Edoxaban Fails to Reduce Overall Stroke Risk After Brain Bleed in Atrial Fibrillation Patients
Edoxaban does not lower the overall risk of stroke or systemic embolism in patients with atrial fibrillation who have previously survived an intracranial hemorrhage, according to results from the ENRICH-AF trial presented at the European Society of Cardiology Congress 2026 and reported by HCPLive. While the anticoagulant medication successfully cut ischemic stroke rates, that benefit was entirely canceled out by a significant increase in hemorrhagic strokes and major bleeding episodes.
Trial Design and Patient Demographics Across International Sites
The investigator-initiated, open-label, blinded-endpoint trial evaluated 948 high-risk patients across 174 recruiting sites in 20 countries. Participants had a documented history of atrial fibrillation, a CHA₂DS₂-VASc score of at least 2, and a prior intracranial hemorrhage. Patients were randomized in a 1:1 ratio to receive either edoxaban at 30 mg or 60 mg daily or a control group receiving non-anticoagulant medical therapy, which consisted of antiplatelet monotherapy or no antithrombotic treatment determined by local investigators. Participants averaged 77 years of age, and roughly 39% were women.
Bleeding Risks Offset Ischemic Benefits During Trial Follow-Up
Over an average follow-up of 28 months, the primary composite endpoint of stroke or systemic embolism occurred in 11.8% of patients assigned to edoxaban compared to 12.8% in the control group, yielding no statistically significant reduction. When examining individual components, edoxaban reduced ischemic stroke to 6.2% compared to 10.3% in controls. However, hemorrhagic stroke climbed to 5.8% in the edoxaban arm versus 1.9% in the control group. International Society on Thrombosis and Haemostasis major bleeding reached 11.6% among patients receiving edoxaban, compared with 5.2% in the control arm.
Edoxaban Findings Highlight Need for Individualized Patient Decisions
Our findings do not support the use of edoxaban in unselected patients with AF after intracranial hemorrhage, but highlight the need for an individualized decision-making approach,
Ashkan Shoamanesh, principal investigator of McMaster University in Hamilton, Ontario, Canada, stated during the presentation of the trial data. Shoamanesh noted that ongoing research, such as the double-blinded, randomized ASPIRE trial comparing apixaban to aspirin, will provide additional clarity. A prospective individual participant data meta-analysis known as COCROACH will examine combined data from all trials to help clinicians individualize stroke prevention strategies for this vulnerable patient population.
Frequently Asked Questions About the ENRICH-AF Trial
What specific types of prior brain bleeds carried the highest recurrence risk during the study?
Subgroup observations indicated that patients with lobar intracranial hemorrhage or convexity subarachnoid hemorrhage faced higher annualized rates of recurrent bleeding compared to those with nonlobar intracranial hemorrhage, though researchers emphasized these specific breakdowns remain hypothesis-generating.
How did the control group manage their stroke risk without oral anticoagulation?
Approximately 52% of the patients assigned to the non-anticoagulant control group received single antiplatelet therapy, while the remainder received no antithrombotic treatment based on the clinical discretion of local investigators.
What additional cardiovascular endpoints showed notable differences between the treatment arms?
Myocardial infarction occurred significantly less often in the edoxaban group, affecting just one patient compared to seven patients in the control group.
Related reading