RT Journal Article
SR Electronic
T1 Association between oral anticoagulants and COVID-19 related outcomes: two cohort studies
JF medRxiv
FD Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press
SP 2021.04.30.21256119
DO 10.1101/2021.04.30.21256119
A1 ,
A1 Wong, Angel YS
A1 Tomlinson, Laurie
A1 Brown, Jeremy P
A1 Elson, William
A1 Walker, Alex J
A1 Schultze, Anna
A1 Morton, Caroline E
A1 Evans, David
A1 Inglesby, Peter
A1 MacKenna, Brian
A1 Bhaskaran, Krishnan
A1 Rentsch, Christopher T
A1 Powell, Emma
A1 Williamson, Elizabeth
A1 Croker, Richard
A1 Bacon, Seb
A1 Hulme, William
A1 Bates, Chris
A1 Curtis, Helen J
A1 Mehrkar, Amir
A1 Cockburn, Jonathan
A1 McDonald, Helen I
A1 Mathur, Rohini
A1 Wing, Kevin
A1 Forbes, Harriet
A1 Eggo, Rosalind M
A1 Evans, Stephen JW
A1 Smeeth, Liam
A1 Goldacre, Ben
A1 Douglas, Ian J
YR 2021
UL http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2021/04/30/2021.04.30.21256119.abstract
AB Objectives We investigated the role of routinely prescribed oral anticoagulants (OACs) in COVID-19 outcomes, comparing current OAC use versus non-use in Study 1; and warfarin versus direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) in Study 2.Design Two cohort studies, on behalf of NHS England.Setting Primary care data and pseudonymously-linked SARS-CoV-2 antigen testing data, hospital admissions, and death records from England.Participants Study 1: 70,464 people with atrial fibrillation (AF) and CHA□DS□-VASc score of 2. Study 2: 372,746 people with non-valvular AF.Main outcome measures Time to test for SARS-CoV-2, testing positive for SARS-CoV-2, COVID-19 related hospital admission, COVID-19 deaths or non-COVID-19 deaths in Cox regression.Results In Study 1, we included 52,416 current OAC users and 18,048 non-users. We observed no difference in risk of being tested for SARS-CoV-2 associated with current use (adjusted HR, 1.01, 95%CI, 0.96 to 1.05) versus non-use. We observed a lower risk of testing positive for SARS-CoV-2 (adjusted HR, 0.73, 95%CI, 0.60 to 0.90), and COVID-19 deaths (adjusted HR, 0.69, 95%CI, 0.49 to 0.97) associated with current use versus non-use. In Study 2, we included 92,339 warfarin users and 280,407 DOAC users. We observed a lower risk of COVID-19 deaths (adjusted HR, 0.79, 95%CI, 0.76 to 0.83) associated with warfarin versus DOACs. Similar associations were found for all other outcomes.Conclusions Among people with AF and a CHA□DS□-VASc score of 2, those receiving OACs had a lower risk of receiving a positive COVID-19 test and severe COVID-19 outcomes than non-users; this might be explained by a causal effect of OACs in preventing severe COVID-19 outcomes or more cautious behaviours leading to reduced infection risk. There was no evidence of a higher risk of severe COVID-19 outcomes associated with warfarin versus DOACs in people with non-valvular AF regardless of CHA□DS□-VASc score.What is already known on this topicCurrent studies suggest that prophylactic or therapeutic anticoagulant use, particularly low molecular weight heparin, lower the risk of pulmonary embolism and mortality during hospitalisation among patients with COVID-19.Reduced vitamin K status has been reported to be correlated with severity of COVID-19. This could mean that warfarin, as a vitamin K antagonist, is associated with more severe COVID-19 disease than non-vitamin K anticoagulants.What this study addsIn 70,464 people with atrial fibrillation, at the threshold of being treated with an OAC based on risk of stroke, we observed a lower risk of testing positive for SARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19 related deaths associated with routinely prescribed OACs, relative to non-use.This might be explained by OACs preventing severe COVID-19 outcomes, or more cautious behaviours and environmental factors reducing the risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection in those taking OACs.In 372,746 people with non-valvular atrial fibrillation, there was no evidence of a higher risk of severe COVID-19 outcomes associated with warfarin compared with DOACs.Competing Interest StatementThe authors have declared no competing interest.Funding StatementThis work was supported by the Medical Research Council MR/V015737/1. TPP provided technical expertise and infrastructure within their data centre pro bono in the context of a national emergency. Work of BG on better use of data in healthcare more broadly is currently funded in part by: NIHR Oxford Biomedical Research Centre, NIHR Applied Research Collaboration Oxford and Thames Valley, the Mohn-Westlake Foundation, NHS England, and the Health Foundation; all DataLab staff are supported by grants of BG on this work. LS reports grants from Wellcome, MRC, NIHR, UKRI, British Council, GSK, British Heart Foundation, and Diabetes UK outside this work. AYSW holds a fellowship from BHF. JPB is funded by a studentship from GSK. AS is employed by LSHTM on a fellowship sponsored by GSK. KB holds a Sir Henry Dale fellowship jointly funded by Wellcome and the Royal Society. HIM is funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Protection Research Unit in Immunisation, a partnership between Public Health England and LSHTM. RM holds a Sir Henry Wellcome fellowship. EW holds grants from MRC. RG holds grants from NIHR and MRC. ID holds grants from NIHR and GSK. HF holds a UKRI fellowship. The views expressed are those of the authors and not necessarily those of the NIHR, NHS England, Public Health England or the Department of Health and Social Care. Funders had no role in the study design, collection, analysis, and interpretation of data; in the writing of the report; and in the decision to submit the article for publication Author DeclarationsI confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.YesThe details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:This study was approved by the Health Research Authority (REC reference 20/LO/0651) and by the LSHTM Ethics Board (reference 21863).All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.YesI understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).YesI have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.YesAll codelists for identifying exposures, covariates and outcomes are openly shared at https://codelists.opensafely.org/ for inspection and re-use. All study analyses were pre-planned unless otherwise stated. All code for data management and analyses in addition to the pre-specified protocol (https://github.com/opensafely/anticoagulants-research/blob/master/protocol/Protocol_%20Anticoag%20OpenSAFELY_v3.docx) are archived at: https://github.com/opensafely/anticoagulants-research.AFatrial fibrillationCIconfidence intervalCOVID-19coronavirus disease 2019DAGDirected Acyclic GraphDOACdirect oral anticoagulantsHRHazard ratioOACoral anticoagulantsNHSNational Health Service