Comparative safety and effectiveness of direct oral anticoagulants and warfarin in patients with venous thromboembolism in Finland, Norway and Sweden

<b>Aim:</b> Clinical trial data have demonstrated that direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) are both noninferior to and safer than conventional therapy for the treatment of venous thromboembolism (VTE). This study aimed to compare the effectiveness and safety of DOACs versus warfarin using Nordic population-based registries. <b>Materials & methods:</b> This observational cohort study used Swedish, Norwegian and Finnish national administrative data from 2012 to 2018. We identified treatment-naive adult patients with noncancer-related VTE treated with either a DOAC (apixaban or rivaroxaban) or warfarin. We employed inverse probability of treatment weighting for each DOAC-warfarin comparison and assessed the risks of bleeding (overall and by site: gastrointestinal bleeding [GI], intracranial bleeding [ICH], or other bleeding) and recurrent VTE within 6 months after treatment initiation. Cox proportional hazards models estimated the adjusted hazard ratios of each end point. Country estimates were combined using meta-analyses. <b>Results:</b> After inverse probability of treatment weighting, 22,450 warfarin, 14,542 apixaban and 23,002 rivaroxaban patients were included. At 6 months, for apixaban versus warfarin, the risk of bleeding was lower overall (hazard ratio: 0.51 [95% CI: 0.43, 0.61]) and by site (GI: 0.65 [0.45, 0.93]; ICH: 0.58 [0.34, 0.97]; other: 0.45 [0.34, 0.58]). For recurrent VTE the risk was similar for apixaban versus warfarin (0.85 [0.71, 1.02]). For rivaroxaban versus warfarin the risk of bleeding was lower for overall and other bleeding (0.86 [0.75, 0.99]; 0.81 [0.69, 0.95], respectively), but similar for GI and ICH bleeding (1.06 [0.84, 1.34]; 0.68 [0.47, 1.00], respectively). For recurrent VTE the risk was lower for rivaroxaban versus warfarin (0.74 [0.63, 0.87]). <b>Conclusion:</b> DOACs showed improved safety and at least similar effectiveness compared with warfarin, which is in line with clinical trial estimates.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Journal of Comparative Effectiveness Research
Published
2025-09-25
DOI
https://doi.org/10.57264/cer-2024-0207
Primary Topic
Venous Thromboembolism Diagnosis and Management
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Comparative safety and effectiveness of direct oral anticoagulants and warfarin in patients with venous thromboembolism in Finland, Norway and Sweden

Alison Booth, Sophie Graham, Waleed Ghanima, Anders Gottsäter et al.
Journal of Comparative Effectiveness Research
Venous Thromboembolism Diagnosis and Management
article

Comparative safety and effectiveness of direct oral anticoagulants and warfarin in patients with venous thromboembolism in Finland, Norway and Sweden

Alison Booth, Sophie Graham, Waleed Ghanima, Anders Gottsäter, Hanna Pohjantähti, Dimitra Lambrelli, Aaron Jenkins, Ruth Mokgokong, Feng Dai, Beth Nordstrom, José Chaves
article en

Abstract

<b>Aim:</b> Clinical trial data have demonstrated that direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) are both noninferior to and safer than conventional therapy for the treatment of venous thromboembolism (VTE). This study aimed to compare the effectiveness and safety of DOACs versus warfarin using Nordic population-based registries. <b>Materials & methods:</b> This observational cohort study used Swedish, Norwegian and Finnish national administrative data from 2012 to 2018. We identified treatment-naive adult patients with noncancer-related VTE treated with either a DOAC (apixaban or rivaroxaban) or warfarin. We employed inverse probability of treatment weighting for each DOAC-warfarin comparison and assessed the risks of bleeding (overall and by site: gastrointestinal bleeding [GI], intracranial bleeding [ICH], or other bleeding) and recurrent VTE within 6 months after treatment initiation. Cox proportional hazards models estimated the adjusted hazard ratios of each end point. Country estimates were combined using meta-analyses. <b>Results:</b> After inverse probability of treatment weighting, 22,450 warfarin, 14,542 apixaban and 23,002 rivaroxaban patients were included. At 6 months, for apixaban versus warfarin, the risk of bleeding was lower overall (hazard ratio: 0.51 [95% CI: 0.43, 0.61]) and by site (GI: 0.65 [0.45, 0.93]; ICH: 0.58 [0.34, 0.97]; other: 0.45 [0.34, 0.58]). For recurrent VTE the risk was similar for apixaban versus warfarin (0.85 [0.71, 1.02]). For rivaroxaban versus warfarin the risk of bleeding was lower for overall and other bleeding (0.86 [0.75, 0.99]; 0.81 [0.69, 0.95], respectively), but similar for GI and ICH bleeding (1.06 [0.84, 1.34]; 0.68 [0.47, 1.00], respectively). For recurrent VTE the risk was lower for rivaroxaban versus warfarin (0.74 [0.63, 0.87]). <b>Conclusion:</b> DOACs showed improved safety and at least similar effectiveness compared with warfarin, which is in line with clinical trial estimates.

Journal of Comparative Effectiveness ResearchVol. 14(11)
Pfizer (United States) (US), University of Oslo (NO), Lund University (SE), Pfizer (United Kingdom) (GB), Tampere University Hospital (FI), EVRAZ (United Kingdom) (GB), Anderson Orthopaedic Clinic (US), Tampere University (FI), Skåne University Hospital (SE), Pfizer (Spain) (ES)
Openalex Percentile: Top 56%
Venous Thromboembolism Diagnosis and Management
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.