scholarly journals Safety and efficacy of new oral anticoagulants and low-molecular-weight heparins compared with aspirin in patients undergoing total knee and hip replacements

2016 ◽  
Vol 25 (11) ◽  
pp. 1245-1252 ◽  
Author(s):  
Johannes T. H. Nielen ◽  
Pieter C. Dagnelie ◽  
Pieter J. Emans ◽  
Nicole Veldhorst-Janssen ◽  
Arief Lalmohamed ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Molecular Weight ◽  
Oral Anticoagulants ◽  
New Oral Anticoagulants ◽  
Low Molecular Weight ◽  
Low Molecular Weight Heparins ◽  
Safety And Efficacy ◽  
Hip Replacements ◽  
Total Knee

New Oral Anticoagulants Versus Low Molecular Weight Heparins for the Treatment of Cancer-associated Thrombosis: a Cost-effectiveness Analysis

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kaidireyahan Wumaier ◽  
Wenqian Li ◽  
Naifei Chen ◽  
Jiuwei Cui
Keyword(s):  
Molecular Weight ◽  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Oral Anticoagulants ◽  
New Oral Anticoagulants ◽  
Low Molecular Weight ◽  
Test Model ◽  
Low Molecular Weight Heparins ◽  
Gastrointestinal Malignancy ◽  
Cancer Associated Thrombosis ◽  
The Cost

Abstract Background: Recently, new oral anticoagulants (NOACs) have been included in guidelines for the treatment of cancer-associated thrombosis (CAT) to be extended to suitable cancer patients. The purpose of this study was to compare the cost-effectiveness of using NOACs and low molecular weight heparins(LMWHs) for treating CAT from the perspective of the Chinese healthcare system. Methods: A Markov model was constructed to estimate the cost-effectiveness of the two strategies with a 6-month and 5-year time horizon. Input parameters were either sourced from the clinical trial, published literature. The primary outcome of the model was reported as incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs). Sensitivity analyses were performed to test model uncertainty. Results: The 6-month cost of NOACs was $ 654.65 with 0.40 QALYs while the 6-month cost of LMWHs was $ 1719.31 with 0.37 QALYs. Similarly, treatment with NOACs had a lower cost ($ 657.85 vs. $ 1716.56) and more health benefits (0.40 QALY vs. 0.37 QALY) than treatment with LMWHs in a subgroup of patients with gastrointestinal malignancy. We found treatment with NOACs would result in a large reduction in cost($ 1447.22 vs. $ 3374.70) but a small reduction in QALYs (3.07 QALY vs. 3.09 QALY) compared with LMWHs over a 5-year time frame, resulting in an ICER of $ 112895.50/QALY. Sensitivity analysis confirmed the robustness of the results. Conclusion: As compared to LMWHs, NOACs can be a cost-saving anticoagulant choice for the treatment of CAT in the general oncology population and gastrointestinal malignancy population.Classification codes: I.

Safety and efficacy of direct oral anticoagulants for venous thromboembolism and stroke prophylaxis in patients with hematologic malignancies

2019 ◽  
Vol 26 (2) ◽  
pp. 351-360 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stephanie Kim ◽  
Jennifer Namba ◽  
Aaron M Goodman ◽  
Thi Nguyen ◽  
Ila M Saunders
Keyword(s):  
Molecular Weight ◽  
Venous Thromboembolism ◽  
Major Bleeding ◽  
Oral Anticoagulants ◽  
Direct Oral Anticoagulants ◽  
Hematologic Malignancies ◽  
Low Molecular Weight ◽  
Direct Oral Anticoagulant ◽  
Low Molecular Weight Heparins ◽  
Bleeding Events

Purpose Low-molecular-weight heparins are currently the recommended antithrombotic therapy for treatment and prevention of malignancy-related venous thromboembolism. Currently, the evidence evaluating direct oral anticoagulants versus low-molecular-weight heparins or a vitamin K antagonist in cancer patients with hematologic malignancies is limited. We evaluated the safety and efficacy of direct oral anticoagulants for venous thromboembolism treatment or stroke prevention for non-valvular atrial fibrillation in patients with hematologic malignancies. Methods This was a retrospective evaluation of adult patients with hematologic malignancies who received at least one dose of the Food and Drug Administration-approved direct oral anticoagulant for venous thromboembolism treatment or stroke prevention. We determined the frequency of major bleeding events, non-major bleeding events, stroke, systemic embolism, appropriateness of initial direct oral anticoagulant doses, holding practices prior to procedures, and the rate of all-cause mortality. An analysis was also performed to compare the incidence of bleeding between patients with a history of hematopoietic stem cell transplant to non-transplant patients. Results A total of 103 patients were identified, with the majority of patients receiving rivaroxaban for venous thromboembolism treatment. Major bleeding events occurred in four patients and no fatal bleeding events occurred. Non-major bleeding occurred in 29 patients, most commonly epistaxis and bruising. Two patients experienced a systemic embolism while on direct oral anticoagulant therapy. Conclusion Direct oral anticoagulants may be a safe and effective alternative for anticoagulation therapy in patients with hematologic malignancies. However, larger prospective studies comparing direct oral anticoagulants to low-molecular-weight heparins or vitamin K antagonists are warranted to compare efficacy and safety outcomes in this patient population.

A retrospective single-center evaluation of the safety and efficacy of direct oral anticoagulants versus low molecular weight heparin in patients with cancer-associated thrombosis.

2020 ◽  
Vol 38 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. e24102-e24102
Author(s):  
Melissa McShane ◽  
Jordan Senchak ◽  
Anthony Stack ◽  
Justina Frimpong ◽  
Van T Hellerslia ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Molecular Weight ◽  
Major Bleeding ◽  
Low Molecular Weight Heparin ◽  
Oral Anticoagulants ◽  
Direct Oral Anticoagulants ◽  
Low Molecular Weight ◽  
Safety And Efficacy ◽  
The Past ◽  
Cancer Associated Thrombosis

e24102 Background: Over the past decade, there has been an increase in the use of direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) in the cancer population despite limited data comparing its use against low molecular weight heparin (LMWH), the standard of care in cancer patients. Increasing data supporting DOACs in cancer-associated thrombosis has emerged over the past few years. Nonetheless, this study will evaluate the relative safety and efficacy of DOACs versus LMWH in cancer-associated thrombosis within an urban setting associated with low socioeconomic status. Methods: This is a retrospective chart review of medical records from patients treated at an urban academic medical center from October 2010 through October 2018. Patients met study inclusion if they had a diagnosis of venous thromboembolism occurring after the date of diagnosis of active cancer and were prescribed a direct oral anticoagulant (rivaroxaban, apixaban, dabigatran, edoxaban) or a low molecular weight heparin (dalteparin, enoxaparin, or fondaparinux) as monotherapy for the treatment of venous thromboembolic disease. Patients were excluded if they had less than 6 months of follow up data for reasons other than death. The primary outcomes were recurrent venous thromboembolism, major bleeding and death. Results: Of the 914 patients who met inclusion criteria, 286 were excluded due to lack of follow up data. The remaining patients included 472 in the LMWH arm and 156 in the DOAC arm. At 6 months, recurrent thromboembolism occurred in 5 of the 472 patients (1.1%) in the LMWH group as compared with 4 of the 156 patients (2.6%) in the DOAC group (p = 0.170). Major bleeding occurred in 36 patients (7.6%) in the LMWH group and 11 patients (7.0%) in the DOAC group (p = 0.813). Death within 6 months of starting anticoagulation occurred in 76 patients (16.1%) in the LMWH group and 16 patients (9.6%) in the DOAC group (p = 0.046). Discontinuation before 6 months of treatment occurred in 241 patients (51.2%) in the LMWH group and 46 patients (29.5%) in the DOAC group. Conclusions: The LMWH and DOAC groups had similar rates of recurrent thromboembolism and major bleeding. The mortality rate within 6 months of starting anticoagulation was significantly higher in the LMWH group and this difference requires further evaluation. These results help support the continued use of DOACs for the treatment of cancer-associated thrombosis and demonstrate that DOACs are as safe and effective as LMWH in this patient population.

scholarly journals Direct oral anticoagulants versus low molecular weight heparins for the treatment of cancer-associated thrombosis: a cost-effectiveness analysis

2021 ◽  
Vol 19 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Kaidireyahan Wumaier ◽  
Wenqian Li ◽  
Naifei Chen ◽  
Jiuwei Cui
Keyword(s):  
Molecular Weight ◽  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Oral Anticoagulants ◽  
Direct Oral Anticoagulants ◽  
Low Molecular Weight ◽  
Test Model ◽  
Low Molecular Weight Heparins ◽  
Gastrointestinal Malignancy ◽  
Cancer Associated Thrombosis ◽  
The Cost

Abstract Background Recently, direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) have been included in guidelines for the treatment of cancer-associated thrombosis (CAT) to be extended to suitable cancer patients. The purpose of this study was to compare the cost-effectiveness of using DOACs and low molecular weight heparins (LMWHs) for treating CAT from the perspective of the Chinese healthcare system. Methods A Markov model was constructed to estimate the cost-effectiveness of the two strategies with a 6-month and 5-year time horizon. Input parameters were either sourced from the clinical trial, published literature. The primary outcome of the model was reported as incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs). Sensitivity analyses were performed to test model uncertainty. Results The 6-month cost of DOACs was $ 654.65 with 0.40 quality adjusted life-years (QALYs) while the 6-month cost of LMWHs was $USD 1719.31 with 0.37 QALYs. Similarly, treatment with DOACs had a lower cost ($USD 657.85 vs. $USD 1716.56) and more health benefits (0.40 QALYs vs. 0.37 QALYs) than treatment with LMWHs in a subgroup of patients with gastrointestinal malignancy. We found treatment with DOACs would result in a large reduction in cost ($USD 1447.22 vs. $USD 3374.70) but a small reduction in QALYs (3.07 QALYs vs. 3.09 QALYs) compared with LMWHs over a 5-year time frame, resulting in an ICER of $USD 112895.50/QALYs. Sensitivity analysis confirmed the robustness of the results. Conclusion As compared to LMWHs, DOACs can be a cost-saving anticoagulant choice for the treatment of CAT in the general oncology population and gastrointestinal malignancy population.

scholarly journals Terapia antitrombótica en pacientes con hemorragia intracraneal. ¿Revertimos?

2018 ◽  
Vol 10 (8) ◽  
pp. 6
Author(s):  
Jose Vicente Catalá Ripoll ◽  
Jose Ángel Monsalve Naharro ◽  
Esther Domingo Chiva ◽  
Pablo Cuesta Montero ◽  
Jose María Jiménez Vizuete
Keyword(s):  
Molecular Weight ◽  
Clinical Practice ◽  
Intracranial Hemorrhage ◽  
Vitamin K Antagonists ◽  
Oral Anticoagulants ◽  
Fibrinolytic Therapy ◽  
Low Molecular Weight ◽  
Low Molecular Weight Heparins ◽  
Direct Acting ◽  
Direct Acting Oral Anticoagulants

Realizamos una revisión de la guía de práctica clínica de la reversión de la terapia antitrombótica en pacientes con hemorragia intracraneal que hayan recibido terapia antiagregante, anticoagulante o fibrinolítica. Se analizan recomendaciones para la reversión de antagonistas de vitamina K, anticoagulantes orales de acción directa, heparinas no fraccionadas y de bajo peso molecular, trombolíticos y antiagregantes plaquetarios, en el contexto de una hemorragia intracraneal.  ABSTRACT Review the clinical practice guidelines for the reversal of antithrombotic therapy in patients with intracranial hemorrhage with antiplatelet, anticoagulant or fibrinolytic therapy. We analyzed the most important recommendations for the reversal of vitamin K antagonists, direct-acting oral anticoagulants, unfractionated and low-molecular-weight heparins, thrombolytics and platelet antiaggregants, in the context of an intracranial hemorrhage.

scholarly journals Prevention and treatment of thrombosis in cancer and oncohematological patients

2021 ◽  
Vol 16 (4) ◽  
pp. 40-49
Author(s):  
O. V. Somonova ◽  
A. L. Elizarova ◽  
T. V. Davydova
Keyword(s):  
Molecular Weight ◽  
Cancer Patients ◽  
Oral Anticoagulants ◽  
Direct Oral Anticoagulants ◽  
Low Molecular Weight ◽  
Low Molecular Weight Heparins ◽  
Oncological Patient ◽  
Risk Of Death ◽  
Prevention And Treatment ◽  
Thrombotic Complications

The purpose of the review is to highlight the current possibilities for the prevention and treatment of venous thrombotic complications in patients with cancer.The data of 52 scientific sources published in the Russian and foreign press in 1997–2020 are considered.Cancer patients are at high risk of thrombotic complications, which worsen the outcome of anticancer treatment and are one of the leading causes of death. Thrombosis in an oncological patient increases the risk of death by 30 times, which is associated with fatal thromboembolism and a more aggressive course of the disease. The leading role in the pathogenesis of thrombotic complications is played by disorders in the hemostasis system caused both by the tumor itself and by therapy. Low molecular weight heparins are considered the basis for specific prophylaxis of thromboembolic complications in cancer patients. The use of low molecular weight heparins after surgery and during chemotherapy effectively reduces the incidence of venous thrombosis. Direct oral anticoagulants are promising drugs for oral administration and are indicated as one of the treatment options for patients with tumor-associated thrombosis with a low risk of bleeding and no drug interactions with ongoing systemic chemotherapy.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document