Association of Oral Anticoagulants and Verapamil or Diltiazem With Adverse Bleeding Events in Patients With Nonvalvular Atrial Fibrillation and Normal Kidney Function
Authors: Phuong Pham, Stephan Schmidt, Lawrence Lesko, Gregory Y. H. Lip, Joshua D. Brown
Journal: JAMA Network Open (2020)

<h3>Importance</h3> Direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) are purported to have fewer drug-drug interactions than warfarin. However, potential interactions with coprescribed medications are still a safety concern. Verapamil hydrochloride and diltiazem hydrochloride are combined P-glycoprotein (P-gp) and CYP3A4 inhibitors and may be associated with increases in the risk of bleeding with DOACs. <h3>Objective</h3> To evaluate the risk of bleeding with DOACs and verapamil or diltiazem using an active comparator design. <h3>Design, Setting, and Participants</h3> A comparative effectiveness active comparator cohort study was conducted using US population-based data (2010-2015) analyzed between January 1 and July 15, 2019. Data were obtained on 48 442 patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation who had received an index prescription of dabigatran, rivaroxaban, or apixaban between October 19, 2010, through June 30, 2015, with final follow-up on October 1, 2015. Analysis was restricted to individuals with no history of kidney disease who were receiving standard doses of the DOACs. <h3>Exposures</h3> Patients with initial prescriptions of DOACs who were receiving verapamil or diltiazem were compared with those receiving amlodipine or metoprolol. <h3>Main Outcomes and Measures</h3> Overall and gastrointestinal major, moderate, and minor bleeding using primary or secondary diagnoses. Hazard ratios and 95% CIs were estimated using inverse probability of treatment weights in Cox proportional hazards regression models. <h3>Results</h3> Of the 48 442 patients reviewed, analysis was conducted on 1764 patients receiving DOACs with verapamil or diltiazem compared with 3105 receiving amlodipine and 1793 patients receiving DOACs with verapamil or diltiazem compared with 3224 receiving metoprolol. Depending on the comparison, approximately 60% of the cohort were younger than 65 years and male, which differed by treatment group. Rivaroxaban and apixaban were not associated with increased rates of bleeding for patients receiving verapamil or diltiazem compared with those receiving amlodipine or metoprolol. Among patients receiving dabigatran etexilate, the overall bleeding rate was 52% higher (hazard ratio, 1.52; 95% CI, 1.05-2.20) with verapamil or diltiazem vs amlodipine and 43% higher (hazard ratio, 1.43; 95% CI, 1.02-2.00) vs metoprolol. Bleeding rates for dabigatran with verapamil or diltiazem were higher overall for other bleeding types (244.9 vs 158.4 per 1000 person-years; adjusted hazard ratios of overall GI bleeding: 2.16; 95% CI, 1.30-3.60; minor bleeding: 1.56; 95% CI, 1.07-2.27; and minor GI bleeding: 2.16; 95% CI, 1.29-3.63). Sensitivity analyses showed consistent results for dabigatran when used with verapamil and diltiazem, with magnitudes ranging from 50% to 100% increased hazard rates and no significant results for apixaban or rivaroxaban. <h3>Conclusions and Relevance</h3> Current US prescribing information only recommends prescribing changes with dabigatran and P-gp inhibitors with lower kidney function. This study found increased bleeding risk associated with dabigatran when used concomitantly with the P-gp inhibitors verapamil and diltiazem in individuals with normal kidney function. Clinicians and patients may need to consider these drug-drug interactions when choosing oral anticoagulation.