On-treatment Comparative Effectiveness of Vitamin K Antagonists and Direct Oral Anticoagulants in GARFIELD-VTE, and Focus on Cancer and Renal Disease.

 Direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) provide a safe, effective alternative to vitamin K antagonists (VKAs) for venous thromboembolism (VTE) treatment, as shown via intention-to-treat comparative effectiveness analysis. However, on-treatment analysis is imperative in observational studies because anticoagulation choice and duration are at investigators' discretion.  The aim of the study is to compare the effectiveness of DOACs and VKAs on 12-month outcomes in VTE patients using on-treatment analysis.  The Global Anticoagulant Registry in the FIELD - VTE (GARFIELD-VTE) is a world-wide, prospective, non-interventional study observing treatment of VTE in routine clinical practice.  In total, 8,034 patients received VKAs (  = 3,043, 37.9%) or DOACs (  = 4,991, 62.1%). After adjustment for baseline characteristics and follow-up bleeding events, and accounting for possible time-varying confounding, all-cause mortality was significantly lower with DOACs than VKAs (hazard ratio: 0.58 [95% confidence interval 0.42-0.79]). Furthermore, patients receiving VKAs were more likely to die of VTE complications (4.9 vs. 2.2%) or bleeding (4.9 vs. 0.0%). There was no significant difference in rates of recurrent VTE (hazard ratio: 0.74 [0.55-1.01]), major bleeding (hazard ratio: 0.76 [0.47-1.24]), or overall bleeding (hazard ratio: 0.87 [0.72-1.05]) with DOACs or VKAs. Unadjusted analyses suggested that VKA patients with active cancer or renal insufficiency were more likely to die than patients treated with DOAC (52.51 [37.33-73.86] vs. 26.52 [19.37-36.29] and 9.97 [7.51-13.23] vs. 4.70 [3.25-6.81] per 100 person-years, respectively).  DOACs and VKAs had similar rates of recurrent VTE and major bleeding. However, DOACs were associated with reduced all-cause mortality and a lower likelihood of death from VTE or bleeding compared with VKAs.