Relationship Between Time in Therapeutic Range and Comparative Treatment Effect of Rivaroxaban and Warfarin: Results From the ROCKET AF Trial

Background Time in therapeutic range (TTR) is a standard quality measure of the use of warfarin. We assessed the relative effects of rivaroxaban versus warfarin at the level of trial center TTR (cTTR) since such analysis preserves randomized comparisons. Methods and Results TTR was calculated using the Rosendaal method, without exclusion of international normalized ratio (INR) values performed during warfarin initiation. Measurements during warfarin interruptions >7 days were excluded. INRs were performed via standardized finger‐stick point‐of‐care devices at least every 4 weeks. The primary efficacy endpoint (stroke or non‐central nervous system embolism) was examined by quartiles of cTTR and by cTTR as a continuous function. Centers with the highest cTTRs by quartile had lower‐risk patients as reflected by lower CHADS2 scores (P<0.0001) and a lower prevalence of prior stroke or transient ischemic attack (P<0.0001). Sites with higher cTTR were predominantly from North America and Western Europe. The treatment effect of rivaroxaban versus warfarin on the primary endpoint was consistent across a wide range of cTTRs (P value for interaction=0.71). The hazard of major and non‐major clinically relevant bleeding increased with cTTR (P for interaction=0.001), however, the estimated reduction by rivaroxaban compared with warfarin in the hazard of intracranial hemorrhage was preserved across a wide range of threshold cTTR values. Conclusions The treatment effect of rivaroxaban compared with warfarin for the prevention of stroke and systemic embolism is consistent regardless of cTTR.

[1]  R. de Caterina,et al.  Efficacy and Safety of Apixaban Compared With Warfarin at Different Levels of Predicted International Normalized Ratio Control for Stroke Prevention in Atrial Fibrillation , 2013, Circulation.

[2]  G. Breithardt,et al.  Impact of Global Geographic Region on Time in Therapeutic Range on Warfarin Anticoagulant Therapy: Data From the ROCKET AF Clinical Trial , 2013, Journal of the American Heart Association.

[3]  H. Inoue Thromboembolism in patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation: comparison between Asian and Western countries. , 2013, Journal of cardiology.

[4]  S. Yusuf,et al.  Variation in Warfarin Dose Adjustment Practice Is Responsible for Differences in the Quality of Anticoagulation Control Between Centers and Countries: An Analysis of Patients Receiving Warfarin in the Randomized Evaluation of Long-Term Anticoagulation Therapy (RE-LY) Trial , 2012, Circulation.

[5]  j-Cypher Registry Investigators Determinants of warfarin use and international normalized ratio levels in atrial fibrillation patients in Japan. - Subanalysis of the J-RHYTHM Registry-. , 2011, Circulation journal : official journal of the Japanese Circulation Society.

[6]  S. S. Hasan,et al.  Factors Affecting Warfarin-Related Knowledge and INR Control of Patients Attending Physician- and Pharmacist-Managed Anticoagulation Clinics , 2011, Journal of pharmacy practice.

[7]  R. Troughton,et al.  Rivaroxaban versus warfarin in nonvalvular atrial fibrillation. , 2011, The New England journal of medicine.

[8]  D. Berlowitz,et al.  Patient characteristics associated with oral anticoagulation control: results of the Veterans AffaiRs Study to Improve Anticoagulation (VARIA) , 2010, Journal of thrombosis and haemostasis : JTH.

[9]  Salim Yusuf,et al.  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 , 2010, The Lancet.

[10]  R. Investigators Rivaroxaban-once daily, oral, direct factor Xa inhibition compared with vitamin K antagonism for prevention of stroke and Embolism Trial in Atrial Fibrillation: rationale and design of the ROCKET AF study. , 2010, American heart journal.

[11]  D. Singer,et al.  Should Patient Characteristics Influence Target Anticoagulation Intensity for Stroke Prevention in Nonvalvular Atrial Fibrillation?: The ATRIA Study , 2009, Circulation. Cardiovascular quality and outcomes.

[12]  W. Baker,et al.  Meta-Analysis to Assess the Quality of Warfarin Control in Atrial Fibrillation Patients in the United States , 2009, Journal of managed care pharmacy : JMCP.

[13]  R. Perera,et al.  Anticoagulation Control and Prediction of Adverse Events in Patients With Atrial Fibrillation: A Systematic Review , 2008, Circulation. Cardiovascular quality and outcomes.

[14]  R. Califf,et al.  Antithrombotic drug development for atrial fibrillation: proceedings, Washington, DC, July 25-27, 2005. , 2008, American heart journal.

[15]  Jane A. Linderbaum,et al.  ACC/AHA/Physician Consortium 2008 clinical performance measures for adults with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation or atrial flutter: a report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Performance Measures and the Physician Consortium for Performance Improvement (Wr , 2008, Circulation.

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

[17]  David B. Matchar,et al.  Relationship Between Test Frequency and Outcomes of Anticoagulation: A Literature Review and Commentary with Implications for the Design of Randomized Trials of Patient Self-Management , 2000, Journal of Thrombosis and Thrombolysis.

[18]  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.

[19]  T. Yamaguchi Optimal intensity of warfarin therapy for secondary prevention of stroke in patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation : a multicenter, prospective, randomized trial. Japanese Nonvalvular Atrial Fibrillation-Embolism Secondary Prevention Cooperative Study Group. , 2000, Stroke.

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

[21]  J. Wittes,et al.  Analysis and interpretation of treatment effects in subgroups of patients in randomized clinical trials. , 1991, JAMA.