Clinical outcomes of off-label dosing of direct oral anticoagulant therapy among japanese patients with atrial fibrillation identified from the SAKURA AF registry

60Citations
Citations of this article
61Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

Background: Off-label dosing of direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) is encountered clinically among patients with atrial fibrillation (AF), although data on the clinical outcomes of over- and under-dosing are lacking in Japan. Methods and Results: We examined the clinical outcomes of off-label DOAC dosing using the SAKURA AF Registry, a prospective multicenter registry in Japan. Among 3,237 enrollees, 1,676 under any of the 4 DOAC regimens were followed up for a median of 39.3 months: 746 (45.0%), appropriate standard-dose; 477 (28.7%), appropriate low-dose; 66 (4.0%), over-dose; and 369 (22.2%) under-dose. Compared with the standard-dose group, patients in the under- and over-dose groups were significantly older and had a higher stroke risk. After multivariate adjustment, stroke/systemic embolism (SE) and death events were equivalent between the standard- and under-dose groups, but major bleeding events tended to be lower in the under-dose group (hazard ratio [HR] 0.474, P=0.0739). Composite events (stroke/SE, major bleeding, or death) were higher in the over-dose than in the standard-dose group (HR 2.714, P=0.0081). Conclusions: Clinical outcomes were not worse for under-dose than for standard-dose users among patients with different backgrounds. Over-dose users, however, were at higher risk for all clinical events and required careful follow-up. Further studies are needed to clarify the safety and effectiveness of off-label DOAC dosing in Japan.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Murata, N., Okumura, Y., Yokoyama, K., Matsumoto, N., Tachibana, E., Kuronuma, K., … Hirayama, A. (2019). Clinical outcomes of off-label dosing of direct oral anticoagulant therapy among japanese patients with atrial fibrillation identified from the SAKURA AF registry. Circulation Journal, 83(4), 727–735. https://doi.org/10.1253/circj.CJ-18-0991

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free