↓ Skip to main content

Association Between Use of Non–Vitamin K Oral Anticoagulants With and Without Concurrent Medications and Risk of Major Bleeding in Nonvalvular Atrial Fibrillation

Overview of attention for article published in JAMA: Journal of the American Medical Association, October 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (99th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (92nd percentile)

Mentioned by

news
20 news outlets
blogs
3 blogs
policy
2 policy sources
twitter
452 X users
facebook
13 Facebook pages
googleplus
3 Google+ users

Citations

dimensions_citation
306 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
330 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Association Between Use of Non–Vitamin K Oral Anticoagulants With and Without Concurrent Medications and Risk of Major Bleeding in Nonvalvular Atrial Fibrillation
Published in
JAMA: Journal of the American Medical Association, October 2017
DOI 10.1001/jama.2017.13883
Pubmed ID
Authors

Shang-Hung Chang, I-Jun Chou, Yung-Hsin Yeh, Meng-Jiun Chiou, Ming-Shien Wen, Chi-Tai Kuo, Lai-Chu See, Chang-Fu Kuo

Abstract

Non-vitamin K oral anticoagulants (NOACs) are commonly prescribed with other medications that share metabolic pathways that may increase major bleeding risk. To assess the association between use of NOACs with and without concurrent medications and risk of major bleeding in patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation. Retrospective cohort study using data from the Taiwan National Health Insurance database and including 91 330 patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation who received at least 1 NOAC prescription of dabigatran, rivaroxaban, or apixaban from January 1, 2012, through December 31, 2016, with final follow-up on December 31, 2016. NOAC with or without concurrent use of atorvastatin; digoxin; verapamil; diltiazem; amiodarone; fluconazole; ketoconazole, itraconazole, voriconazole, or posaconazole; cyclosporine; erythromycin or clarithromycin; dronedarone; rifampin; or phenytoin. Major bleeding, defined as hospitalization or emergency department visit with a primary diagnosis of intracranial hemorrhage or gastrointestinal, urogenital, or other bleeding. Adjusted incidence rate differences between person-quarters (exposure time for each person during each quarter of the calendar year) of NOAC with or without concurrent medications were estimated using Poisson regression and inverse probability of treatment weighting using the propensity score. Among 91 330 patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation (mean age, 74.7 years [SD, 10.8]; men, 55.8%; NOAC exposure: dabigatran, 45 347 patients; rivaroxaban, 54 006 patients; and apixaban, 12 886 patients), 4770 major bleeding events occurred during 447 037 person-quarters with NOAC prescriptions. The most common medications co-prescribed with NOACs over all person-quarters were atorvastatin (27.6%), diltiazem (22.7%), digoxin (22.5%), and amiodarone (21.1%). Concurrent use of amiodarone, fluconazole, rifampin, and phenytoin with NOACs had a significant increase in adjusted incidence rates per 1000 person-years of major bleeding than NOACs alone: 38.09 for NOAC use alone vs 52.04 for amiodarone (difference, 13.94 [99% CI, 9.76-18.13]); 102.77 for NOAC use alone vs 241.92 for fluconazole (difference, 138.46 [99% CI, 80.96-195.97]); 65.66 for NOAC use alone vs 103.14 for rifampin (difference, 36.90 [99% CI, 1.59-72.22); and 56.07 for NOAC use alone vs 108.52 for phenytoin (difference, 52.31 [99% CI, 32.18-72.44]; P < .01 for all comparisons). Compared with NOAC use alone, the adjusted incidence rate for major bleeding was significantly lower for concurrent use of atorvastatin, digoxin, and erythromycin or clarithromycin and was not significantly different for concurrent use of verapamil; diltiazem; cyclosporine; ketoconazole, itraconazole, voriconazole, or posaconazole; and dronedarone. Among patients taking NOACs for nonvalvular atrial fibrillation, concurrent use of amiodarone, fluconazole, rifampin, and phenytoin compared with the use of NOACs alone, was associated with increased risk of major bleeding. Physicians prescribing NOAC medications should consider the potential risks associated with concomitant use of other drugs.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 452 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 330 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 330 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 48 15%
Student > Master 37 11%
Other 36 11%
Student > Ph. D. Student 29 9%
Student > Postgraduate 21 6%
Other 86 26%
Unknown 73 22%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 137 42%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 53 16%
Nursing and Health Professions 9 3%
Neuroscience 8 2%
Computer Science 5 2%
Other 31 9%
Unknown 87 26%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 432. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 30 January 2024.
All research outputs
#67,002
of 25,706,302 outputs
Outputs from JAMA: Journal of the American Medical Association
#1,255
of 36,732 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#1,405
of 332,604 outputs
Outputs of similar age from JAMA: Journal of the American Medical Association
#27
of 367 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,706,302 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 99th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 36,732 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 72.7. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 332,604 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 367 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% of its contemporaries.