Andexanet alfa versus PCC products for factor Xa inhibitor bleeding: A systematic review with meta-analysis

White C.M.; Caroti K.S.; Bessada Y.; Hernandez A.V.; Baker W.L.; Dobesh P.P.; van Haalen H.; Rhodes K.; Coleman C.I. · Pharmacotherapy (2024) · DOI: 10.1002/phar.2925

Resumen

Previous meta-analyses assessed andexanet alfa (AA) or prothrombin complex concentrate (PCC) products for the treatment of Factor Xa inhibitor (FXaI)-associated major bleeding. However, they did not include recent studies or assess the impact of the risk of bias. We conducted a systematic review with meta-analysis on the effectiveness of AA versus PCC products for FXaI-associated major bleeding, inclusive of the studies' risk of bias. PubMed and Embase were searched for comparative studies assessing major bleeding in patients using FXaI who received AA or PCC. We used the Methodological Index for NOn-Randomized Studies (MINORS) checklist and one question from the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) Critical Appraisal of Case Series tool to assess the risk of bias. Random-effects meta-analyses were performed to provide a pooled estimate for the effect of AA versus PCC products on hemostatic efficacy, in-hospital mortality, 30-day mortality, and thrombotic events. Low–moderate risk of bias studies were meta-analyzed separately, as well as combined with high risk of bias studies. Eighteen comparative evaluations of AA versus PCC were identified. Twenty-eight percent of the studies (n = 5) had low–moderate risk and 72% (n = 13) had a high risk of bias. Studies with low–moderate risk of bias suggested improvements in hemostatic efficacy [Odds Ratio (OR) 2.72 (95% Confidence Interval (CI): 1.15–6.44); one study], lower in-hospital mortality [OR 0.48 (95% CI: 0.38–0.61); three studies], and reduced 30-day mortality [OR 0.49 (95% CI: 0.30–0.80); two studies] when AA was used versus PCC products. When studies were included regardless of the risk of bias, pooled effects showed improvements in hemostatic efficacy [OR 1.36 (95% CI: 1.01–1.84); 12 studies] and reductions in 30-day mortality [OR 0.53 (95% CI: 0.37–0.76); six studies] for AA versus PCC. The difference in thrombotic events with AA versus PCC was not statistically significant in the low–moderate, high, or combined risk of bias groups. The evidence from low–moderate quality real-world studies suggests that AA is superior to PCC in enhancing hemostatic efficacy and reducing in-hospital and 30-day mortality. When studies are assessed regardless of the risk of bias, the pooled hemostatic efficacy and 30-day mortality risk remain significantly better with AA versus PCC.

Instituciones: Universidad San Ignacio de Loyola