During follow-up death occurred in 457 patients (22.7%) in the apixaban group and in 438 patients (21.9%) in the aspirin group. The intent-to-treat population had a mean age of 76.8 (±7.6) years and a mean CHA2DS2-VASc score of 3.9 (±1.1). The median duration of the longest episode of subclinical atrial fibrillation in the 6 months before trial enrollment was 1.47 hours (interquartile range, 0.20-4.95).
For patients who experienced stroke, 33% (18 of 55) of those in the apixaban group and 43% (36 of 84) of those in the aspirin group had their severity assessed as being disabling or fatal, defined by modified Rankin Scale scores of 3-6. Despite a similar number of deaths between the groups, the risk of fatal stroke was 49% lower in the apixaban group than with aspirin (HR, 0.51; 95% CI, 0.29-0.88). In terms of safety, fatal bleeding occurred in 5 patients with apixaban and 8 patients with aspirin.
Clinical Takeaways
- Apixaban Superiority: Apixaban lowers stroke risk more effectively than aspirin in subclinical atrial fibrillation patients, with a noted bleeding risk.
- Bleeding Concerns: Treatment with apixaban increases major bleeding risk compared to aspirin in subclinical atrial fibrillation patients.
- Risk-Benefit Assessment: Clinicians must weigh the benefits of reduced stroke risk against the increased bleeding risk with apixaban therapy.
Sensitivity analyses were performed in the on-treatment population (all the patients who had undergone randomization and received at least 1 dose of the assigned trial drug) with follow-up censored 5 days after permanent discontinuation of trial medication for any reason. The mean duration of follow-up was 3.5 (±1.8) years for the intention-to-treat analysis and 2.5 (±1.8) years for the on-treatment analysis. In the on-treatment analysis, the risk of stroke or systemic embolism was 0.71% per patient-year with apixaban and 1.29% per patient-year with aspirin (HR, 0.55; 95% CI, 0.37-0.83; P = .004).
Healey et al wrote, "In considering the clinical benefit of apixaban therapy in patients with subclinical atrial fibrillation, one needs to assess both the benefits and risks. Simply counting strokes as compared with bleeding events might suggest a neutral overall effect."
The investigators noted that these results must be placed in the context of the NOAH-AFNET 6 trial (NCT02618577), an event-driven study that was terminated early. Published in the New England Journal of Medicine in 2023, the trial randomly assigned patients 65 years of age or older who had atrial high-rate episodes (AHREs) lasting for at least 6 minutes 1:1 to either edoxaban or placebo. All told, the study showed no significant between-group difference in the incidence of a composite of stroke, systemic embolism, or death from cardiovascular causes or the incidence of stroke.2
NOAH-AFNET 6 was different from ARTESIA in that it was stopped early, had relatively few stroke events, and was thus underpowered. Secondly, the primary outcome of NOAH-AFNET 6 included a composite of cardiovascular death in addition to stroke and systemic embolism. “The use of aspirin in the control group in the ARTESIA trial probably had little effect on the signal for reduction in stroke but almost certainly mitigated the signal for harm, because aspirin is known to increase bleeding. However, the difference in the control groups of the two trials does not explain the fact that the ARTESIA trial showed a significant reduction in stroke and the NOAH-AFNET 6 trial did not,” Healey et al noted.1
REFERENCES
1. Healey JS, Lopes RD, Granger CB, et al. Apixaban for stroke prevention in subclinical atrial fibrillation. NEJM. 2024;390:107-117. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa2310234
2. Kirchof P, Toennis T, Goette A, et al. Anticoagulation with edoxaban in patients with atrial high-rate episodes. NEJM. 2023;389:1167-1179. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa2303062