. Three groups received ximelagatran (n = 187) at 20, 40, or 60 mg twice daily, given in a double-blind fashion, without routine coagulation monitoring. In a fourth group, warfarin (n = 67) was managed and monitored according to normal routines, aiming for an International Normalized Ratio of 2.0 to 3.0. RESULTS: A total of 254 patients received study drug. One ischemic stroke (nonfatal) and one transient ischemic attack (TIA) occurred in the ximelagatran group. Two TIAs occurred in the warfarin group. No major bleeds were observed in the ximelagatran group. One major bleed occurred in a warfarin-treated patient. The number of minor and multiple minor bleeds was low, but there was a slight increase by ximelagatran dose. The 60-mg dose resulted in the same number of bleeding events as that with warfarin. S-alanine aminotransferase was increased in eight patients (4.3%) taking ximelagatran, but normalized with continuous treatment or cessation of the drug. CONCLUSIONS: Fixed oral doses of ximelagatran up to 60 mg twice daily were well tolerated, without the need for dose adjustment or coagulation monitoring.     

Ximelagatran: oral direct thrombin inhibition as anticoagulant therapy in atrial fibrillation

Atrial fibrillation (AF) causes 50,000 to 100,000 ischemic strokes annually in the U.S., most of which could be prevented by oral anticoagulant treatment of the highest-risk patients. The greatest barrier to such treatment is the narrow therapeutic index of the vitamin K antagonists ([VKAs]: warfarin and related coumarin derivatives), the only oral anticoagulant agents currently available. Safe and effective treatment with the VKAs requires careful monitoring, because they interact with many other drugs and foods, and their anticoagulant action is unpredictable. Besides vitamin K, candidate targets for anticoagulant therapy include thrombin, a key prothrombotic mediator. Ximelagatran, the oral direct thrombin inhibitor at the most advanced stage of clinical development, is rapidly absorbed and bioconverted to its active moiety, melagatran-a potent, competitive inhibitor of both free and clot-bound thrombin. Two large clinical trials have demonstrated that fixed-dose oral ximelagatran, 36 mg twice daily, administered without coagulation monitoring, prevents stroke and systemic embolic events in patients with nonvalvular AF as effectively as well-controlled, adjusted-dose warfarin (international normalized ratio 2.0 to 3.0). The overall risk of bleeding was lower with ximelagatran than warfarin, although differences in rates of major hemorrhage were not statistically significant. Elevation of serum alanine aminotransferase levels above 3x the upper limit of normal occurred in approximately 6% of ximelagatran-treated patients but typically returned toward pretreatment levels without associated symptoms. In terms of preventing thromboembolism without hemorrhage, ximelagatran may have a more favorable benefit:risk profile than warfarin for patients with AF.     

Ximelagatran: a clinical perspective

Ximelagatran is a novel oral anticoagulant belonging to a class of drugs known as direct thrombin inhibitors. Numerous recent large-scale, randomised controlled clinical trials have given the drug a large clinical platform. These include data on the thromboprophylaxis of venous thromboembolism following major orthopaedic surgery and knee arthroscopy, as well as in the treatment of deep vein thrombosis and prevention of stroke with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation. One phase II study has also shown the efficacy and safety of ximelagatran in secondary prevention post-myocardial infarction. Unfortunately, approximately 6% of patients develop usually self-limiting derangement of liver dysfunction, and frequent monitoring of liver function is likely to be recommended for the first 6 months of treatment. Unlike the vitamin K antagonists, ximelagatran has a wide therapeutic interval with few food, alcohol or drug interactions, and it does not require anticoagulant monitoring. The aim of this overview is to review the clinical trials pertaining to this new drug, which is the first new oral anticoagulant for over 60 years, and one that is likely to influence our management of thrombosis-related disorders.     

New approaches to anticoagulation in atrial fibrillation

Oral direct thrombin inhibitors (DTIs) are a potential alternative to vitamin K antagonists, such as warfarin, for anticoagulant therapy. The oral DTI at the most advanced stage of clinical development is ximelagatran, which is rapidly absorbed and bioconverted to the active form melagatran. Oral ximelagatran has been evaluated in randomized, controlled trials for several indications, including stroke prevention in atrial fibrillation (AF). Recently, two pivotal phase III trials demonstrated that fixed-dose oral ximelagatran, 36 mg twice daily without coagulation monitoring, prevents stroke and systemic embolic events in patients with nonvalvular AF as effectively as well-controlled, adjusted-dose warfarin. Oral ximelagatran was generally well tolerated and caused less total (major plus minor) bleeding than warfarin. In a minority of ximelagatran-treated patients, elevated serum alanine aminotransferase levels were reported, but were typically not associated with specific symptoms, and returned toward the pretreatment baseline whether treatment was continued or discontinued. In AF, oral ximelagatran promises a better benefit to risk ratio than warfarin.     

Apixaban: an emerging oral factor Xa inhibitor

Apixaban, an oral direct factor Xa inhibitor, is currently in late stage clinical development for the prevention and treatment of thromboembolic diseases. In comparison with current treatment standards for venous thromboembolism (VTE) prophylaxis, apixaban has shown decreased rates of clinically significant bleeding with mixed results in terms of non-inferiority for VTE events. Secondary treatment of VTE with apixaban is currently in phase III clinical study after earlier trials showed comparable safety and efficacy outcomes. The APPRAISE-1 trial, a phase II investigation of apixaban versus placebo following acute coronary syndrome showed a higher risk of clinically significant bleeding in addition to a trend toward decreased ischemic events. A large, international phase III clinical study (APPRAISE-2) of apixaban following acute coronary syndrome is currently underway. Large, phase III studies testing apixaban for the prevention of vascular events in subjects with non-valvular atrial fibrillation are also ongoing.     

Pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of ximelagatran

Oral anticoagulant therapy with vitamin K antagonists (VKAs) such as warfarin has proven benefits in the treatment and prevention of thromboembolic disorders but has important limitations that result in substantial underuse. In particular, the VKAs have variable and unpredictable pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics and a narrow separation between antithrombotic and hemorrhagic effects that necessitates careful dose adjustment based on frequent coagulation monitoring. In contrast, the oral direct thrombin inhibitor ximelagatran has a predictable and reproducible pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic profile that allows treatment using fixed-dose regimens without coagulation monitoring. The bioavailability of melagatran, the active form of ximelagatran, after oral administration of ximelagatran is approximately 20% with low inter- and intra-individual variability. Peak plasma melagatran concentrations are reached approximately 2 hours after oral dosing of ximelagatran to healthy volunteers, and melagatran is eliminated with a half-life of approximately 3 hours with clearance predominantly by renal excretion. Hence, a higher melagatran exposure is seen in patients with renal failure; ximelagatran is currently not recommended for patients with severe renal impairment (creatinine clearance of <30 mL/min) as these patients were not included in the clinical trial program. Exposure to melagatran increases linearly with the ximelagatran dose. The pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic profile is consistent across a broad range of different patient populations and is unaffected by gender, age, body weight, ethnic origin, obesity, and mild-to-moderate hepatic impairment. Any differences in melagatran pharmacokinetics associated with these factors are attributable to differences in renal function.     

Ximelagatran,the New Oral Anticoagulant: Would Warfarin Survive the Challenge?

The last decade witnessed major advances in the prevention and treatment of venous as well as of arterial thrombosis. Limitations of existing anticoagulants led to the development of novel therapeutic approaches. Ximelagatran is a new direct thrombin inhibitor (DTI) that is given orally, without the need for close monitoring. This compound was tried in the treatment of active venous thromboembolism, and the results were encouraging. Randomized trials suggest that ximelagatran is not inferior to warfarin in the prevention of stroke in patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation. Multiple controlled, prospective trials compared ximelagatran with low molecular weight heparin or warfarin in prevention of venous thromboembolism in patients undergoing major orthopedic procedures. The results of these clinical trials are reviewed in this article. Because of certain safety concerns (increased liver enzymes, potential hepatonecrosis, and increased coronary events) ximelagatran has not yet been approved by the FDA. Additional studies may be required to address these concerns. Ximelagatran has been approved, however, by the European regulatory authorities for short‐term thromboprophylaxis. The success of ximelagatran or other oral antithrombin agents would provide significant proof of the concept for the long‐term use of oral antithrombins in the prevention and treatment of both arterial and venous thrombosis.     

New anticoagulants

Anticoagulants are pivotal agents for prevention and treatment of thromboembolic disorders. Limitations of existing anticoagulants, vitamin K antagonist and heparins, have led to the development of newer anticoagulant therapies. These anticoagulants have been designed to target specific coagulation enzymes or steps in the coagulation pathway. New anticoagulants that are under evaluation in clinical trials include: (1) inhibitors of the factor VIIa/tissue factor pathway; (2) factor Xa inhibitors, both indirect and direct; (3) activated protein C and soluble thrombomodulin; and (4) direct thrombin inhibitors. Although most of these are parenteral agents, several of the direct inhibitors of factor Xa and thrombin are orally active. Clinical development of these therapies often starts with studies in the prevention of venous thrombosis before evaluation for other indications, such as prevention of cardioembolism in patients with atrial fibrillation or prosthetic heart valves. At present, the greatest clinical need is for an oral anticoagulant to replace warfarin for long-term prevention and treatment of patients with venous and arterial thrombosis. Ximelagatran, an oral direct thrombin inhibitor, is the first of a series of promising new agents that might fulfill this need. Large phase 3 trials evaluating ximelagatran for the secondary prevention of venous thromboembolism and prevention of cardioembolic events in patients with atrial fibrillation have been completed.     

Ximelagatran for the prevention of venous thromboembolism following elective hip or knee replacement surgery

Patients undergoing major lower-extremity orthopedic surgery such as total hip replacement (THR) and total knee replacement (TKR) are at an increased risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE). Routine prophylaxis is necessary to reduce the risk of deep vein thrombosis (DVT), which may progress to potentially fatal pulmonary embolism and secondary complications such as postthrombotic syndrome, recurrent DVT, and chronic pulmonary hypertension. Prophylaxis in patients undergoing TKR, THR, and hip fracture surgery is now standard practice and generally involves anticoagulant treatment with either low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) or warfarin for a period of 7 to 10 days, with extended prophylaxis in those with ongoing risk factors such as obesity, cancer, or previous VTE. Data from clinical practice suggest that there is a general trend toward longer postsurgical prophylaxis and shorter hospital stays, making practicality of treatment an important consideration. LMWH is effective for the prophylaxis of VTE, but the parenteral route of administration is not convenient for use in the outpatient setting. Warfarin, on the other hand, can be administered orally but requires the infrastructure for careful patient monitoring and dose adjustments because of its unpredictable dose-response relationship. The development of new anticoagulants has been pursued with the aim of improving efficacy, predictability, consistency of response, safety, and convenience. A recently approved anticoagulant, fondaparinux, has been proven to provide superior efficacy for the prevention of VTE compared with LMWH, but this agent requires parenteral administration and does not overcome the convenience issue. Ximelagatran is the oral form of the direct thrombin inhibitor melagatran, which is available for subcutaneous administration. Ximelagatran has a consistent anticoagulant response allowing fixed oral dosing without the need for coagulation monitoring. The efficacy and safety profile of melagatran/ximelagatran prophylaxis for VTE following THR and TKR has compared favorably with standard LMWH prophylaxis, as seen in the European METHRO II and III trials and EXPRESS trial, and with warfarin prophylaxis, as seen in the North American EXULT A and B trials. Several prophylactic treatment regimens have been evaluated in the European trials to determine the optimal dosing and timing of first dose of melagatran to achieve the best balance of efficacy and safety. Preoperative initiation of melagatran was more effective than when prophylactic treatment was initiated postoperatively, and the lowest rates of bleeding were associated with a postoperative initiation of prophylaxis. Early administration of the first postoperative melagatran dose (4 to 8 hours) was also associated with better prophylactic efficacy relative to a later postoperative start (8 to 12 hours). The results of the comprehensive international clinical trial program and in particular the optimal balance of efficacy/safety data provided by the METHRO III study have led to approval of melagatran/ximelagatran in 2004 in the European Union for the prevention of VTE in patients undergoing elective hip or knee replacement surgery. Ximelagatran has the potential to maximize the use of anticoagulation in patients discharged following major lower-extremity orthopedic surgery.     

Anticoagulation: New challenges,old drugs

Effective atrial fibrillation (AF) management requires attention to adequate rate control, consideration for the need to maintain sinus rhythm, and deliberation regarding proper anticoagulation to prevent thromboemboli. When properly used, warfarin anticoagulation in patients with AF at high risk for stroke reduces stroke incidence markedly. Unfortunately, proper anticoagulation with warfarin is not easy. An anticoagulant drug for which there are few interactions with other drugs, food, or supplements; for which there can be uniform dosing; for which routine International Normalized Ratio monitoring is not required; and for which there is a lower risk for bleeding, will gain widespread and rapid acceptance. In two large randomized trials comparing fixed-dose ximelagatran with warfarin in noninferiority studies, ximelagatran appears to be as effective at preventing stroke and thromboembolic events as warfarin (based on intention-to-treat analysis) and with similar, if not better, long-term risk.     

Comparison of bleeding in patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation treated with ximelagatran or warfarin: assessment of incidence, case-fatality rate, time course and sites of bleeding, and risk factors for bleeding

BACKGROUND: Ximelagatran is a novel direct thrombin inhibitor that can be administered as a fixed oral dose, without the need for anticoagulant monitoring. METHODS: We undertook a pooled analysis of 7329 patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation from the Stroke Prevention Using Oral Thrombin Inhibitor in Atrial Fibrillation III and V trials to compare bleeding outcomes in patients who received ximelagatran, 36 mg twice daily, or warfarin sodium (target international normalized ratio, 2.0-3.0). We determined annual risk of bleeding (any, major), case-fatality rate, time course and anatomic sites of major bleeding, and risk factors for major bleeding with ximelagatran and warfarin treatment. RESULTS: Annual incidence of any bleeding was 31.75% with ximelagatran and 38.82% with warfarin (relative risk reduction, 18.2%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 13.0-23.1; P<.001). Annual incidence of major bleeding was 2.01% with ximelagatran and 2.68% with warfarin (relative risk reduction, 25.1%; 95% CI, 3.2-42.1; P = .03). Case-fatality rate of bleeding was comparable in ximelagatran- and warfarin-treated patients (8.16% vs 8.09%; P = .98). Cumulative incidence of major bleeding was higher with warfarin than ximelagatran after 24 months of treatment (4.7% vs 3.7%; P = .04). Anatomic sites of bleeding were comparable with both treatments. Risk factors for bleeding with ximelagatran were as follows (hazard ratios and 95% CIs in parentheses): diabetes mellitus (1.81; 1.19-2.77; P = .006), previous stroke or transient ischemic attack (1.78; 1.16-2.73; P = .008), age 75 years or greater (1.70; 1.33-2.18; P<.001), and aspirin use (1.68; 1.08-2.59; P = .02). Risk factors for bleeding in warfarin-treated patients were previous liver disease (4.88; 1.55-15.39; P = .007); aspirin use (2.41; 1.69-3.43; P<.001); and age 75 years or greater (1.26; 1.03-1.52; P = .02). CONCLUSIONS: Treatment with ximelagatran, 36 mg twice daily, is associated with a lower risk of bleeding than warfarin in patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation. Aspirin use and increasing age were associated with an increased risk of bleeding in ximelagatran- and warfarin-treated patients.     

Bleeding complications to long-term oral anticoagulant therapy

Objective: To evaluate the incidence of bleeding complications in recent randomized trials on oral anticoagulant treatment for prevention of arterial thromboembolism.Data sources: International publications on studies of prevention of arterial thromboembolism by oral anticoagulant therapy.Study selection and data extraction: Randomized trials on oral anticoagulant therapy in patients with atrial fibrillation, recent myocardial infarction, and prosthetic heart valves were selected. For comparison older nonrandomized studies were studied.Background: Oral anticoagulant drugs are recommended for primary prevention of thromboembolic events in patients with chronic atrial fibrillation, recent myocardial infarction, and prosthetic heart valves. Still many physicians hesitate to prescribe anticoagulant drugs, presumably for fear of bleeding complications.Results: In six recent trials of warfarin in patients with atrial fibrillation, the highest annual incidence of fatal and major bleeding was 0.8% and 2.0%, respectively. In patients treated with warfarin after a recent myocardial infarction, the incidence of fatal and major bleeding was 0.2% and 0.5% per year, respectively. The annual incidence of fatal and major bleeding in patients with prosthetic heart valves on warfarin treatment was found to be 1.4% and 5.2%, respectively. The mean incidence of fatal and major bleeding in patients on warfarin in these eight trials was 0.5% and 1.7% per year, respectively. The mean incidence of fatal and major bleeds in patients on placebo was 0.1% and 0.7% per year, respectively. In three randomized trials evaluating aspirin versus warfarin, the respective mean incidences of fatal and major bleeding during aspirin treatment were 0.2% and 0.8% per year. A remarkable decrease in the incidence of major bleeding complications to oral anticoagulant therapy is revealed by these trials as compared to previous studies. Reasons for this decline may be less intensive anticoagulant regimes, better control of anticoagulant therapy due to the introduction of the international normalized ratio, and careful pretreatment evaluation of risk factors for bleeding. In all prospective trials of oral anticoagulation, the risk of bleeding was more than over-weighed by the beneficial effect on the incidence of stroke and peripheral thromboemboli.     

Effectiveness and safety of combined antiplatelet and anticoagulant therapy: a critical review of the evidence from randomized controlled trials

Antiplatelet and anticoagulant drugs are effective for the prevention of arterial and venous thrombosis but patients continue to experience major cardiovascular events despite their use. Strategies to improve the effectiveness of antithrombotic therapies include selecting the optimal drug and dosing regimen, the use of combinations of antiplatelet and anticoagulant drugs and the development of new more effective drugs to replace existing therapies. Evidence from randomized controlled trials indicates that the combination of aspirin and an anticoagulant is more effective than aspirin alone for the prevention of recurrent cardiovascular events in patients with acute coronary syndrome and is more effective than anticoagulation alone for the prevention of thromboembolic events in patients with mechanical heart valves, but at a cost of increased bleeding. Randomized controlled trials provide no evidence for improved effectiveness of combination therapy compared with antiplatelet therapy alone for the prevention of recurrent cardiovascular events in patients with non-cardioembolic stroke or peripheral artery disease, or compared with anticoagulant therapy alone for the prevention of stroke in patients with atrial fibrillation. Despite lack of evaluation in randomized controlled trials, combination therapy is commonly used in patients with separate indications for antiplatelet therapy (e.g., acute coronary syndrome, recent coronary artery stent) and anticoagulant therapy (e.g., atrial fibrillation with at least one additional risk factor for stroke). Randomized trials are urgently required to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of combining antiplatelet and anticoagulant therapy in these settings.     

Anticoagulation in heart failure without atrial fibrillation: gaps and dilemmas in current clinical practice

Data from observational and post‐hoc analyses suggest that heart failure (HF) itself may be associated with higher risk of thromboembolic events compared to populations without HF. Although oral anticoagulants (OACs) might be a therapeutic option in individual cases, anticoagulation therapy in HF patients in sinus rhythm is not generally recommended, as the implementation of OACs in clinical practice in this HF population is not supported by large randomized clinical trials to date. Indeed, the available data suggest that the risk of major bleeding overshadows the potential anti‐thromboembolic benefit of OACs in HF patients in sinus rhythm with no net beneficial effect on mortality rates. In this review we explore the current available evidence for the clinical outcomes of anticoagulation therapy in patients with HF in sinus rhythm, highlighting the current gaps in knowledge, which may guide the design of future randomized clinical trials focusing on the efficacy and safety of anticoagulant therapy in this HF population.     

Low potential for interactions between melagatran/ximelagatran and other drugs, food, or alcohol

Vitamin K antagonists including warfarin are associated with numerous interactions with other drugs and foods. In clinical practice, this complicates the task of maintaining plasma levels of warfarin within a narrow therapeutic window and so maximizing protection against thromboembolic events while minimizing the risk of complications, particularly bleeding. In contrast, ximelagatran has a low potential for pharmacokinetic drug:drug and food interactions. There is no significant metabolism of melagatran, and the main route of elimination of melagatran is renal excretion that appears to occur via glomerular filtration. Most importantly, cytochrome P450 isoenzymes that mediate many drug:drug interactions are not involved in the biotransformation of ximelagatran to melagatran. No significant pharmacokinetic interactions have been observed when oral ximelagatran is administered with a range of agents, including diclofenac, diazepam, nifedipine, digoxin, atorvastatin, or amiodarone. The low potential for drug:drug interactions with ximelagatran is also supported by an analysis of the pharmacokinetic data from clinical studies in patients with atrial fibrillation receiving long-term treatment with oral ximelagatran. Increases of mean melagatran area under the curve and maximum plasma concentration ( Cmax) of up to approximately 80% have been observed when ximelagatran is co-administered with the macrolide antibiotics erythromycin or azithromycin, and the mechanism for this interaction is currently under investigation. The bioavailability of melagatran is not altered by co-administration with food or alcohol. The melagatran-induced prolongation of activated partial thromboplastin time (APTT), an ex vivo coagulation time assay used as a measure of thrombin inhibition, is not altered by other drugs [including digoxin, atorvastatin, acetylsalicylic acid (ASA), and amiodarone], food, or alcohol. The effect of melagatran on capillary bleeding time, which is prolonged as a result of the inhibition of thrombin-induced platelet aggregation, is relatively low and additive to the platelet-inhibitory effect of ASA.     

Interventioneller Vorhofohrverschluss

Stroke prevention in patients with atrial fibrillation is one of the greatest challenges in modern cardiology. Interventional left atrial appendage occlusion is an alternative to oral anticoagulation in patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation. This procedure is currently used mainly for patients with elevated risk for bleeding complications (HAS-BLED score ≥3) or other contraindications for oral anticoagulation. The novel anticoagulants dabigatran, rivaroxaban and apixaban carry a risk for major bleeding for 2–3% of patients per year. The indications for an interventional left atrial appendage closure are therefore not affected by these substances. Several devices have been developed for this purpose; however, currently only the WATCHMAN® and AMPLATZER® cardiac plug are used in the clinical routine in Germany. The WATCHMAN® device proved to be non-inferior to oral anticoagulation with warfarin in the PROTECT-AF trial in terms of safety and efficacy. These findings are supported by data from registries with up to 5 years follow-up. For the second device currently used in clinical practice, the AMPLATZER® cardiac plug, there is increasing data from registries suggesting comparable safety and efficacy. Both devices necessitate anticoagulation during the first 3–6 months after implantation until endothelialization is completed. Due to the anatomical complexity the implantation should be performed in experienced centers with reduction of the periprocedural risk to <1%. Thus, interventional left atrial appendage occlusion is a valid option to prevent stroke or other thromboembolic events in non-valvular atrial fibrillation especially for elderly patients or those with a history of bleeding complications.