Efficacy and safety of dabigatran compared with warfarin at different levels of international normalised ratio control for stroke prevention in atrial fibrillation: an analysis of the RE-LY trial

BACKGROUND Effectiveness and safety of warfarin is associated with the time in therapeutic range (TTR) with an international normalised ratio (INR) of 2·0-3·0. In the Randomised Evaluation of Long-term Anticoagulation Therapy (RE-LY) trial, dabigatran versus warfarin reduced both stroke and haemorrhage. We aimed to investigate the primary and secondary outcomes of the RE-LY trial in relation to each centre's mean TTR (cTTR) in the warfarin population. METHODS In the RE-LY trial, 18 113 patients at 951 sites were randomly assigned to 110 mg or 150 mg dabigatran twice daily versus warfarin dose adjusted to INR 2·0-3·0. Median follow-up was 2·0 years. For 18 024 patients at 906 sites, the cTTR was estimated by averaging TTR for individual warfarin-treated patients calculated by the Rosendaal method. We compared the outcomes of RE-LY across the three treatment groups within four groups defined by the quartiles of cTTR. RE-LY is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00262600. FINDINGS The quartiles of cTTR for patients in the warfarin group were: less than 57·1%, 57·1-65·5%, 65·5-72·6%, and greater than 72·6%. There were no significant interactions between cTTR and prevention of stroke and systemic embolism with either 110 mg dabigatran (interaction p=0·89) or 150 mg dabigatran (interaction p=0·20) versus warfarin. Neither were any significant interactions recorded with cTTR with regards to intracranial bleeding with 110 mg dabigatran (interaction p=0·71) or 150 mg dabigatran (interaction p=0·89) versus warfarin. There was a significant interaction between cTTR and major bleeding when comparing 150 mg dabigatran with warfarin (interaction p=0·03), with less bleeding events at lower cTTR but similar events at higher cTTR, whereas rates of major bleeding were lower with 110 mg dabigatran than with warfarin irrespective of cTTR. There were significant interactions between cTTR and effects of both 110 mg and 150 mg dabigatran versus warfarin on the composite of all cardiovascular events (interaction p=0·036 and p=0·0006, respectively) and total mortality (interaction p=0·066 and p=0·052, respectively) with reduced event rates at low cTTR, and similar rates at high cTTR. INTERPRETATION The benefits of 150 mg dabigatran at reducing stroke, 110 mg dabigatran at reducing bleeding, and both doses at reducing intracranial bleeding versus warfarin were consistent irrespective of centres' quality of INR control. For all vascular events, non-haemorrhagic events, and mortality, advantages of dabigatran were greater at sites with poor INR control than at those with good INR control. Overall, these results show that local standards of care affect the benefits of use of new treatment alternatives. FUNDING Boehringer Ingelheim.

[1]  D. Singer,et al.  An analysis of the lowest effective intensity of prophylactic anticoagulation for patients with nonrheumatic atrial fibrillation. , 1996, The New England journal of medicine.

[2]  K. Fahrbach,et al.  Warfarin anticoagulation and outcomes in patients with atrial fibrillation: a systematic review and metaanalysis. , 2004, Chest.

[3]  Samuel Wann,et al.  ACC/AHA/ESC 2006 guidelines for the management of patients with atrial fibrillation-executive summary: a report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines and the European Society of Cardiology Committee for Practice Guidelines (Writing Committ , 2006, European heart journal.

[4]  D. Pennell,et al.  Cardiovascular magnetic resonance of left ventricular pseudoaneurysm , 2005, Heart.

[5]  Gregory W Albers,et al.  Comparison of outcomes among patients randomized to warfarin therapy according to anticoagulant control: results from SPORTIF III and V. , 2007, Archives of internal medicine.

[6]  M. Aguilar,et al.  Meta-analysis: Antithrombotic Therapy to Prevent Stroke in Patients Who Have Nonvalvular Atrial Fibrillation , 2007, Annals of Internal Medicine.

[7]  J. Plumb,et al.  Warfarin treatment in patients with atrial fibrillation: observing outcomes associated with varying levels of INR control. , 2009, Thrombosis research.

[8]  S. Iliceto,et al.  Worldwide Management of Oral Anticoagulant Therapy: the ISAM Study , 2006, Journal of Thrombosis and Thrombolysis.

[9]  A. Forster,et al.  Effect of study setting on anticoagulation control: a systematic review and metaregression. , 2006, Chest.

[10]  F R Rosendaal,et al.  A Method to Determine the Optimal Intensity of Oral Anticoagulant Therapy , 1993, Thrombosis and Haemostasis.

[11]  S. Yusuf,et al.  Dabigatran versus warfarin in patients with atrial fibrillation. , 2009, The New England journal of medicine.

[12]  Silvia G. Priori,et al.  ACC/AHA/ESC 2006 guidelines for the management of patients with atrial fibrillation: a report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association task force on practice guidelines and the European society of cardiology committee for PRAC , 2006 .

[13]  M. Aguilar,et al.  Oral anticoagulants for preventing stroke in patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation and no previous history of stroke or transient ischemic attacks. , 2005, The Cochrane database of systematic reviews.

[14]  S. Willich,et al.  Anticoagulation treatment for the reduction of stroke in atrial fibrillation: a cohort study to examine the gap between guidelines and routine medical practice , 2007, Journal of Thrombosis and Thrombolysis.

[15]  Yuchiao Chang,et al.  Effect of intensity of oral anticoagulation on stroke severity and mortality in atrial fibrillation. , 2003, The New England journal of medicine.

[16]  S. Lydersen,et al.  Frequency and effect of optimal anticoagulation before onset of ischaemic stroke in patients with known atrial fibrillation , 2005, Journal of internal medicine.

[17]  S. Yusuf,et al.  Rationale and design of RE-LY: randomized evaluation of long-term anticoagulant therapy, warfarin, compared with dabigatran. , 2009, American heart journal.

[18]  A. Forster,et al.  Frequency of adverse events in patients with poor anticoagulation: a meta-analysis , 2007, Canadian Medical Association Journal.

[19]  A. Forster,et al.  Anticoagulation intensity and outcomes among patients prescribed oral anticoagulant therapy: a systematic review and meta-analysis , 2008, Canadian Medical Association Journal.

[20]  Leon Poller,et al.  Dabigatran versus warfarin in patients with atrial fibrillation. , 2009, The New England journal of medicine.

[21]  S. Yusuf,et al.  Benefit of Oral Anticoagulant Over Antiplatelet Therapy in Atrial Fibrillation Depends on the Quality of International Normalized Ratio Control Achieved by Centers and Countries as Measured by Time in Therapeutic Range , 2008, Circulation.