scholarly journals Risk of major bleeding during extended oral anticoagulation in patients with first unprovoked venous thromboembolism: a systematic review and meta-analysis protocol

2019 ◽  
Vol 8 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Faizan Khan ◽  
Miriam Kimpton ◽  
Tobias Tritschler ◽  
Grégoire Le Gal ◽  
Brian Hutton ◽  
...  

Abstract Background The optimal duration of anticoagulation after a first unprovoked venous thromboembolism (VTE) remains controversial. Deciding to stop or continue anticoagulant therapy indefinitely after completing 3 to 6 months of initial treatment requires balancing the long-term risk of recurrent VTE if anticoagulation is stopped against the long-term risk of major bleeding if anticoagulation is continued. However, knowledge of the long-term risk for major bleeding events during extended anticoagulation in this patient population is limited. We plan to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis to quantify the risk for major bleeding events during extended oral anticoagulation in patients with first unprovoked VTE. Methods Electronic databases including MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials will be systematically searched with the assistance of an information specialist (from inception to March 1, 2019) to identify randomized controlled trials and prospective cohort studies reporting major bleeding during extended oral anticoagulation in patients with first unprovoked VTE, who have completed at least 3 months of initial anticoagulant therapy. Study selection, risk of bias assessment, and data extraction will be performed independently by at least two investigators. The number of major bleeding events and person-years of follow-up will be used to calculate the rate (events per 100 person-years) with its 95% confidence interval for each study cohort, during clinically relevant time periods of extended anticoagulant therapy. Results will be pooled using random effect meta-analysis. Discussion The planned systematic review and meta-analysis will provide reliable estimates of the risk for major bleeding events during extended anticoagulation. This information will help inform patient prognosis and assist clinicians with balancing the risks and benefits of treatment to guide management of unprovoked VTE. Systematic review registration PROSPERO CRD42019128597.

2021 ◽  
Vol 10 (23) ◽  
pp. 5549
Author(s):  
Anastasios Kollias ◽  
Konstantinos G. Kyriakoulis ◽  
Ioannis P. Trontzas ◽  
Vassiliki Rapti ◽  
Ioannis G. Kyriakoulis ◽  
...  

Thromboprophylaxis in hospitalized patients with COVID-19 has been associated with a survival benefit and is strongly recommended. However, the optimal dose of thromboprophylaxis remains unclear. A systematic review and meta-analysis (PubMed/EMBASE) of studies comparing high (intermediate or therapeutic dose) versus standard (prophylactic dose) intensity of thrombo-prophylaxis with regard to outcome of hospitalized patients with COVID-19 was performed. Randomized and non-randomized studies that provided adjusted effect size estimates were included. Meta-analysis of 7 studies comparing intermediate versus prophylactic dose of thromboprophylaxis (2 randomized and 5 observational, n = 2009, weighted age 61 years, males 61%, ICU 53%) revealed a pooled adjusted relative risk (RR) for death at 0.56 (95% confidence intervals (CI) 0.34, 0.92) in favor of the intermediate dose. For the same comparison arms, the pooled RR for venous thromboembolism was 0.84 (95% CI 0.54, 1.31), and for major bleeding events was 1.63 (95% CI 0.79, 3.37). Meta-analysis of 17 studies comparing therapeutic versus prophylactic dose of thromboprophylaxis (2 randomized and 15 observational, n = 7776, weighted age 64 years, males 54%, ICU 21%) revealed a pooled adjusted RR for death at 0.73 (95% CI 0.47, 1.14) for the therapeutic dose. An opposite trend was observed in the unadjusted analysis of 15 observational studies (RR 1.24 (95% CI 0.88, 1.74)). For the same comparison arms, the pooled RR for venous thromboembolism was 1.13 (95% CI 0.52, 2.48), and for major bleeding events 3.32 (95% CI 2.51, 4.40). In conclusion, intermediate compared with standard prophylactic dose of thromboprophylaxis appears to be rather safe and is associated with additional survival benefit, although most data are derived from observational retrospective analyses. Randomized studies are needed to define the optimal thromboprophylaxis in hospitalized patients with COVID-19.


2021 ◽  
Vol 104 (2) ◽  
pp. 003685042110121
Author(s):  
Bo Liang ◽  
Yi Liang ◽  
Li-Zhi Zhao ◽  
Yu-Xiu Zhao ◽  
Ning Gu

All cancers can increase the risk of developing venous thromboembolism (VTE), and anticoagulants should be considered as an optimal treatment for patients suffering from cancer-associated VTE. However, there is still a debate about whether the new oral anticoagulant, rivaroxaban, can bring better efficacy and safety outcomes globally. Thus, this systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted to evaluate the efficacy and safety of rivaroxaban. We searched PubMed, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Web of Science, and China National Knowledge Infrastructure for relevant published papers before 1 September 2019, with no language restrictions. The primary outcomes are defined as the recurrence of VTE. The secondary outcomes are defined as clinically relevant non-major bleeding, adverse major bleeding events, and all-cause of death. The data were analyzed by Stata with risk ratio (RR) and 95% confidence interval (CI). Four trials encompassing 1996 patients were included. Rivaroxaban reduced recurrent VTE with no significant difference (RR = 0.68, 95% CI = 0.43–1.07). Similarly, there were no significant differences in adverse major bleeding events (RR = 0.86, 95% CI = 0.37–2.00), clinically relevant non-major bleeding (RR = 1.24, 95% CI = 0.73–2.12) and all-cause mortality (RR = 0.76, 95% CI = 0.40–1.44). In a selected study population of cancer patients with VTE, rivaroxaban is as good as other anticoagulants. Further, carefully designed randomized controlled trials should be performed to confirm these results.


Blood ◽  
2012 ◽  
Vol 120 (21) ◽  
pp. 1157-1157
Author(s):  
Minh Phan ◽  
Sonia John ◽  
Ana Isabel Casanegra ◽  
Alfonso Tafur

Abstract Abstract 1157 Background: Venous thromboembolism [VTE] is the second highest cause of mortality among patients with cancer. However, pharmacological thromboprophylaxis for patients with solid tumor is only recommended during hospitalization. Primary outpatient thromboprophylaxis is not a widely accepted practice. Objective: Determine safety and efficacy of outpatient primary VTE prophylaxis in patients with solid tumors. Data sources: A systematic review was conducted using MEDLINE and EMBASE up to June 2012. Key search words included venous thromboembolism, malignancy, anticoagulants, and chemotherapy. Studies were considered for our meta-analysis if they included outpatient primary pharmacological thromboprophylaxis in adult patients with active solid cancer. All the information was independently reviewed by 2 of the authors [MP, SJ] and a third reviewer resolved discrepancies. The measure of association was calculated with R (R: A Language and Environment for Statistical, R Development Core Team, www.R-project.org), R META package (Version 0.8–2, Author: Guido Schwarzer). The Q statistic was calculated and a formal test of homogeneity was conducted. Random-effects model was preferred in case of heterogeneity. Results: A total of 1371 abstracts were reviewed and 29 manuscripts were fully abstracted. Eight randomized controlled trials including 6706 patients were analyzed. There were less VTE events with outpatient prophylaxis: odds ratio [OR] of 0.53 (95% CI, 0.40–0.70). Six studies used low or ultra-low molecular weight heparin and two studies used warfarin. In the subgroup analysis of heparin based primary prophylaxis, there was a significant reduction in VTE events [OR 0.47, 95% CI, 0.34–0.64], no significant heterogeneity [FIG 1]. In addition, there was no difference in major bleeding events between groups [OR 1.48, 95% CI, 0.89–2.46]. Five studies reported mortality data; there was significant heterogeneity between studies. Conclusions: Heparin based outpatient VTE prophylaxis in patients with solid tumors reduced by half the risk of VTE with no significant differences in major bleeding events. The current publications do not allow a meaningful grouped analysis of survival data, improved patient selection is necessary in order to adequately target VTE prevention strategies. Disclosures: No relevant conflicts of interest to declare.


2017 ◽  
Vol 44 (04) ◽  
pp. 348-352 ◽  
Author(s):  
Reinhard Raggam ◽  
Franz Hafner ◽  
Alexander Avian ◽  
Gerald Hackl ◽  
Gerhard Cvirn ◽  
...  

AbstractThe aim of this study was prospective evaluation of the performance of the HAS-BLED score in predicting major bleeding complications in a real-world outpatient cohort, during long-term anticoagulation for venous thromboembolism (VTE), treated with a broad spectrum of anticoagulants. We analyzed 111 outpatients objectively diagnosed with VTE and treated long-term with various anticoagulants. Patients were grouped in three cohorts based on the anticoagulant regimen. Calculation of the HAS-BLED score and documentation of bleeding events were performed every 6 months for 1 year. Patients with a HAS-BLED score ≥ 3 had an increased risk for major bleeding events (odds ratio [OR]: 13.05, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.96–692.58, p = 0.028) and a trend to higher risk for minor bleeding events as well (OR: 2.25, 95% CI: 0.87–5.85, p = 0.091) when compared with patients with a HAS-BLED score < 3.This indicates that a HAS-BLED score ≥ 3 allows for identification of patients with VTE on long-term anticoagulation at an increased risk for major bleeding events, irrespective of the anticoagulant agent used.


Author(s):  
Faizan Khan ◽  
Alvi Rahman ◽  
Tobias Tritschler ◽  
Marc Carrier ◽  
Clive Kearon ◽  
...  

Background: The long-term risk of major bleeding after discontinuing anticoagulant therapy for a first unprovoked venous thromboembolism (VTE) is uncertain. Objectives: To determine the incidence of major bleeding up to 5 years after discontinuing anticoagulation for a first unprovoked VTE. Methods: We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane CENTRAL (from inception to January 2021) to identify relevant randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and prospective cohort studies reporting major bleeding after discontinuing anticoagulation in patients with a first unprovoked VTE who had completed ≥3 months of initial treatment. Unpublished data on major bleeding events and person-years were obtained from authors of included studies to calculate study-level incidence rates. Random-effects meta-analysis was used to pool results across studies. Results: Of 1123 records identified by the search, 20 studies (17 RCTs) and 8740 patients were included in the analysis. During 13 011 person-years of follow-up after discontinuing anticoagulation, the pooled incidence of major bleeding (n=41) and fatal bleeding (n=7) per 100 person-years was 0.35 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.20-0.54) and 0.09 (95% CI, 0.05-0.15). The 5-year cumulative incidence of major bleeding was of 1.0% (95% CI, 0.4%-2.4%). The case-fatality rate of major bleeding after discontinuing anticoagulation was 19.9% (95% CI, 10.6%-31.1%). Conclusions: Patients with a first unprovoked VTE have a non-trivial risk of major bleeding once anticoagulants are discontinued. Estimates from this study can help clinicians counsel patients about the incremental risk of major bleeding with extended anticoagulation to guide decision making about treatment duration for unprovoked VTE.


Blood ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 136 (12) ◽  
pp. 1433-1441 ◽  
Author(s):  
Frits I. Mulder ◽  
Floris T. M. Bosch ◽  
Annie M. Young ◽  
Andrea Marshall ◽  
Robert D. McBane ◽  
...  

Abstract Direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) are an emerging treatment option for patients with cancer and acute venous thromboembolism (VTE), but studies have reported inconsistent results. This systematic review and meta-analysis compared the efficacy and safety of DOACs and low-molecular-weight heparins (LMWHs) in these patients. MEDLINE, Embase, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and conference proceedings were searched to identify relevant randomized controlled trials. Additional data were obtained from the original authors to homogenize definitions for all study outcomes. The primary efficacy and safety outcomes were recurrent VTE and major bleeding, respectively. Other outcomes included the composite of recurrent VTE and major bleeding, clinically relevant nonmajor bleeding (CRNMB), and all-cause mortality. Summary relative risks (RRs) were calculated in a random effects meta-analysis. In the primary analysis comprising 2607 patients, the risk of recurrent VTE was nonsignificantly lower with DOACs than with LMWHs (RR, 0.68; 95% CI, 0.39-1.17). Conversely, the risks of major bleeding (RR, 1.36; 95% CI, 0.55-3.35) and CRNMB (RR, 1.63; 95% CI, 0.73-3.64) were nonsignificantly higher. The risk of the composite of recurrent VTE or major bleeding was nonsignificantly lower with DOACs than with LMWHs (RR, 0.86; 95% CI, 0.60-1.23). Mortality was comparable in both groups (RR, 0.96; 95% CI, 0.68-1.36). Findings were consistent during the on-treatment period and in those with incidental VTE. In conclusion, DOACs are an effective treatment option for patients with cancer and acute VTE, although caution is needed in patients at high risk of bleeding.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document