Bivariate evaluation of thromboembolism and bleeding in clinical trials of anticoagulants in patients with atrial fibrillation

Antithrombotic Trials Leadership and Steering (ATLAS) Group

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

Clinical trials of antithrombotic therapy require a cohesive assessment of benefit and risk. A new graphical method to represent the bivariate relation of benefit and risk in trials of antithrombotic drugs is described and illustrated using published data from the four major registration clinical trials of non-vitamin K oral anticoagulants (NOACs) totalling 71,683 patients for prevention of thromboembolic events (TE) in patients with atrial fibrillation (RE-LY, ROCKET AF, ARISTOTLE, and ENGAGE-AF TIMI48). A curve representing a null hypothesis defines a region of benefit on a two-dimensional plane. Trial results are summarised by a rectangle defined by standard 95 % confidence intervals (CI) for thrombosis and bleeding risks. Benefit is judged by whether the confidence rectangle contains the null curve. The treatment effect is measured by the distance from the null curve to the opposing corners of the confidence rectangle (termed “corner distance (CD)”). Across trials NOACs reduced the absolute risk of TE compared to warfarin by 0.30 % (95 % CI: –0.56 % to –0.05 %) and reduced major bleeding by 0.88 % (95 % CI: –1.26 % to –0.51 %). Bivariate evaluation showed NOAC superiority to warfarin overall and elucidated dose differences; low dose edoxaban increased bivariate TEbleeding risk 0.08 % (CD = –0.85 % to 0.78 %), whereas high dose edoxaban reduced risk 1.41 % (CD = –2.07 % to –0.70 %). In conclusion, bivariate evaluation facilitates visual assessment of the safety-efficacy profile of antithrombotic drugs. Its application to trials in atrial fibrillation found NOACs superior to warfarin without substantial differences between agents.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)544-553
Number of pages10
JournalThrombosis and Haemostasis
Volume116
Issue number3
DOIs
StatePublished - Sep 1 2016

Fingerprint

Thromboembolism
Anticoagulants
Atrial Fibrillation
Warfarin
Clinical Trials
Hemorrhage
Confidence Intervals
Pharmaceutical Preparations
Thrombosis
Safety
Therapeutics
edoxaban

Keywords

  • Clinical trial
  • Meta-analysis
  • Net clinical benefit
  • Noninferiority

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Hematology

Cite this

Bivariate evaluation of thromboembolism and bleeding in clinical trials of anticoagulants in patients with atrial fibrillation. / Antithrombotic Trials Leadership and Steering (ATLAS) Group.

In: Thrombosis and Haemostasis, Vol. 116, No. 3, 01.09.2016, p. 544-553.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Antithrombotic Trials Leadership and Steering (ATLAS) Group. / Bivariate evaluation of thromboembolism and bleeding in clinical trials of anticoagulants in patients with atrial fibrillation. In: Thrombosis and Haemostasis. 2016 ; Vol. 116, No. 3. pp. 544-553.
@article{25c8419410ce401da42c55860a4882f3,
title = "Bivariate evaluation of thromboembolism and bleeding in clinical trials of anticoagulants in patients with atrial fibrillation",
abstract = "Clinical trials of antithrombotic therapy require a cohesive assessment of benefit and risk. A new graphical method to represent the bivariate relation of benefit and risk in trials of antithrombotic drugs is described and illustrated using published data from the four major registration clinical trials of non-vitamin K oral anticoagulants (NOACs) totalling 71,683 patients for prevention of thromboembolic events (TE) in patients with atrial fibrillation (RE-LY, ROCKET AF, ARISTOTLE, and ENGAGE-AF TIMI48). A curve representing a null hypothesis defines a region of benefit on a two-dimensional plane. Trial results are summarised by a rectangle defined by standard 95 {\%} confidence intervals (CI) for thrombosis and bleeding risks. Benefit is judged by whether the confidence rectangle contains the null curve. The treatment effect is measured by the distance from the null curve to the opposing corners of the confidence rectangle (termed “corner distance (CD)”). Across trials NOACs reduced the absolute risk of TE compared to warfarin by 0.30 {\%} (95 {\%} CI: –0.56 {\%} to –0.05 {\%}) and reduced major bleeding by 0.88 {\%} (95 {\%} CI: –1.26 {\%} to –0.51 {\%}). Bivariate evaluation showed NOAC superiority to warfarin overall and elucidated dose differences; low dose edoxaban increased bivariate TEbleeding risk 0.08 {\%} (CD = –0.85 {\%} to 0.78 {\%}), whereas high dose edoxaban reduced risk 1.41 {\%} (CD = –2.07 {\%} to –0.70 {\%}). In conclusion, bivariate evaluation facilitates visual assessment of the safety-efficacy profile of antithrombotic drugs. Its application to trials in atrial fibrillation found NOACs superior to warfarin without substantial differences between agents.",
keywords = "Clinical trial, Meta-analysis, Net clinical benefit, Noninferiority",
author = "{Antithrombotic Trials Leadership and Steering (ATLAS) Group} and Kittelson, {John M.} and Steg, {Philippe Gabriel} and Halperin, {Jonathan L.} and Neil Goldenberg and Sam Schulman and Spyropoulos, {Alex C.} and Kessler, {Craig M.} and Turpie, {Alexander G G} and Cutler, {Neal R.} and Hiatt, {William R.}",
year = "2016",
month = "9",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1160/TH15-12-1000",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "116",
pages = "544--553",
journal = "Thrombosis and Haemostasis",
issn = "0340-6245",
publisher = "Schattauer GmbH",
number = "3",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Bivariate evaluation of thromboembolism and bleeding in clinical trials of anticoagulants in patients with atrial fibrillation

AU - Antithrombotic Trials Leadership and Steering (ATLAS) Group

AU - Kittelson, John M.

AU - Steg, Philippe Gabriel

AU - Halperin, Jonathan L.

AU - Goldenberg, Neil

AU - Schulman, Sam

AU - Spyropoulos, Alex C.

AU - Kessler, Craig M.

AU - Turpie, Alexander G G

AU - Cutler, Neal R.

AU - Hiatt, William R.

PY - 2016/9/1

Y1 - 2016/9/1

N2 - Clinical trials of antithrombotic therapy require a cohesive assessment of benefit and risk. A new graphical method to represent the bivariate relation of benefit and risk in trials of antithrombotic drugs is described and illustrated using published data from the four major registration clinical trials of non-vitamin K oral anticoagulants (NOACs) totalling 71,683 patients for prevention of thromboembolic events (TE) in patients with atrial fibrillation (RE-LY, ROCKET AF, ARISTOTLE, and ENGAGE-AF TIMI48). A curve representing a null hypothesis defines a region of benefit on a two-dimensional plane. Trial results are summarised by a rectangle defined by standard 95 % confidence intervals (CI) for thrombosis and bleeding risks. Benefit is judged by whether the confidence rectangle contains the null curve. The treatment effect is measured by the distance from the null curve to the opposing corners of the confidence rectangle (termed “corner distance (CD)”). Across trials NOACs reduced the absolute risk of TE compared to warfarin by 0.30 % (95 % CI: –0.56 % to –0.05 %) and reduced major bleeding by 0.88 % (95 % CI: –1.26 % to –0.51 %). Bivariate evaluation showed NOAC superiority to warfarin overall and elucidated dose differences; low dose edoxaban increased bivariate TEbleeding risk 0.08 % (CD = –0.85 % to 0.78 %), whereas high dose edoxaban reduced risk 1.41 % (CD = –2.07 % to –0.70 %). In conclusion, bivariate evaluation facilitates visual assessment of the safety-efficacy profile of antithrombotic drugs. Its application to trials in atrial fibrillation found NOACs superior to warfarin without substantial differences between agents.

AB - Clinical trials of antithrombotic therapy require a cohesive assessment of benefit and risk. A new graphical method to represent the bivariate relation of benefit and risk in trials of antithrombotic drugs is described and illustrated using published data from the four major registration clinical trials of non-vitamin K oral anticoagulants (NOACs) totalling 71,683 patients for prevention of thromboembolic events (TE) in patients with atrial fibrillation (RE-LY, ROCKET AF, ARISTOTLE, and ENGAGE-AF TIMI48). A curve representing a null hypothesis defines a region of benefit on a two-dimensional plane. Trial results are summarised by a rectangle defined by standard 95 % confidence intervals (CI) for thrombosis and bleeding risks. Benefit is judged by whether the confidence rectangle contains the null curve. The treatment effect is measured by the distance from the null curve to the opposing corners of the confidence rectangle (termed “corner distance (CD)”). Across trials NOACs reduced the absolute risk of TE compared to warfarin by 0.30 % (95 % CI: –0.56 % to –0.05 %) and reduced major bleeding by 0.88 % (95 % CI: –1.26 % to –0.51 %). Bivariate evaluation showed NOAC superiority to warfarin overall and elucidated dose differences; low dose edoxaban increased bivariate TEbleeding risk 0.08 % (CD = –0.85 % to 0.78 %), whereas high dose edoxaban reduced risk 1.41 % (CD = –2.07 % to –0.70 %). In conclusion, bivariate evaluation facilitates visual assessment of the safety-efficacy profile of antithrombotic drugs. Its application to trials in atrial fibrillation found NOACs superior to warfarin without substantial differences between agents.

KW - Clinical trial

KW - Meta-analysis

KW - Net clinical benefit

KW - Noninferiority

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84989165979&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84989165979&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1160/TH15-12-1000

DO - 10.1160/TH15-12-1000

M3 - Article

C2 - 27346176

AN - SCOPUS:84989165979

VL - 116

SP - 544

EP - 553

JO - Thrombosis and Haemostasis

JF - Thrombosis and Haemostasis

SN - 0340-6245

IS - 3

ER -