Time to revisit dabigatran dose in the US?
|Adapted from Medscape Medical News—a professional news service of WebMD|
Hamilton, ON – The 110-mg twice-daily dose of dabigatran (Pradaxa, Boehringer Ingelheim), tested in clinical trials but not approved in the US for stroke prevention in patients with atrial fibrillation, may be best after all for patients over 75, a new analysis suggests .
“Important new data” from the Randomized Evaluation of Long-Term Anticoagulation Therapy (RE-LY) trial “strongly support” the need to make the 110-mg dose of dabigatran available in the US “so it can be considered in elderly patients,” lead author Dr John W Eikelboom (McMaster University, Hamilton, ON) said in an interview.
In a report published online May 16, 2011 in Circulation, Eikelboom and the RE-LY trialists publish “previously unreported” safety results for both the 110-mg and 150-mg dose of dabigatran vs warfarin for different types of major bleeding and in key subgroups, most notably individuals older than age 75 years.
A key finding in the new analysis, they say, is an increased risk of extracranial bleeding with dabigatran 150-mg twice daily in patients aged 75 and older.
A RE-LY refresher
The RE-LY trial enrolled more than 18 000 patients with atrial fibrillation at risk for stroke to receive dabigatran 110 mg or 150 mg twice daily or warfarin at a dose adjusted to an international normalized ratio (INR) of 2.0 to 3.0 for a median of two years.
The trial showed that dabigatran 110 mg twice daily compared with warfarin was associated with a similar risk of stroke and a lower risk of major bleeding and that dabigatran 150 mg twice daily was associated with a lower risk of stroke and a similar risk of major bleeding.
“The effects of both doses of dabigatran in stroke prevention were consistent irrespective of patient baseline characteristics, suggesting the efficacy results can be applied widely,” Eikelboom and colleagues note in the Circulation paper.
Based largely on these findings, the US Food and Drug Administration in October 2010 approved dabigatran for the prevention of stroke and systemic embolism in patients with AF. The agency approved two doses: 150 mg twice daily and, for a small subset of patients with severe renal impairment, 75 mg twice daily, which was not studied in RE-LY. In Canada, both the 110-mg and 150-mg doses are approved.
The failure of the FDA to approve the 110-mg dose fueled heated debate, which continues today.
Dr J David Spence (University of Western Ontario, London), who was not involved in the RE-LY trial, called the FDA decision to approve the 75-mg dose “very strange.”
In October 2010, at the time of the FDA decision, he noted that the problem with the RE-LY study is that it did not use dose adjustment; “it compared two doses to which patients were randomized, [and] the 150-mg dose performed better on average, but patients don’t come in averages; they come one at a time.”
More recently, in a perspective published online April 13, 2011 in the New England Journal of Medicine, three FDA officers offered a fuller explanation of that decision.
“There were certainly reasons why we might have approved both doses,” Drs B Nhi Beasley, Ellis F Unger, and Robert Temple (FDA Center for Drug Evaluation and Research) concede. “Ultimately, the FDA’s decision to approve only the 150-mg strength was based on our inability to identify any subgroup in which use of the lower dose would not represent a substantial disadvantage.”
In an interview with heartwire, RE-LY principal investigator Dr Stuart J Connolly (McMaster University) disagreed, calling the FDA perspective an “apology” for a bad decision.
“I just think that they’re wrong; they should have approved the lower dose. I don’t think what they’re saying is incorrect—they couldn’t find a subgroup in the RE-LY study—but I do think that there are patients where the 110-mg dose makes perfect sense.”
“Significant treatment-by-age interaction”
In the new analysis of bleeding, dabigatran 110 mg twice daily compared with warfarin was associated with a lower risk of major bleeding (2.87% vs 3.57%; p=0.002), whereas dabigatran 150 mg twice daily was associated with a similar risk of major bleeding (3.31% vs 3.57%; p=0.32).
However, Eikelboom and colleagues say they found a “significant treatment-by-age interaction.”
“In the under-75s,” Eikelboom said, “both doses of dabigatran compared with warfarin are associated with reduced bleeding, but in the over-75s the lower dose of dabigatran is associated with a similar risk of bleeding compared with warfarin and the higher dose is associated with a higher risk of bleeding compared with warfarin.”
“Importantly,” Eikelboom said, “this change in the risk of bleeding with dabigatran compared with warfarin affects extracranial bleeding but not intracranial bleeding, which is the most feared complication of warfarin treatment. Both doses of dabigatran compared with warfarin have lower rates of intracranial bleeding irrespective of age,” he noted.
Risk of extracranial and intracranial bleeding (% per year) by age
Eikelboom said he believes that these new data “support the need for both doses of dabigatran to be made available in the US. The 150-mg dose will be the dose of choice in the under-75s but in older patients clinicians will want to consider the 110-mg dose to reduce the risk of extracranial bleeding.”
The new analyses, Eikelboom added, indicate that “the safety advantages of dabigatran compared with warfarin are less evident with increasing age.”
Spence agrees that these new data “provide a rationale for considering the 110-mg dose in patients above age 75. That dose would probably also be preferable for patients with impaired renal function (for example, an estimated glomerular filtration rate [GFR] <50 mL/min/1.73 m2 or so).”
|The RE-LY study was funded by Boehringer Ingelheim. Eikelboom has received grant support/honoraria/consulting fees from Boehringer Ingelheim, AstraZeneca, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Eli Lilly, GlaxoSmithKline, Regado Biosciences, and Sanofi-Aventis. Disclosures for the coauthors are listed in the paper. Spence is the principal investigator in the ARISTOTLE trial with apixaban and has been a consultant to Boehringer Ingelheim.|
|The complete contents of Medscape Medical News, a professional news service of WebMD, can be found at www.medscape.com, a website for medical professionals.|
- New oral anticoagulant drugs – mechanisms of action (earlsview.com)
- Anti-coagulant Blockbuster Drugs Are Here… (earlsview.com)
- How dabigatran is an atrial fibrillation paradigm shift (kevinmd.com)
- Treating a Blood Clot With Medication (everydayhealth.com)
- Top stories in health and medicine this morning, August 4, 2011 (kevinmd.com)
- The Critical Path: Making Medical Products Better, Faster, and Cheaper (everydayhealth.com)
- Lixiana (Edoxaban): New Oral Anticoagulant (clotconnectmd.wordpress.com)
- Eliquis (Apixaban) – Good News (clotconnectmd.wordpress.com)
- Lixiana (Edoxaban): New Oral Blood Thinner (clotconnect.wordpress.com)
- Top stories in health and medicine this morning, July 26, 2011 (kevinmd.com)