Quantitative Benefit-Risk Evaluation of Rivaroxaban in Patients After Peripheral Arterial Revascularization: The VOYAGER PAD Trial

• Published in: Journal of the American Heart Association Vol. 13; no. 8; p. e032782
• Main Authors: Yuan, Zhong, Levitan, Bennett, Deng, Hsiaowei, Szarek, Michael, Bauersachs, Rupert M, Berkowitz, Scott D, Haskell, Lloyd, Barnathan, Elliot S, Bonaca, Marc P
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: England John Wiley and Sons Inc 16.04.2024; Wiley
• Subjects: health state utilities; modeling; multi‐criteria decision analysis; Original Research; peripheral artery disease; rivaroxaban; multi‐criteria decision analysis; rivaroxaban; modeling; peripheral artery disease; health state utilities
• ISSN: 2047-9980; 2047-9980
• DOI: 10.1161/JAHA.123.032782

The VOYAGER PAD (Efficacy and Safety of Rivaroxaban in Reducing the Risk of Major Thrombotic Vascular Events in Subjects With Symptomatic Peripheral Artery Disease Undergoing Peripheral Revascularization Procedures of the Lower Extremities) trial compared rivaroxaban (2.5 mg twice a day) plus aspirin with aspirin alone in patients with symptomatic peripheral artery disease requiring endovascular or surgical limb revascularization, with 50% receiving clopidogrel background therapy. The New Drug Indication application includes benefit-risk assessments using clinical judgment to balance benefits against risks. During its review, the US Food and Drug Administration requested additional quantitative benefit-risk analyses with formal weighting approaches. Benefits and risks were assessed using rate differences between treatment groups (unweighted analysis). To account for clinical importance of the end points, a multi-criteria decision analysis was conducted using health state utility values as weights. Monte Carlo simulations incorporated statistical uncertainties of the event rates and utility weights. Intent-to-treat and on-treatment analyses were conducted. For unweighted intent-to-treat analyses, rivaroxaban plus aspirin would result in 120 (95% CI, -208 to -32) fewer events of the primary composite end point (per 10 000 patient-years) compared with aspirin alone. Rivaroxaban caused an excess of 40 (95% CI, 8-72) Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction major bleeding events, which was largely driven by nonfatal, nonintracranial hemorrhage Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction major bleeding events. For weighted analyses, rivaroxaban resulted in the utility equivalent of 13.7 (95% CI, -85.3 to 52.6) and 68.1 (95% CI, 7.9-135.7) fewer deaths per 10 000 patient-years (intent-to-treat and on-treatment, respectively), corresponding to probabilities of 64.4% and 98.7%, respectively, that benefits outweigh risks favoring rivaroxaban per Monte Carlo simulation. These analyses show a favorable benefit-risk profile of rivaroxaban therapy in the VOYAGER PAD trial, with findings generally consistent between the unweighted and weighted approaches.