Influence of Age and Renal Function on Efficacy and Safety of Dabigatran Versus Warfarin for the Treatment of Acute Venous Thromboembolism: A Pooled Analysis of RE-COVER™ and RE-COVER™ II
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Abstract Background: In the RE-COVER™ and RE-COVER™ II trials, dabigatran etexilate (DE) was as effective as warfarin (W) for prevention of recurrent venous thromboembolism (VTE) in patients with acute VTE, and was associated with a lower risk of bleeding. Objectives: Older patients and patients with renal impairment may be at greater risk of bleeding and/or VTE. In this post-hoc analysis of the pooled dataset from RE-COVER™ and RE-COVER™ II, we assessed rates of VTE recurrence and bleeding with DE and W in patients below and above 75 years according to renal function (normal, or mildly or moderately impaired). Methods: Patients with acute VTE, initially on parenteral anticoagulation, were randomized to either W (started in parallel; international normalized ratio range 2.0‒3.0) or DE 150 mg twice daily for 6 months. Primary efficacy outcome was recurrent, symptomatic VTE/VTE-related death from randomization to the end of the prespecified post-treatment follow-up. Safety outcomes included centrally adjudicated major bleeding events (MBEs), the composite of MBEs or clinically relevant non-major bleeding events (MBEs/CRBEs), and any bleeds from the start of the double-dummy period (treatment with oral DE or W alone) to the end of the 6-month period. Patients with creatinine clearance (CrCL) ≤ 30 mL/min (hence not meeting inclusion criteria) were excluded from this analysis. Results: In all patients aged < 75 years, recurrent VTE/VTE-related death occurred in 65/2241 (2.9%) and 52/2218 (2.3%) patients with DE and W, respectively. In the analysis by renal function, event rates for DE vs W in subgroups with CrCL ≥ 80 (normal), 50–< 80 (mild renal dysfunction), and 30–< 50 mL/min (moderate renal dysfunction), respectively, were 3.1% (57/1828) vs 2.5% (45/1780), 2.1% (8/381) vs 1.5% (6/403), and 0% (0/32) vs 2.9% (1/35). In all patients aged ≥ 75 years, recurrent VTE/VTE-related death occurred in 3/272 (1.1%) and 10/304 (3.3%) patients with DE and W, respectively. Event rates for DE vs W in the normal, mild and moderate renal dysfunction subgroups, respectively, were 3.1% (1/32) vs 5.2% (3/58), 1.3% (2/158) vs 1.9% (3/158), and 0% (0/82) vs 4.5% (4/88). For the safety endpoints, in all patients aged < 75 years, MBEs occurred in (DE vs W, respectively) 16/2169 (0.7%) vs 29/2146 (1.4%) patients, MBEs/CRBEs in 87/2169 (4.0%) vs 153/2146 (7.1%) patients, and any bleeding in 303/2169 (14.0%) vs 430/2146 (20.0%) patients. The table shows event rates by renal function; bleeding rates in this age group were numerically lower for DE than W across all categories of renal function, except for rates of MBEs in patients with moderate dysfunction (6.7% vs 6.5%). Among the older patient group, bleeding event rates for DE vs W were 8/252 (3.2%) vs 11/287 (3.8%) for MBEs, 21/252 (7.9%) vs 35/287 (12.2%) for MBEs/CRBEs, and 48/252 (18.3%) vs 68/287 (23.0%) for any bleeding. The table shows event rates by renal function; the incidences of bleeding were numerically lower for DE vs W across all categories of renal function in older patients, except for MBEs (5.3% vs 3.6%) and MBEs/CRBEs (11.8% vs 9.6%) in the subgroup with moderate renal dysfunction. TablePatientsMBEsPatients, n/N (%)MBEs/CRBEsPatients, n/N (%)Any bleedsPatients, n/N (%)Age(year)CrCL (mL/min)DEWDEWDEW< 7530‒< 502/30 (6.7)2/31 (6.5)3/30 (10.0)4/31 (12.9)6/30 (20.0)8/31 (25.8)50‒< 805/359 (1.4)10/387 (2.6)26/359 (7.2)43/387 (11.1)70/359 (19.5)90/387 (23.3)≥ 809/1780 (0.5)17/1728 (1.0)58/1780 (3.3)106/1728 (6.1)227/1780 (12.8)332/1728 (19.2)≥ 7530‒< 504/76 (5.3)3/83 (3.6)9/76 (11.8)8/83 (9.6)15/76 (19.7)21/83 (25.3)50‒< 804/145 (2.8)6/149 (4.0)10/145 (6.9)23/149 (15.4)27/145 (18.6)35/149 (23.5)≥ 800/31 (0.0)2/55 (3.6)1/31 (3.2)4/55 (7.3)4/31 (12.9 )10/55 (18.2) Conclusions: In DE-treated patients, no increase in VTE recurrence was apparent for older (≥ 75 years) vs younger (< 75 years) patients. Recurrent VTE rates decreased with declining renal function. Bleeding events increased with declining renal function in both age groups irrespective of treatment, but in most subgroups were numerically less frequent with DE than with W. Disclosures Schulman: Boehringer Ingelheim: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Bayer HealthCare: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding. Eriksson:Boehringer Ingelheim: Consultancy; BMS: Consultancy; Pfizer: Consultancy. Kakkar:Boehringer Ingelheim: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Pfizer: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; BMS: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Daiichi: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Bayer: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Sanofi: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Eisai: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding. Kearon:Bayer Healthcare: Consultancy; Boehringer Ingelheim (Canada): Consultancy. Schellong:Daiichi Sankyo: advisory boards, advisory boards Other, Honoraria; Bayer Healthcare: advisory boards, advisory boards Other, Consultancy, Honoraria; BMS/Pfizer: Honoraria; Boehringer Ingelheim: advisory boards Other, Consultancy, Honoraria. Feuring:Boehringer Ingelheim: Employment. Hantel:Boehringer Ingelheim: Employment. Kreuzer:Boehringer Ingelheim: Employment. Goldhaber:Boehringer Ingelheim: Consultancy; Daiichi: Consultancy, Research Funding; BMS: Consultancy, Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy; Merck: Consultancy; Pfizer: Consultancy; Portola: Consultancy; Sanofi-Aventis: Consultancy.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,018 | 0,018 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,010 | 0,025 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,002 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».