Inappropriate Underdosing of Direct Oral Anticoagulants in Atrial Fibrillation Patients: Results from the START2-AF Registry.
Daniela PoliEmilia AntonucciWalter AgenoMartina BerteottiAnna FalangaVittorio PengoPaolo ChiarugiBenilde CosmiCarmelo PaparoAntonio ChistoliniAntonio InsanaDomenico LioneGiuseppe MalcangiGiuliana MartiniLucilla MascioccoSimona PedriniEugenio BucheriniDaniele PastoriPasquale PignatelliAndrea TomaSophie TestaGualtiero Palaretinull Start Af Study GroupPublished in: Journal of clinical medicine (2024)
Background: Direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) are recommended for stroke prevention in non-valvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF) patients. We aimed to describe the prevalence of inappropriate DOACs dose prescription in the START2-AF Registry, the outcomes according to the appropriateness of the dosage, and the factors associated with inappropriate dose prescription. Methods: Patients' demographics and clinical data were prospectively collected as electronic files in an anonymous form on the website of the START2-Registry; DOACs dosage was determined to be appropriate when prescribed according to the European Heart Rhythm Association Guidelines. Results: We included 5943 NVAF patients on DOACs; 2572 (46.3%) were female patients. The standard dose (SD) was prescribed to 56.9% of patients and the low dose (LD) was prescribed to 43.1% of patients; 38.9% of all NVAF patients received an inappropriate LD DOAC and 0.3% received inappropriate SD. Patients treated with LD DOAC had a significantly higher rate of all bleedings (RR 1.5; 95% CI 1.2-2.0), major bleedings (RR 1.8; 95% CI 1.3-1.7), and mortality (RR 2.8; 95% CI 1.9-4.1) with respect to patients treated with SD DOAC. No difference was found among patients treated with appropriate and inappropriate LD regarding bleeding, thrombotic, and mortality rates. Age, body weight <60 kg, and renal failure were significantly associated with inappropriate LD DOAC prescription. Conclusions: Inappropriate LD DOACs in NVAF patients is not associated with a reduction in bleeding risk, nor with an increased thrombotic risk. Instead, it is associated with higher mortality rate, suggesting that, in clinical practice, underdosing is preferred for patients at particularly high risk for adverse events.
Keyphrases