Ximelagatran vs warfarin for stroke prevention in patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation: a randomized trial.

CONTEXT In patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation, warfarin prevents ischemic stroke, but dose adjustment, coagulation monitoring, and bleeding limit its use. OBJECTIVE To compare the efficacy of the oral direct thrombin inhibitor ximelagatran with warfarin for prevention of stroke and systemic embolism. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS Double-blind, randomized, multicenter trial (2000-2001) conducted at 409 North American sites, involving 3922 patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation and additional stroke risk factors. INTERVENTIONS Adjusted-dose warfarin (aiming for an international normalized ratio [INR] 2.0 to 3.0) or fixed-dose oral ximelagatran, 36 mg twice daily. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES The primary end point was all strokes (ischemic or hemorrhagic) and systemic embolic events. The primary analysis was based on demonstrating noninferiority within an absolute margin of 2.0% per year according to the intention-to-treat model. RESULTS During 6405 patient-years (mean 20 months) of follow-up, 88 patients experienced primary events. The mean (SD) INR with warfarin (2.4 [0.8]) was within target during 68% of the treatment period. The primary event rate with ximelagatran was 1.6% per year and with warfarin was 1.2% per year (absolute difference, 0.45% per year; 95% confidence interval, -0.13% to 1.03% per year; P<.001 for the predefined noninferiority hypothesis). When all-cause mortality was included in addition to stroke and systemic embolic events, the rate difference was 0.10% per year (95% confidence interval, -0.97% to 1.2% per year; P = .86). There was no difference between treatment groups in rates of major bleeding, but total bleeding (major and minor) was lower with ximelagatran (37% vs 47% per year; 95% confidence interval for the difference, -14% to -6.0% per year; P<.001). Serum alanine aminotransferase levels rose to greater than 3 times the upper limit of normal in 6.0% of patients treated with ximelagatran, usually within 6 months and typically declined whether or not treatment continued; however, one case of documented fatal liver disease and one other suggestive case occurred. CONCLUSIONS The results establish the efficacy of fixed-dose oral ximelagatran without coagulation monitoring compared with well-controlled warfarin for prevention of thromboembolism in patients with atrial fibrillation requiring chronic anticoagulant therapy, but the potential for hepatotoxicity requires further investigation.

[1]  J. Haybittle,et al.  Repeated assessment of results in clinical trials of cancer treatment. , 1971, The British journal of radiology.

[2]  S. Pocock,et al.  Sequential treatment assignment with balancing for prognostic factors in the controlled clinical trial. , 1975, Biometrics.

[3]  K. K. Lan,et al.  Discrete sequential boundaries for clinical trials , 1983 .

[4]  D. Wade,et al.  The Barthel ADL Index: a reliability study. , 1988, International disability studies.

[5]  J. Slattery,et al.  Interobserver agreement for the assessment of handicap in stroke patients. , 1989, Stroke.

[6]  R. Asinger,et al.  Cardiogenic brain embolism. The second report of the Cerebral Embolism Task Force. , 1989, Archives of neurology.

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

[8]  G. Albers,et al.  Atrial fibrillation and stroke. Three new studies, three remaining questions. , 1994, Archives of internal medicine.

[9]  J. Hirsh,et al.  Interactions of Warfarin with Drugs and Food , 1994, Annals of Internal Medicine.

[10]  W. J. Hamilton,et al.  Adjusted-dose warfarin versus low-intensity, fixed-dose warfarin plus aspirin for high-risk patients with atrial fibrillation: Stroke Prevention in Atrial Fibrillation III randomised clinical trial , 1996, The Lancet.

[11]  A. Ebbutt,et al.  Practical issues in equivalence trials. , 1998, Statistics in medicine.

[12]  D. Singer,et al.  Warfarin Use among Ambulatory Patients with Nonvalvular Atrial Fibrillation: The AnTicoagulation and Risk Factors in Atrial Fibrillation (ATRIA) Study , 1999, Annals of Internal Medicine.

[13]  F. McAlister,et al.  Why do patients with atrial fibrillation not receive warfarin? , 2000, Archives of internal medicine.

[14]  D. Witter,et al.  Quality of anticoagulation management among patients with atrial fibrillation: results of a review of medical records from 2 communities. , 2000, Archives of internal medicine.

[15]  R. Hart,et al.  Antithrombotic Therapy To Prevent Stroke in Patients with Atrial Fibrillation , 2000 .

[16]  M. Rosenqvist,et al.  Management of atrial fibrillation: discrepancy between guideline recommendations and actual practice exposes patients to risk for complications. , 2001, European heart journal.

[17]  D. Singer,et al.  Antithrombotic therapy in atrial fibrillation. , 2001, Chest.

[18]  V. Fuster,et al.  ACC/AHA/ESC guidelines for the management of patients with atrial fibrillation , 2001 .

[19]  B. Eriksson,et al.  Ximelagatran and melagatran compared with dalteparin for prevention of venous thromboembolism after total hip or knee replacement: the METHRO II randomised trial , 2002, The Lancet.

[20]  W. Weaver,et al.  Oral ximelagatran for secondary prophylaxis after myocardial infarction: the ESTEEM randomised controlled trial , 2003, The Lancet.

[21]  L. Johansson,et al.  Influence of Age on the Pharmacokinetics and Pharmacodynamics of Ximelagatran, an Oral Direct Thrombin Inhibitor , 2003, Clinical pharmacokinetics.

[22]  Ulf Bredberg,et al.  Pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of ximelagatran, a novel oral direct thrombin inhibitor, in young healthy male subjects , 2003, European Journal of Clinical Pharmacology.

[23]  J. Halperin,et al.  Active-control clinical trials to establish equivalence or noninferiority: methodological and statistical concepts linked to quality. , 2003, American heart journal.

[24]  J. Rak,et al.  The benefit‐to‐risk profile of melagatran is superior to that of hirudin in a rabbit arterial thrombosis prevention and bleeding model , 2003, Journal of thrombosis and haemostasis : JTH.

[25]  B. Eriksson,et al.  Direct thrombin inhibitor melagatran followed by oral ximelagatran in comparison with enoxaparin for prevention of venous thromboembolism after total hip or knee replacement , 2003, Thrombosis and Haemostasis.

[26]  T. Andersson,et al.  Ximelagatran, an Oral Direct Thrombin Inhibitor, Has a Low Potential for Cytochrome P450-Mediated Drug-Drug Interactions , 2003, Clinical pharmacokinetics.

[27]  P. Petersen,et al.  Ximelagatran versus warfarin for stroke prevention in patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation. SPORTIF II: a dose-guiding, tolerability, and safety study. , 2003, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

[28]  U. Eriksson,et al.  No Influence of Obesity on the Pharmacokinetics and Pharmacodynamics of Melagatran, the Active Form of the Oral Direct Thrombin Inhibitor Ximelagatran , 2003, Clinical pharmacokinetics.

[29]  S. Schulman,et al.  Secondary prevention of venous thromboembolism with the oral direct thrombin inhibitor ximelagatran. , 2003, The New England journal of medicine.

[30]  F. Rosendaal,et al.  Comparison of the quality of oral anticoagulant therapy through patient self-management and management by specialized anticoagulation clinics in the Netherlands: a randomized clinical trial. , 2003, Archives of internal medicine.

[31]  C. Colwell,et al.  Comparison of ximelagatran with warfarin for the prevention of venous thromboembolism after total knee replacement. , 2003, The New England journal of medicine.

[32]  M. Woodward,et al.  Effects of a Perindopril-Based Blood Pressure–Lowering Regimen on the Risk of Recurrent Stroke According to Stroke Subtype and Medical History: The PROGRESS Trial , 2003, Stroke.