We analyzed three BW groups: low BW (LBW: <5th percentile, ≤55 kg, N = 1,082), middle BW (MBW: 45th-55th percentile, 79.8-84 kg, N = 2,153), and high BW (HBW: >95th percentile, ≥120 kg, N = 1,093). In the
warfarin arm, LBW patients had higher rates of
stroke/systemic
embolism (SSE: 6.5 vs. 4.7 in MBW vs. 1.6% in HBW, P trend < 0.001), major
bleeding (MB: 9.3 vs. 7.7 vs. 6.5%, P trend = 0.08), and worse net clinical outcome of systemic embolic event, MB, or death (31.5 vs. 19.1 vs. 16.0%, P trend < 0.0001). The time-in-therapeutic range with
warfarin was lowest in LBW patients (63.0 vs. 69.3 vs. 70.1% patients, P trend < 0.001). The pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic profile of
edoxaban was consistent across BW groups. The risk of SSE was similar between HDER and
warfarin for each of the three weight groups (P int = 0.52, P int-trend = 0.86). MB was reduced by LDER versus
warfarin (P int = 0.061, P int-trend = 0.023), especially in LBW patients. Net clinical outcomes were improved by HDER versus
warfarin (P int = 0.087, P int-trend = 0.027), especially in LBW patients.
CONCLUSION: Patients with LBW in ENGAGE AF-TIMI 48 had in general a more fragile clinical status and poorer international normalized ratio control. The pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic profile of
edoxaban was consistent across extremes of BW, resulting in similar efficacy compared with
warfarin, while major or clinically relevant non-MB and net outcomes were most favorable with
edoxaban as compared to
warfarin in LBW patients.