Jurisdictional Guidance on DOAC Use—Will It Affect Practice? A Comparison of European,American,and Canadian Product Monographs

Abstract

Objective: To identify clinically relevant areas of concordance and discordance between product monographs for 4 direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) approved by regulatory authorities in Europe, the United States, and Canada. Data Sources: For each DOAC (apixaban, dabigatran, edoxaban, rivaroxaban), manufacturer product monographs were retrieved from the European Medicines Database, US Food and Drug Administration, and Health Canada Drug Product Database. Data Extraction: Monographs for each DOAC were independently reviewed by 2 investigators to identify areas of concordance and discordance. Discordance existed if it was deemed that a potentially clinically relevant difference existed. A heat map summarizing the data was created to identify areas of complete concordance, partial concordance (concordance between 2 of 3 monographs), and complete discordance. Data Synthesis: The areas of concordance were indications for use, use in extremes of weight, and switching to/from the DOAC. Areas of discordance included the following: differing recommendations for use/dosing with renal dysfunction; contraindication or use with caution with drug interactions, pregnancy, and hepatic/renal dysfunction; and timing of DOAC with spinal/epidural anesthesia after a procedure or traumatic puncture. Relevance to Patient Care and Clinical Practice: Concordance was most evident for uncomplicated patients with atrial fibrillation or venous thromboembolism, whereas discordance emerged for those having characteristics/factors wherein clinicians may seek clarification within product monographs (eg, impaired renal/hepatic function, drug interactions). As such, clinicians must be familiar with product information within their country of practice. Conclusion: Variability between jurisdictions was evident, and variability of DOAC use is likely to increase with expanding worldwide uptake.