Home treatment of fragile patients with acute pulmonary embolism: a subgroup analysis of the multinational home treatment of pulmonary embolism (HoT-PE) trial

2020 ◽  
Vol 41 (Supplement_2) ◽  
Author(s):  
L Hobohm ◽  
T Anusic ◽  
S.V Konstantinides ◽  
S Barco

Abstract Background and aims Subgroup analyses of randomized trials and cohort studies on direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) suggested that single direct drug treatment may be effective and safe in elderly and “fragile” patients with acute pulmonary embolism (PE). In a post-hoc analysis of HoT-PE, a prospective multicenter management trial, we studied whether early discharge and home treatment of acute PE is effective and safe in these patients. Methods HoT-PE enrolled patients with acute PE classified as being at low risk based on the modified Hestia criteria and the absence of right ventricular dysfunction. The primary efficacy outcome was symptomatic recurrent VTE, or PE-related death within 3 months of enrolment. The safety outcome included major bleeding. Fragility was defined as age >75 years, a creatinine clearance level <50 ml/min, or a body mass index <18.5 kg/cm2. Results A total of 524 patients were included; of these, 112 (21.4%) were fragile. Mean age was 77 (range 74–80) years. A total of 104 (92.9%) fragile and 372 (90.3%) non-fragile patients spent two nights or less in hospital corresponding to a median hospital stay of 42 (Q1-Q3: 25–47) and 32 (Q1-Q3: 23–46) hours, respectively. The primary efficacy outcome occurred in one (0.9%) fragile and one (0.5%) non-fragile patient (absolute risk difference [ARD] +0.4%; 95% CI: −1.1%; +4.4%). Major bleeding occurred in three (2.7%) fragile and three (0.7%) non-fragile patients; ARD +2.0% (+0.3%; +6.9%). All-cause 3-month mortality was low in both groups (0.9% vs. 0.2%; ARD +0.7%, −0.7%; +4.7%). Conclusion Early discharge and home treatment of fragile patients with acute PE appears to be feasible and acceptably safe. The HoT-PE trial supports the notion that these patients should not be a priori excluded from early discharge, but caution is warranted due to a possibly higher risk of major bleeding on DOAC treatment. Funding Acknowledgement Type of funding source: Public grant(s) – National budget only. Main funding source(s): This study was supported by the German Federal Ministry of Education and Research (BMBF 01EO1503).

2008 ◽  
Vol 100 (05) ◽  
pp. 756-761 ◽  
Author(s):  
Muhammad Janjua ◽  
Aaref Badshah ◽  
Fadi Matta ◽  
Liviu G. Danescu ◽  
Abdo Y. Yaekoub ◽  
...  

SummaryThe purpose of this systematic review is to test the hypothesis that carefully selected low-risk patients with acute pulmonary embolism (PE) can safely be treated entirely as outpatients or after early hospital discharge.Included articles were required to describe inclusion or exclusion criteria and outcome of patients treated for PE.Early hospital discharge was defined as an average hospital stay ≤3 days.Six investigations included patients with PE who were treated entirely as outpatients; two investigations included patients with PE who were treated after early discharge. All investigations included only low-risk patients or patients with small or medium sized PE. Outcome after 3-46 months in patients treated entirely as outpatients showed recurrent PE in 0% to 6.2% of patients, major bleeding in 0% to 2.8% with one death from an intracerebral bleed. Definite death from PE did not occur, but there was one possible death from PE. Outcome in three months in patients treated after early discharge showed no instances of recurrent PE. Major bleeding occurred in 0% to 3.7% of patients.There were no deaths from PE, but there was one death from bleeding. In conclusion, outpatient therapy of acute PE is probably safe in low-risk,carefully selected compliant patients who have access to outpatient care if necessary. Such outpatient treatment would be cost-effective.


Blood ◽  
2010 ◽  
Vol 116 (21) ◽  
pp. 3320-3320 ◽  
Author(s):  
Takeshi Fuji ◽  
Satoru Fujita ◽  
Shintaro Tachibana ◽  
Yohko Kawai ◽  
Yukihiro Koretsune ◽  
...  

Abstract Abstract 3320 Introduction: Edoxaban is an oral, direct factor Xa inhibitor in clinical development for the prevention and treatment of thromboembolic events. The aim of this non-inferiority trial was to determine the efficacy and safety of edoxaban compared with enoxaparin sodium (enoxaparin) after total hip arthroplasty (THA) in Japan. Methods: This was a randomized, double-blind, double-dummy, enoxaparin-controlled, multicenter trial. Patients were randomized to oral edoxaban 30 mg once daily (QD) or subcutaneous enoxaparin 2,000 IU, equivalent to 20 mg, twice daily (BID) for 11 to 14 days. Edoxaban was initiated 6–24 hours after surgery and enoxaparin was initiated 24–36 hours after surgery which is the Japanese standard of care. The primary efficacy outcome was the composite of symptomatic and asymptomatic deep vein thrombosis (DVT), and pulmonary embolism (PE). The primary safety outcome was the incidence of major and clinically relevant non-major bleeding. Results: A total of 610 patients were randomized. There were no clinically relevant differences in baseline characteristics between the treatment groups. The mean age was 62.8 years and mean body weight was 57.4 kg (Efficacy analysis set). The primary efficacy outcome occurred in 6 of 255 (2.4%) patients receiving edoxaban and 17 of 248 (6.9%) patients receiving enoxaparin (relative risk reduction=65.7%; absolute risk difference -4.5%, 95% CI, -8.6% to -0.9%; P<0.001 for non-inferiority; P=0.0157 for superiority). The thromboembolic events were all asymptomatic DVT (Table). No symptomatic DVT or PE was observed in both treatment groups. The incidence of major and clinically relevant non-major bleeding events was 2.6% (8/303) vs 3.7% (11/301) in the edoxaban and enoxaparin groups, respectively (P=0.475). Major bleeding occurred in 0.7% of the edoxaban group and 2.0% of the enoxaparin group. The rates of elevated serum aminotransferase levels of more than 3 times the upper limit of normal was 2.6% with edoxaban versus 10% with enoxaparin. Conclusions: The STARS J-V trial demonstrated that oral edoxaban 30 mg QD has efficacy superior to enoxaparin 2,000 IU BID in the prevention of thromboembolic events following THA and is associated with a similar incidence of major and clinically relevant non-major bleeding events. Disclosures: Fuji: Astellas: Consultancy; Showa Ikakogyo: Consultancy; Daiichi Sankyo: Consultancy; Bayer: Consultancy. Fujita:Daiichi Sankyo: Consultancy; Astellas: Consultancy; GlaxoSmithkline: Consultancy. Tachibana:Daiichi Sankyo: Consultancy. Kawai:Daiichi Sankyo: Consultancy; Toyama Chemical: Consultancy. Koretsune:Daiichi Sankyo: Consultancy, National Lead Investigator. Yamashita:Daiichi Sankyo: Consultancy, National Lead Investigator; Otsuka Pharmaceutical: Paid instructor; Sanofi-aventis: Paid instructor; Teijin Pharma: Paid instructor. Nakamura:Daiichi Sankyo: Consultancy; GlaxoSmithkline: Consultancy; Astellas: Consultancy.


2020 ◽  
Vol 41 (Supplement_2) ◽  
Author(s):  
E Klok ◽  
G.J.A.M Boon ◽  
Y.M Ende-Verhaar ◽  
R Bavalia ◽  
M Delcroix ◽  
...  

Abstract Background The current diagnostic delay of chronic thromboembolic pulmonary hypertension (CTEPH) after acute pulmonary embolism (PE) is unacceptably long exceeding 1 year, causing loss of quality-adjusted life years and excess mortality. Validated screening strategies to diagnose CTEPH earlier are lacking. Importantly, performing echocardiography in all PE patients for this purpose has a low diagnostic yield, is associated with overdiagnosis and is not cost-effective. Moreover, expertise in performing high-quality PH-dedicated echocardiograms may not be available outside expert centers. Aim To validate a simple screening strategy aimed at identifying CTEPH early in the course after acute PE, avoiding echocardiography if possible (Figure 1). Methods In this prospective, international, multicenter management study, consecutive PE survivors were managed according to the predefined algorithm starting three months after acute PE. All were followed for a total period of two years. The study protocol was approved by all local IRBs and all patients provided informed consent. Results 424 patients were included across three European countries (Table 1). Following the algorithm, CTEPH was considered excluded in 343 (81%) patients based on clinical pre-test probability assessment by the “CTEPH prediction score”, evaluation of symptoms and application of the “CTEPH rule-out criteria” (Figure 1); only 19% was subjected to echocardiography. Only 1 of 343 patients managed without echocardiography was diagnosed with CTEPH, 10 months after initial PE, for a failure rate of 0.29% (95% CI 0–1.6%). Overall, 13 patients were diagnosed with CTEPH (incidence 3.1%), of whom 10 within 4 months after PE diagnosis. Conclusions The algorithm accurately ruled out CTEPH and avoided echocardiography in 81% of patients. The vast majority of CTEPH cases were identified early in the course of acute PE which is a considerable improvement compared to current clinical practice with an economic use of healthcare resources. Figure 1. Study flowchart Funding Acknowledgement Type of funding source: Foundation. Main funding source(s): This study was supported by unrestricted grants from Bayer/Merck Sharp & Dohme (MSD) and Actelion Pharmaceuticals Ltd. F.A. Klok and G.J.A.M. Boon were supported by the Dutch Heart Foundation (2017T064).


2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nuccia Morici ◽  
Gian Marco Podda ◽  
Simone Birocchi ◽  
Luca Bonacchini ◽  
Marco Merli ◽  
...  

It is uncertain whether higher doses of anticoagulants than recommended for thromboprophylaxis are necessary in COVID-19 patients hospitalized in general wards. This is a multicentre, open-label, randomized trial performed in 9 Italian centres, comparing 40 mg b.i.d. vs 40 mg o.d. enoxaparin in COVID-19 patients, between April 30, 2020 and April 25, 2021. Primary efficacy outcome was in-hospital incidence of venous thromboembolism (VTE): asymptomatic or symptomatic proximal deep vein thrombosis (DVT) diagnosed by serial compression ultrasonography (CUS), and/or symptomatic pulmonary embolism (PE) diagnosed by computed tomography angiography (CTA). Secondary endpoints included each individual component of the primary efficacy outcome and a composite of death, VTE, mechanical ventilation, stroke, myocardial infarction, admission to ICU. Safety outcomes included major bleeding. The study was interrupted prematurely due to slow recruitment. We included 183 (96%) of the 189 enrolled patients in the primary analysis (91 in b.i.d., 92 in o.d.). Primary efficacy outcome occurred in 6 patients (6.5%, 0 DVT, 6 PE) in the o.d. group and 0 in the b.id. group (Sto arrivando! 6.5, 95% CI, 1.5-11.6). Absence of concomitant DVT and imaging characteristics suggest that most pulmonary artery occlusions were actually caused by local thrombi rather than PE. Statistically non-significant differences in secondary and safety endpoints were observed, with two major bleeding events in each arm. In conclusion, no DVT developed in COVID-19 patients hospitalized in general wards, independently of enoxaparin dosing used for thromboprophylaxis. Pulmonary artery occlusions developed only in the o.d. group. Our trial is underpowered and with few events.


Author(s):  
Olivier Sanchez ◽  
Anais Charles-Nelson ◽  
Walter Ageno ◽  
Stefano Barco ◽  
Harald Binder ◽  
...  

Intermediate high-risk pulmonary embolism (PE) is characterised by right ventricular (RV) dysfunction and elevated circulating cardiac troponin levels despite apparent haemodynamic stability at presentation. In these patients, full-dose systemic thrombolysis reduced the risk of haemodynamic decompensation or death but increased the risk of life-threatening bleeding. Reduced-dose thrombolysis may be capable of improving safety while maintaining reperfusion efficacy. The Pulmonary Embolism International Trial (PEITHO)-3 study (EudraCT 2018-000816-96) is a randomised, placebo-controlled, double-blind, multicentre, multinational trial with long-term follow-up. We will compare the efficacy and safety of a reduced-dose alteplase regimen with standard heparin anticoagulation. Patients with intermediate high-risk PE will also fulfil at least one clinical criterion of severity: systolic blood pressure ≤ 110 mmHg, respiratory rate >20 breaths/min, or history of heart failure. The primary efficacy outcome is the composite of all-cause death, haemodynamic decompensation or PE recurrence within 30 days of randomisation. Key secondary outcomes, to be included in hierarchical analysis, are fatal or GUSTO severe or life-threatening bleeding; net clinical benefit (primary efficacy outcome plus severe or life-threatening bleeding); and all-cause death, all within 30 days. All outcomes will be adjudicated by an independent committee. Further outcomes include PE-related death, haemodynamic decompensation, or stroke within 30 days; dyspnoea, functional limitation or RV dysfunction at 6 months and 2 years; and utilisation of healthcare resources within 30 days and 2 years. The study is planned to enrol 650 patients. The results are expected to have a major impact on risk-adjusted treatment of acute PE and inform guideline recommendations.


Author(s):  
María Marcos ◽  
Francisco Carmona-Torre ◽  
Rosa Vidal Laso ◽  
PEDRO RUIZ-ARTACHO ◽  
David Filella ◽  
...  

Thrombophylaxis with low molecular weight heparin (LMWH) in hospitalized patients with COVID-19 is mandatory, unless contraindicated. Given the links between inflammation and thrombosis, the use of higher doses of anticoagulants could improve outcomes. We conducted an open-label, multicenter, randomized, controlled trial in adult patients hospitalized with non-severe COVID-19 pneumonia and elevated D-dimer. Patients were randomized to therapeutic-dose bemiparin (115 IU/Kg daily) vs. standard prophylaxis (bemiparin 3,500 IU daily), for 10 days. The primary efficacy outcome was a composite of death, intensive care unit admission, need of mechanical ventilation support, development of moderate/severe acute respiratory distress and venous or arterial thrombosis within 10 days of enrollment. The primary safety outcome was major bleeding (ISTH criteria). A prespecified interim analysis was performed when 40% of the planned study population was reached. From October 2020 to May 2021, 70 patients were randomized at 5 sites and 65 were included in the primary analysis; 32 patients allocated to therapeutic-dose and 33 to standard prophylactic-dose. The primary efficacy outcome occurred in 7 patients (21.9%) in the therapeutic-dose group and 6 patients (18.2%) in the prophylactic-dose (absolute risk difference 3.6% [95% CI, -16%- 24%]; odds ratio 1.26 [95% CI, 0.37-4.26]; p=0.95). Discharge in the first 10 days was possible in 66% and 79% of patients, respectively. No major bleeding event was registered. Therefore, in patients with COVID-19 hospitalized with non-severe pneumonia but elevated D-dimer, the use of a short course of therapeutic-dose bemiparin did not improve clinical outcomes compared to standard prophylactic doses.


Blood ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 138 (Supplement 1) ◽  
pp. 3230-3230
Author(s):  
Cecilia Becattini ◽  
Giancarlo Agnelli ◽  
Aldo P Maggioni ◽  
Francesco Dentali ◽  
Andrea Fabbri ◽  
...  

Abstract Background. New management strategies, risk stratification procedures and treatments have become available over the last years for patients with acute pulmonary embolism (PE), leading to changes in clinical practice and potentially influencing patient's course and outcome. Methods: The COntemporary management of Pulmonary Embolism (COPE) is an academical prospective, non-interventional, multicentre study in patients with confirmed acute symptomatic PE. In-hospital and 30-day mortality were the co-primary study outcomes. At first evaluation, patients were categorized at low-risk (simplified PESI [sPESI]=0), intermediate-risk (further classified based presence/absence of increased levels and right ventricle dysfunction [RVD] at echocardiography) and high-risk (shock or cardiac arrest). Results. Among 5213 study patients, PE was confirmed by computed tomography in 96.3% and at least one test for risk stratification was obtained in more than 80% (81% echocardiography, 83% troponin, 56% brain natriuretic peptide/NT-pro BNP). Among 4885 patients entering the Emergency Department for acute PE, 1.2% were managed as outpatients and 5.8% by short-observation. In-hospital, 289 patients underwent reperfusion (5.5%); at discharge, 6.7% received a vitamin K antagonist and 75.6% a direct oral anticoagulant. Median duration of hospitalization was 7 days (IQR 5-12 days). Overall in-hospital mortality was 3.4% (49% due to PE, 16% cancer and 4.5% major bleeding) and 30-day mortality 4.8% (36% PE, 28% cancer and 4% major bleeding). In-hospital major bleeding was 2.6%. Death at 30 days occurred in 22.6% of 177 high-risk patients, in 6% of the 3281 intermediate-risk and in 0.5% of 1702 low-risk patients. Time to death at 30 days in patients at low, intermediate and high risk for death is reported in the Figure. Conclusions: COPE is the largest ever cohort of patients with acute PE. In this contemporary scenario, the majority of patients received CT for diagnosis, at least one test for risk stratification and direct oral anticoagulants as long-term treatment. Short term death remains not negligible in patients with high and intermediate-risk PE. Figure 1 Figure 1. Disclosures Becattini: Bristol Myers Squibb: Honoraria; Daiichi Sankyo: Honoraria; Bayer HealthCare: Honoraria. Agnelli: Bristol Myers Squibb: Honoraria; Pfizer: Honoraria; Daiichi Sankyo: Honoraria; Bayer HealthCare: Honoraria. Dentali: Daiichi Sankyo: Honoraria; Bayer: Honoraria; Sanofi: Honoraria; Pfizer: Honoraria; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Honoraria; Novartis: Honoraria; Boehringer: Honoraria; Alfa Sigma: Honoraria.


Blood ◽  
2008 ◽  
Vol 112 (11) ◽  
pp. 31-31 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael Rud Lassen ◽  
Alexander S Gallus ◽  
Graham F Pineo ◽  
Gary E Raskob ◽  

Abstract Thromboprophylaxis with enoxaparin after total knee replacement is an evidence-based recommended standard of care. The ADVANCE-1 clinical trial was a phase III randomized double-blind multicenter study that evaluated the efficacy and safety of apixaban, an oral direct factor Xa inhibitor, 2.5 mg orally bid compared with enoxaparin 30 mg subcutaneously every 12 hours for preventing venous thromboembolism after total knee replacement. Apixaban (or oral placebo) and enoxaparin (or subcutaneous placebo) were begun 12 to 24 hours post-operatively (mean 20 hours) and continued until mandatory bilateral venography was completed at 12± 2 days. The primary efficacy outcome was the composite of deep-vein thrombosis (DVT) by venography; symptomatic, objectively confirmed DVT or pulmonary embolism (PE); or death from any cause during the treatment period. The secondary efficacy outcome was the composite of objectively confirmed proximal DVT or PE, or death. The primary safety outcome was bleeding, including major bleeding (defined by ISTH criteria), clinically relevant non-major bleeding, and minor bleeding. All outcome events were interpreted by a central independent adjudication committee without knowledge of treatment. The study hypothesis was that apixaban would be as effective as enoxaparin based on a pre-specified non-inferiority margin in which the upper limit of the two-sided 95% CI is &lt; 1.25 for relative risk and &lt; 5.6% for the absolute risk difference for the primary efficacy outcome. A total of 3195 patients from 129 sites in 14 countries were randomized. The primary efficacy outcome occurred in 104 of 1157 patients (8.99%) given apixaban and in 100 of 1130 (8.85%) given enoxaparin (relative risk 1.02, 95% CI 0.78 to 1.32, one-sided p= 0.064 for non-inferiority, statistical criteria not met). The secondary efficacy outcome occurred in 26 patients (2.05%) given apixaban and in 20 patients (1.64%) given enoxaparin. Symptomatic PE occurred in 16 patients (1.0%) who received apixaban (2 fatal) and in 7 patients (0.44%) given enoxaparin (0 fatal); the majority of the PE in apixaban patients occurred within 48 hours postoperatively. Major or clinically relevant non-major bleeding occurred in 46 of 1596 patients (2.88%) given apixaban, compared with 68 patients (4.28%) given enoxaparin (absolute difference 1.46%, two-sided p=0.034). Major bleeding occurred in 11patients (0.69%) who received apixaban and in 22 patients (1.39%) who received enoxaparin (two-sided p=0.053). Elevated levels of liver transaminase enzymes were uncommon (2% to 3%) in both groups; no patient given apixaban met Hy’s criteria. Myocardial infarction or stroke occurred in only one patient who received apixaban (0.06%) and in 5 patients (0.31%) given enoxaparin. The lower-than-expected incidence of the primary efficacy outcome in the enoxaparin group resulted in an undersized study to meet the pre-defined statistical criteria for non-inferiority in spite of a similar incidence with the apixaban regimen. This is the first phase III trial to demonstrate a potential advantage of the new oral anticoagulants for bleeding. The apixaban regimen resulted in less clinically relevant bleeding than enoxaparin 30 mg given every 12 hours. Maintaining this advantage while optimizing efficacy with an altered dosing regimen, either by earlier postoperative dosing or by a slightly increased dose, would be an important advance in patient care.


Blood ◽  
2012 ◽  
Vol 120 (21) ◽  
pp. LBA-1-LBA-1 ◽  
Author(s):  
Giancarlo Agnelli ◽  
Harry Roger Buller ◽  
Alexander Cohen ◽  
Madelyn Curto ◽  
Alexander S. Gallus ◽  
...  

Abstract Abstract LBA-1 Background: Apixaban, an oral factor Xa inhibitor, may provide a simple, fixed-dose regimen for extended treatment of venous thromboembolism. Objectives: To compare the efficacy and safety of two doses of apixaban (2.5 or 5 mg twice daily) with placebo for the extended treatment of venous thromboembolism in patients who have completed 6 to 12 months of prior anticoagulant therapy. Methods: This randomized, double-blind study (ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00633893) compared two apixaban doses (2.5 or 5 mg twice daily) with placebo for 12 months in patients with venous thromboembolism who had completed 6–12 months of anticoagulation. The primary efficacy outcome was symptomatic recurrent venous thromboembolism or all-cause mortality. Secondary efficacy outcomes included (a) the composite of symptomatic venous thromboembolism or venous thromboembolism-related death, and (b) the composite of symptomatic venous thromboembolism, venous thromboembolism-related death, myocardial infarction, stroke, or cardiovascular-related death. The primary safety outcome was major bleeding; the secondary safety outcome was major and clinically relevant non-major bleeding. Results: The study included 2486 patients: 829, 840, and 815 randomized to placebo, apixaban 2.5 mg, and apixaban 5 mg, respectively. Rates of the primary efficacy outcome were 11.6% in the placebo group, compared with 3.8% and 4.2% in the apixaban 2.5 mg and 5 mg groups, respectively (absolute risk differences of 7.8% and 7.4%, respectively; 95% confidence intervals 5.3% to 10.3% and 4.8% to 10%, respectively; p<0.001 for both comparisons). Other outcomes are detailed in the Table. Conclusions: Both doses of apixaban reduced the risk of symptomatic recurrent fatal or non-fatal venous thromboembolism by approximately 80% without increasing the rate of major bleeding. In addition, both apixaban doses reduced arterial thrombotic events. The lower apixaban dose may be preferred for extended treatment, because of the trend for less clinically relevant non-major bleeding. Disclosures: Agnelli: Bristol Myers Squibb: Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Daiichi Sankyo: Consultancy; Boehringer Ingelheim: Consultancy; Bayer Healthcare: Consultancy, Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Sanofi-Aventis: Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau. Buller:Bayer: Consultancy, Research Funding; Bristol Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Research Funding; Daiichi: Consultancy, Research Funding; GlaxoSmithKline: Consultancy, Research Funding; Pfizer: Consultancy, Research Funding; Sanofi-aventis: Consultancy, Research Funding; Roche: Consultancy, Research Funding; Isis: Consultancy, Research Funding; Thrombogenics: Consultancy, Research Funding. Cohen:Astellas: Consultancy, Research Funding; AstraZenica: Consultancy, Research Funding; Bayer: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Boheringer-Ingelheim: Consultancy, Research Funding; Bristol Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Daiichi: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; GlaxoSmithKline: Consultancy, Research Funding; Johnson & Johnson: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Mitsubishi Pharma: Consultancy, Research Funding; Pfizer: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Portola: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Sanofi: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Schering Plough: Consultancy, Research Funding; Takeda: Consultancy, Research Funding. Curto:Pfizer: Employment. Gallus:Pfizer: Consultancy, Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees; Bristol Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees; Daiichi Sankyo: Consultancy; Bayer: Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees; boehringer-Ingelheim: Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees. Johnson:Pfizer: Employment. Porcari:Pfizer: Employment. Raskob:Pfizer: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Bristol Myer Squibb: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Bayer: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Daiichi Sankyo: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Johnson & Johnson: Consultancy, Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Portola: Consultancy; Quintiles: Consultancy; National Blood Clot Alliance: Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau. Weitz:Pfizer: Consultancy, Honoraria; Bristol Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Honoraria.


Blood ◽  
2016 ◽  
Vol 128 (22) ◽  
pp. 85-85 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jan Beyer-Westendorf ◽  
Sebastian Schellong ◽  
Horst Gerlach ◽  
Katja Jersemann ◽  
Eberhard Rabe ◽  
...  

Abstract Background The current standard of therapy in superficial vein thrombosis (SVT) comprises subcutaneous injections of the indirect factorXainhibitorfondaparinuxfor up to 45 days, which was highlyeffectivecompared to placebo in the CALISTO trial. However,fondaparinuxis expensive, requires daily injections and cost-effectiveness in SVT therapy has been questioned. Rivaroxaban is a direct oral factorXainhibitor which has been shown to be effective in the prevention and treatment of venous thromboembolism (VTE). We hypothesizedthat SVT patientsat high risk for VTE complications may be treated as efficacious and safe with rivaroxaban as withfondaparinux. Methods The SURPRISE trial, a randomized, open-label blinded outcome event adjudication trial, compared rivaroxaban 10 mg once daily withfondaparinux2.5 mg once daily in patients with SVT at high risk of VTE complications (defined assupragenualSVT + age > 65 years, male sex, previous VTE, cancer, autoimmune disease or SVT of non-varicose veins). Treatment duration for both treatments was 45+5 days with an observational period until day 90+10. The primary efficacy outcome was a composite endpoint of deep vein thrombosis, pulmonary embolism, SVT progression towards thesaphenofemoraljunction, SVT recurrence or all cause death in the per-protocol analysis at day 45. A predefined sensitivity analysis was performed in all randomized patients (full analysis set). The primary safety outcome was the rate of ISTH major bleeding during treatment. Further outcome measures included the composite efficacy outcome up to day 90, each component of the primary efficacy outcome, rates of surgical treatment of SVT and rates of major VTE (composite of symptomatic PE or symptomatic proximal DVT or VTE-related death) at days 45 and 90. The trial was designed to test for non-inferiority of rivaroxaban compared tofondaparinuxwith respect to the primary efficacy outcome and to the rates of ISTH major bleeding. Results A total of 472 patients were randomized (mean age 60.3 years; 60.4% female) and treated with rivaroxaban (n=236) orfondaparinux(n=236). Mean treatment duration was 44.0 days for rivaroxaban and 44.8 days forfondaparinux. Until day 45+5, the primary efficacy outcome (n=435 in per-protocol analysis set) occurred in 3.3% (95%-CI 0.90; 5.73) of patients treated with rivaroxaban and 1.8% (95%-CI 0.05; 3.52) of patients receivingfondaparinux(absolute difference between rivaroxaban andfondaparinuxwas 1.53%; one-sided upper CI limit 4.03%; p-value for non-inferiority 0.025; table 1 and figure 1). Until day 90+10, the respective rates were 7.1% for rivaroxaban and 6.7% forfondaparinux(absolute difference 0.41;one-sided upper CI limit 4.41%;p-value for non-inferiority 0.047). Non-inferiority of rivaroxaban vs.fondaparinuxwas preserved in the full analysis set. No major bleeding occurred and rates of non-major, clinically relevant bleeding were 2.5 vs. 0.4% for day 45+5 and 2.5 vs. 0.9% for day 90+10 in safety set for rivaroxaban andfondaparinux, respectively (table 1).Mean±SDadherence (pill/syringe count at day 45) was 98.9±13.4% for rivaroxaban and 99.3±6.2% forfondaparinux(full analysis set). Conclusions In high-risk SVT patients, rivaroxaban was non-inferior tofondaparinuxin preventing thromboembolic complications with comparable safety. VTE events were predominantly SVT recurrence. Few cases of DVT and PE occurred, which indicates that a 45 days course of rivaroxaban 10 mg orfondaparinux2.5 mg is sufficient to prevent serious complications in this specific subset of SVT patients. As to whether oral rivaroxaban offers a better quality of life compared to 45 days of injections, this has to be investigated in future studies. We found higher SVT complications rates in both treatment arms compared to thefondaparinuxarm in the CALISTO trial. Therefore, patients at higher VTE risk can be identified by use of a simple risk factor assessment, which may help to improve cost-effectiveness of SVT therapy. However, the concept of SVT risk stratification needs to be further investigated, since patients without additional risk factors may not need anticoagulant therapy at all. (Funded by Bayer Vital GmbH, Germany, ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01499953) In response to a pre-submission enquiry, the New England Journal of Medicine indicated potential interest in the study results and a simultaneous publication/presentation is targeted. Disclosures Beyer-Westendorf: Daichii Sankyo: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Boehringer Ingelheim: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Pfizer: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Bayer: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; LEO: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding. Schellong:Bayer: Honoraria; Pfizer: Honoraria; Boehringer-Ingelheim: Honoraria; Daichii Sankyo: Honoraria; LeoPharma: Honoraria. Gerlach:ASPEN: Honoraria; Bayer: Honoraria; Boehringer-Ingelheim: Honoraria; LeoPharma.: Honoraria. Rabe:Bayer: Honoraria; Boehringer Ingelheim: Honoraria; Daichii-Sankyo: Honoraria; LeoPharma: Honoraria; Pfizer: Honoraria. Bauersachs:Bayer: Honoraria, Research Funding; Boehringer Ingelheim: Honoraria, Research Funding; BristolMyers Squibb: Honoraria, Research Funding; Daiichi Sankyo: Honoraria, Research Funding; ASPEN: Honoraria, Research Funding.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document