Rivaroxaban FDA review of ROCKET AF data: Difference between revisions
No edit summary |
|||
Line 30: | Line 30: | ||
IDMC indicated that there was no problem with the transition method. At the time the IDMC looked, there were more events in the warfarin arm. | IDMC indicated that there was no problem with the transition method. At the time the IDMC looked, there were more events in the warfarin arm. | ||
The excess number of events in the riva arm was due to an INR under 2 in the riva patients until they achieved anticoagulation. | The excess number of events in the riva arm was due to an INR under 2 in the riva patients until they achieved anticoagulation. | ||
Following rug discontinuation there was a: | |||
6.4% event rate per year in the rivaroxaban arm which is consistent with the rate in patients who are not anticoagulated | |||
1.7 event rate per year in the coumadin arm consistent with effective coumadin therapy |
Revision as of 13:21, 8 September 2011
Editor-In-Chief: C. Michael Gibson, M.S., M.D. [1]
Overview
The FDA conducted an advisory committee review regarding the approvability of rivaroxaban for reduction of stroke and systemic embolization in patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation on September 8th, 2011.
Non-Inferiority Margin
An upper bound of the 95% CI of the hazard ratio was set at 1.38 by the FDA to establish non-inferiority. In no subgroup did the comparison come near the non-inferiority margin, and non-inferiority was clearly observed in all treatment subgroups and in all forms of analysis.
Primary Efficacy Endpoint
The primary efficacy endpoint was stroke and systemic embolization. The efficacy in the trial was driven by a reduction in hemorrhagic stroke and systemic embolization.
Secondary Efficacy Endpoints
There were fewer non-fatal myocardial infarctions in the Rivaroxaban group.
Safety Endpoint(s)
There were more major bleeding events in the rivaroxaban group, however, the risk of fatal bleeds (H.R.=0.61) and hemorrhagic strokes was reduced in the rivaroxaban group.
Cross Trial Comparisons
Dr. Califf emphasized that cross trial comparisons are inappropriate given the variation in design and patient risk.
Resumption of Events Following Discontinuation of Study Drug
Method of Transition at the End of the Trial
- Start VKA at maintenance dose rather than loading dose
- There was no overlap with blinded study drug
- No INR was checked for three days
- Heparin brdiging rarely used
IDMC indicated that there was no problem with the transition method. At the time the IDMC looked, there were more events in the warfarin arm. The excess number of events in the riva arm was due to an INR under 2 in the riva patients until they achieved anticoagulation. Following rug discontinuation there was a: 6.4% event rate per year in the rivaroxaban arm which is consistent with the rate in patients who are not anticoagulated 1.7 event rate per year in the coumadin arm consistent with effective coumadin therapy