Discussion
Despite the clinical complexities imposed by CKD, to date, there have been limited data evaluating patterns of anticoagulant use considering either the presence or severity of CKD. In this study, we leveraged a large database of UK electronic medical records between 2010 and 2020 to compare anticoagulant initiation among AF patients with and without CKD. We observed a decline in warfarin use over time, coinciding with the approval of DOACs. Notably, among DOACs, apixaban emerged as the preferred choice, regardless of CKD status or stage. Patients with stage 4 CKD were three times more likely to initiate warfarin compared with those with mild to moderate renal impairment and exhibited the lowest relative use of apixaban within any subgroup. Additionally, there was a secular trend towards higher initiation doses of apixaban across all patient subgroups over the study period.
Although current clinical guidelines advocate for DOACs over warfarin for AF,16 17 real-world prescribing decisions are influenced by multiple factors including efficacy, safety, tolerability, treatment costs and available evidence among patients with CKD. Moreover, consideration must be given to the variable significance of CKD or its stages based on the specific disease context, which may impact prescribers’ decisions on anticoagulant initiation or dosage adjustment. For example, while apixaban requires renal dose adjustment in AF, with caution in severe kidney disease, its use in VTE does not require dosage adjustment or restrictions based on kidney function. This variability underscores the complexity of prescribing practices of anticoagulants. Our study revealed that DOACs, particularly apixaban, were more commonly prescribed than warfarin regardless of CKD status, reflecting evolving patient and clinician priorities. Notably, these trends contrast with the therapeutic inertia observed in other clinical contexts for newer therapies among patients with CKD.23 24 However, the use of warfarin remained higher in patients with stage 4 CKD compared with those with stages 3a and 3b CKD, despite the European Society of Cardiology and the recent American Heart Association/American College of Cardiology/Heart Rhythm Society recommendations.14 17 The disparity may stem from the absence of clinical trial data to fully establish DOAC’s efficacy and safety among patients with eGFR below 25–30 mL/min.25 While warfarin has demonstrated efficacy in AF patients with severe CKD,26 concerns remain over its safety profile, marked by an elevated risk of bleeding and a rare yet life-threatening effect for vascular calcification with prolonged use.27
While the current National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) guidelines do not recommend a particular DOAC among patients with CKD and AF,15 they acknowledge the more favourable data for apixaban in this patient population. The preferential prescribing preference for apixaban may also have been attributed to two factors. First, meta-analyses of clinical trials have shown superiority of apixaban over other DOACs, especially for risk of major bleeding in advanced CKD. Our analysis of major bleeding crude incidence rates aligns with findings from large-scale trials comparing different DOACs, which indicate an additive benefit of apixaban in reducing the risk of major bleeding relative to other anticoagulants. Second, among all DOACs, apixaban has the lowest renal excretion (27%), compared with rivaroxaban (35%), edoxaban (50%) and dabigatran (80%), making it a more attractive option for patients with CKD.
In our study, we observed that the higher 10 mg daily dose of apixaban was the primary initiation dose among patients without CKD and those with stage 3a CKD. Further, there was a notable secular trend in the increasing use of this higher dose among patients with stages 3b and 4 CKD. Despite meeting dose reduction criteria, the majority of apixaban initiators were prescribed the standard 10 mg daily dose, with only 27% undergoing dose reduction. While we cannot attribute this trend to any specific cause, certain factors such as growing familiarity of apixaban among healthcare providers may have played a role. Further, the availability of data demonstrating a low risk of bleeding and a perceived improvement in stroke outcomes with higher doses may have also influenced prescribing decisions.
Our study findings are aligned with the existing literature, showing a decline in warfarin use in favour of DOACs in the general AF population,28–30 and generally consistent with the limited available literature examining AF patients with CKD. A prior study examining anticoagulant use in newly admitted nursing home residents with AF and CKD (2011–2018) noted a clear preference for warfarin among patients with CKD compared with those without CKD31; whereas, our study found a more modest difference in warfarin use between patients with CKD and non-CKD. This variation could be attributed to differences in the underlying study populations and the study period considered. Additionally, an older Danish study conducted from 2011 to 2013, in AF patients newly initiating anticoagulants (3.2% of whom had CKD),32 the presence of CKD was associated with a 67% lower odds of DOAC (vs warfarin) initiation.
Our study represents the first systematic effort to assess anticoagulant initiation patterns among patients with and without CKD, as well as across CKD stages. This was accomplished by leveraging a large, highly generalisable, and comprehensive electronic health record database from the UK. Laboratory data to estimate serum creatinine were well recorded in the data, allowing for an unbiased appraisal of medication use. However, study findings should be viewed in light of certain limitations. First, we had information on prescribing—rather than dispensing, so it is possible that patients may not have filled their prescriptions. Second, given that our study ended in 2020, we were unable to evaluate the impact of 2021 NICE AF guidelines nor study the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on treatment disruptions or switches. Third, CPRD data do not identify the prescription’s origin (eg, primary or specialty care) and do not include information on prescriptions originating from inpatient hospitalisations or emergency department visits. Fourth, as our study spanned from 2010 to 2020, variations in approval times for anticoagulants, such as edoxaban in 2015, may have limited our ability to assess trends, particularly in comparison to subsequent guideline updates in 2016 and 2019. Finally, as we employed a 12-month washout window to define new medication initiation, it is possible that patients may have initiated their medications prior to this 12-month window.
In conclusion, patients with stage 4 CKD were still more likely to be initiated on warfarin compared with those with stage 3a and 3b CKD, despite minimal warfarin use overall. Apixaban emerged as the preferred anticoagulant regardless of CKD status or severity, with a strong secular trend towards the use of higher doses over time. These findings ultimately shed light on the evolving trends and shifting patient and prescriber priorities in anticoagulant therapy initiation.