Direct oral factor Xa inhibitors for the treatment of acute cancer-associated venous thromboembolism: A systematic review and network meta-analysis.

2019 ◽  
Vol 37 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. e23156-e23156
Author(s):  
Harry E Fuentes ◽  
Robert McBane ◽  
Waldemar Wysokinski ◽  
Alfonso Javier Tafur ◽  
Charles L. Loprinzi ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Venous Thromboembolism ◽  
Major Bleeding ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Oral Anticoagulants ◽  
Direct Oral Anticoagulants ◽  
Indirect Comparison ◽  
Factor Xa ◽  
Factor Xa Inhibitors ◽  
Efficacy And Safety ◽  
Patients With Cancer

e23156 Background: A direct meta-analysis was performed to explore the efficacy and safety of direct oral factor Xa inhibitors with dalteparin in patients with cancer associated acute venous thromboembolism (VTE). Also, the comparative efficacy and safety of apixaban, rivaroxaban, and edoxaban was assessed with a network meta-analysis. Methods: MEDLINE, CENTRAL, and EMBASE were searched for trials comparing direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) to dalteparin for the management of cancer associated acute VTE. A network meta-analysis using both frequentist and Bayesian methods was performed to analyze VTE recurrence, major and clinically relevant non-major bleeding (CRNMB). Results: Three randomized control trials, at low risk of bias, enrolled 1,739 patients with cancer associated VTE. Direct comparison showed a lower rate of VTE recurrence in DOAC compared to dalteparin groups (odds Ratio [OR]:0.48, 95% Confidence interval [CI]:0.24-0.96; I2:46%). Indirect comparison suggested that apixaban had greater reduction in VTE recurrence compared to dalteparin (OR: 0.10; 95% CI: 0.01–0.82), but not rivaroxaban or edoxaban. Apixaban also had the highest probability of being ranked most effective. By direct comparisons, there was an increased likelihood of major bleeding in the DOAC group compared to dalteparin (OR: 1.70; 95% CI: 1.04–2.78). CRNMB did not differ. Indirect estimates were imprecise. Subgroup analyses in gastrointestinal cancers suggested that dalteparin may have the lowest risk of bleeding whereas estimates in urothelial cancer were imprecise. Conclusions: DOACs appear to lower the risk of VTE recurrence compared to daltaparin while increasing major bleeding. Apixaban may be associated with the lowest risk of VTE recurrence compared to the other DOACs.

scholarly journals Direct Oral Anticoagulants for the Treatment of Acute Venous Thromboembolism Associated with Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

2020 ◽  
Vol 120 (07) ◽  
pp. 1128-1136 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michela Giustozzi ◽  
Giancarlo Agnelli ◽  
Jorge del Toro-Cervera ◽  
Frederikus A. Klok ◽  
Rachel P. Rosovsky ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Major Bleeding ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Oral Anticoagulants ◽  
Direct Oral Anticoagulants ◽  
Factor Xa ◽  
Factor Xa Inhibitors ◽  
Patients With Cancer ◽  
Randomized Controlled ◽  
Recurrent Vte ◽  
Acute Venous Thromboembolism

Abstract Background International guidelines have endorsed the use of edoxaban or rivaroxaban as an alternative to low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) for the treatment of acute venous thromboembolism (VTE) in cancer patients. Recently, a large randomized controlled trial of apixaban versus dalteparin in patients with cancer was completed. We performed an updated meta-analysis to assess the efficacy and safety of direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) versus LMWH in patients with cancer-associated VTE. Methods MEDLINE, EMBASE, and CENTRAL (Cochrane Controlled Trials Registry) were systematically searched up to March 30, 2020 for randomized controlled trials comparing DOACs versus LMWH for the treatment of VTE in patients with cancer. The two coprimary outcomes were recurrent VTE and major bleeding at 6 months. Data were pooled by the Mantel–Haenszel method and compared by relative risk ratios (RRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Results Four randomized controlled studies (2,894 patients) comparing apixaban, edoxaban, or rivaroxaban with dalteparin were included in the meta-analysis. Recurrent VTE occurred in 75 of 1,446 patients (5.2%) treated with oral factor Xa inhibitors and in 119 of 1,448 patients (8.2%) treated with LMWH (RR 0.62; 95% CI 0.43–0.91; I 2, 30%). Major bleeding occurred in 62 (4.3%) and 48 (3.3%) patients receiving oral factor Xa inhibitors or LMWH, respectively (RR 1.31; 95% CI 0.83–2.08; I 2, 23%). Conclusion In patients with cancer-associated VTE, oral factor Xa inhibitors reduced the risk of recurrent VTE without a significantly higher likelihood of major bleeding at 6 months compared with LMWH.

scholarly journals Direct oral anticoagulants for cancer-associated venous thromboembolism: a systematic review and meta-analysis

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 ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Venous Thromboembolism ◽  
Major Bleeding ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Oral Anticoagulants ◽  
Direct Oral Anticoagulants ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Efficacy And Safety ◽  
Patients With Cancer ◽  
Recurrent Vte

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.

scholarly journals The use of direct oral anticoagulants for thromboprophylaxis or treatment of cancer-associated venous thromboembolism: a meta-analysis and review of the guidelines

2021 ◽  
Vol 19 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Norah S. Alsubaie ◽  
Shahad M. Al Rammah ◽  
Reema A. Alshouimi ◽  
Mohammed Y. Alzahrani ◽  
Majed S. Al Yami ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Venous Thromboembolism ◽  
Major Bleeding ◽  
Randomized Clinical Trials ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Oral Anticoagulants ◽  
Direct Oral Anticoagulants ◽  
Safety Data ◽  
Efficacy And Safety ◽  
Patients With Cancer ◽  
Common Causes

Abstract Background Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is a common complication among patients with cancer and is one of the most common causes of increased morbidity and mortality. The use of direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) for thromboprophylaxis and treatment of cancer-associated venous thromboembolism (CA-VTE) has been evaluated in several randomized clinical trials (RCTs). The aim of this meta-analysis was to assess efficacy and safety of using DOACs for thromboprophylaxis and treatment of CA-VTE and provide a summary for available guidelines’ recommendations. Methods MEDLINE was searched to identify studies evaluating the use of DOACs for thromboprophylaxis or treatment in patients with cancer. Search was limited to peer-reviewed studies published in English. Studies were excluded if they were not RCTs or subgroup analyses of data derived from RCTs, if they did not report efficacy and safety data on patients with active cancer, or if they were published as an abstract. New VTE or VTE recurrence, and major or clinically relevant non-major bleeding (CRNMB) were used to assess the efficacy and safety, respectively. The Mantel-Haenszel random-effects model risk ratios (RRs) and the corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated to estimate the pooled treatment effects of DOACs. Results Four studies evaluating DOACs use for thromboprophylaxis and four – for treatment of CA-VTE were included. Thromboprophylaxis with DOACs was associated with a significant reduction in the risk of symptomatic VTE (RR = 0.58; 95%CI 0.37,0.91) but with an incremental risk of major bleeding or CRNMB (RR = 1.57; 95%CI 1.10,2.26). CA-VTE treatment with DOACs was linked with a significant reduction in VTE recurrence (RR = 0.62; 95%CI 0.44,0.87) but with an incremental risk of CRNMB (RR = 1.58; 95%CI 1.11,2.24). Conclusions The DOACs are associated with a lower risk of symptomatic VTE and VTE recurrence, but the risk of bleeding remains a considerable concern. Clinical decisions should be made by assessing individual patient’s risk of VTE and bleeding.

3054Efficacy and safety of non-vitamin K oral anticoagulants in patients with atrial fibrillation and cancer

2019 ◽  
Vol 40 (Supplement_1) ◽  
Author(s):  
I Cavallari ◽  
G Verolino ◽  
G Patti
Keyword(s):  
Atrial Fibrillation ◽  
Venous Thromboembolism ◽  
Intracranial Hemorrhage ◽  
Major Bleeding ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Oral Anticoagulants ◽  
Efficacy And Safety ◽  
Systemic Embolism ◽  
Patients With Cancer ◽  
All Cause Mortality

Abstract Background Anticoagulation in patients with cancer and atrial fibrillation (AF) is particularly challenging given the higher risk of both thrombotic and bleeding complications in this setting. Data regarding the efficacy and safety of non-vitamin K oral anticoagulants (NOACs) in AF patients with malignancy remain unclear. Purpose In the present meta-analysis we further investigate the efficacy and safety of NOACs compared to warfarin in patients with AF and cancer assuming that available studies may be individually underpowered for endpoints at low incidence, i.e. stroke, major and intracranial bleeding. Methods We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of studies comparing the use of NOACs vs. warfarin in AF patients with cancer. Efficacy outcome measures included stroke or systemic embolism, venous thromboembolism and mortality. Safety outcome measures were major bleeding and intracranial hemorrhage. Results We pooled data from 6 identified studies enrolling a total of 31,756 AF patients with cancer. Mean follow-up was 1.7 years. Patients with cancer had significantly increased annualized rates of venous thromboembolism (1.38% vs. 0.74%), major bleeding (9.01% vs. 5.13%), in particular major gastrointestinal bleeding (2.38% vs. 1.60%), and all-cause mortality (17.73% vs. 8.50%) vs. those without (all P values <0.001), whereas the incidence of stroke or systemic embolism and intracranial hemorrhage did not differ. Compared with warfarin, treatment with NOACs nominally decreased the risk of stroke or systemic embolism (5.41% vs. 2.70%; odds ratio, OR; 95% confidence intervals, CI 0.51, 0.26–1.01; P=0.05; Figure), mainly of ischemic stroke (OR 0.56; 95% CI 0.35–0.89; P=0.01), and the risk of venous thromboembolism (OR 0.51; 95% CI 0.42–0.61; P<0.001). In cancer patients receiving NOACs there was a significant reduction of major bleeding (3.95% vs. 4.66%; OR 0.66, 95% CI 0.46–0.94; P=0.02; Figure) and intracranial hemorrhage (0.26% vs. 0.66%; OR 0.25, 95% CI 0.08–0.82; P=0.02) vs. warfarin, with no difference in gastrointestinal major bleeding rates. Conclusion AF patients on oral anticoagulation and concomitant cancer are at higher risk of venous thromboembolism, major bleeding and all-cause mortality. NOACs may represent a safer and more effective alternative to warfarin also in this setting of patients.

scholarly journals Impact of Age, Sex, and Renal Function on the Efficacy and Safety of Direct Oral Anticoagulants vs. Vitamin K Antagonists for the Treatment of Acute Venous Thromboembolism: A Meta-Analysis of 22,040 Patients

2021 ◽  
Vol 8 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bo Zhou ◽  
Haoyu Wu ◽  
Chen Wang ◽  
Bowen Lou ◽  
Jianqing She
Keyword(s):  
Renal Function ◽  
Venous Thromboembolism ◽  
Creatinine Clearance ◽  
Major Bleeding ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Vitamin K Antagonists ◽  
Oral Anticoagulants ◽  
Direct Oral Anticoagulants ◽  
Efficacy And Safety ◽  
Acute Venous Thromboembolism

Objective: In this study, we conducted a meta-analysis to assess the impact of age, sex, and renal function on the efficacy and safety of direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) vs. vitamin K antagonists (VKAs) for the treatment of acute venous thromboembolism (VTE).Methods: Electronic databases (accessed till June 2021) were systematically searched to investigate randomized clinical trials evaluating apixaban, dabigatran, edoxaban, and rivaroxaban vs. VKAs for the treatment of acute VTE. Results were presented as odds ratio (OR) and 95% CIs.Results: Direct oral anticoagulants were associated with a borderline higher efficacy in women (OR: 0.79, 95% CI: 0.62–1.02), a significantly higher efficacy in patients with age more than 75 years (OR: 0.51, 95% CI: 0.32–0.80), and creatinine clearance &lt;50 ml/min (OR: 0.57, 95% CI: 0.32–0.99). The primary safety endpoint of major or clinically relevant non-major bleeding was significantly reduced in DOACs as compared to VKAs in both patients with age &lt;75 years (OR: 0.79, 95% CI: 0.70–0.89) and patients with age more than 75 years (OR: 0.75, 95% CI: 0.59–0.96). DOACs also show an advantage in terms of major or clinically relevant non-major bleeding in men (OR: 0.72, 95% CI: 0.60–0.86) and patients with creatinine clearance of more than 50 ml/min (OR: 0.75, 95% CI: 0.67–0.84).Conclusions: Direct oral anticoagulants have exhibited clinical preference among patients with acute VTE with decreased thrombosis and bleeding events, especially in patients with age more than 75 years and creatinine clearance &lt;50 ml/min.

scholarly journals Efficacy and Safety of Direct Oral Anticoagulants for Risk of Cancer-Associated Venous Thromboembolism

2019 ◽  
Vol 25 ◽  
pp. 107602961985362 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jie Zeng ◽  
Xuhui Zhang ◽  
Gregory Y. H. Lip ◽  
Xiaochen Shu ◽  
Lehana Thabane ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Venous Thromboembolism ◽  
Major Bleeding ◽  
Oral Anticoagulants ◽  
Direct Oral Anticoagulants ◽  
Favorable Effect ◽  
Entire Body ◽  
Efficacy And Safety ◽  
Patients With Cancer ◽  
Risk Of Cancer

Efficacy and safety of direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) for preventing primary and recurrent venous thromboembolism (VTE) in patients with cancer remain unclear. In this study, we conducted a systematic review to summarize the most up-to-date evidence from randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Our primary outcomes included the benefit outcome (VTE) and safety outcome (major bleeding). A random-effects model was used to pool the relative risks (RRs) for data syntheses. The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation tool was used to evaluate the quality of the entire body of evidence across studies. We included 11 RCTs with a total of 3741 patients with cancer for analyses. The DOACs were significantly related with a reduced risk of VTE when compared with non-DOACs: RR = 0.77, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.61-0.99, P = .04. Nonsignificant trend towards a higher risk of major bleeding was found in DOACs: RR = 1.28 95% CI: 0.81-2.02, P = .29. The quality of the entire body of evidence was graded as moderate for risk of VTE, and low for risk of major bleeding. To summarize, DOACs were found to have a favorable effect on risk of VTE but a nonsignificant higher risk of major bleeding compared with non-DOACs in patients with cancer. The safety effect of DOACs in patients with cancer requires further evaluation in adequately powered and designed studies.

scholarly journals Factor Xa inhibitor for venous thromboembolism management in patient with cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis

F1000Research ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 10 ◽  
pp. 1257
Author(s):  
Johanes Nugroho Eko Putranto ◽  
Ardyan Wardhana ◽  
Yoga Alfian Noor ◽  
Pirhot Lambok Marnala Yosua Siahaan ◽  
Makhyan Jibril Al Farabi
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Venous Thromboembolism ◽  
Major Bleeding ◽  
Fixed Effects ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Factor Xa ◽  
Factor Xa Inhibitors ◽  
Cochrane Library ◽  
Factor Xa Inhibitor ◽  
Patients With Cancer

Background: An earlier systematic review reported no differences in the incidence of recurrent venous thromboembolism and major bleeding between factor Xa inhibitors and standard anticoagulation. The present meta-analysis aimed to assess the effectiveness of factor Xa inhibitors for the management of venous thromboembolism (VTE), specifically in patients with cancer, as there were more randomized clinical trials (RCTs) available. Methods: The PubMed and Cochrane Library databases were systematically screened for all RCTs assessing factor Xa inhibitor efficacy for VTE management in cancer patients. Using RevMan 5.3, we performed a Mantel–Haenszel fixed-effects meta-analysis of the following outcomes: recurrent VTE, VTE events, and major bleeding rates. Results: We identified 11 studies involving 7,965 patients. Factor Xa inhibitors were superior in preventing VTE recurrence, compared to low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) (OR 0.60; 95% CI 0.45–0.80; P < 0.01) and vitamin K antagonists (VKA) (OR 0.51; 95% CI 0.33–0.78; P < 0.01). As prophylaxis, factor Xa inhibitors had a similar rate of VTE compared to VKAs (OR 1.08 [95% CI 0.31–3.77]; P = 0.90) and a lower rate compared to placebo (OR 0.54 [95% CI 0.35–0.81]; P < 0.01). Major bleeding rates were higher with factor Xa inhibitors than with LMWHs (OR 1.34 [95% CI 0.83–2.18]; P = 0.23), but significantly lower than VKAs (OR 0.71 [95% CI 0.55–0.92]; P < 0.01). Conclusions: Factor Xa inhibitors are effective for VTE management in patients with cancer; however, they are also associated with an increased bleeding risk compared to LMWH, but decreased when compared to VKA.

Extended treatment of venous thromboembolism: a systematic review and network meta-analysis

Heart ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 105 (7) ◽  
pp. 545-552 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kang-Ling Wang ◽  
Nick van Es ◽  
Chris Cameron ◽  
Lana A Castellucci ◽  
Harry R Büller ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Venous Thromboembolism ◽  
Major Bleeding ◽  
Low Dose ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Factor Xa ◽  
Factor Xa Inhibitors ◽  
Efficacy And Safety ◽  
Standard Intensity ◽  
All Cause Mortality ◽  
Dose Factor

ObjectiveTo evaluate efficacy and safety of oral anticoagulant regimens and aspirin for extended venous thromboembolism (VTE) treatment.MethodsWe searched MEDLINE, Embase, CENTRAL and conference proceedings for randomised controlled trials studying vitamin K antagonists (VKAs), direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) or aspirin for secondary prevention of VTE beyond 3 months. ORs (95% credible intervals) between treatments were estimated using random-effects Bayesian network meta-analysis.ResultsSixteen studies, totaling more than 22 000 patients, were included. Compared with placebo or observation and with aspirin, respectively, the risk of recurrent VTE was lower with standard-intensity VKAs (0.15 (0.08 to 0.24) and 0.23 (0.09 to 0.54)), low-dose factor Xa inhibitors (0.16 (0.06 to 0.38) and 0.25 (0.09 to 0.66)), standard-dose factor Xa inhibitors (0.17 (0.08 to 0.33) and 0.27 (0.11 to 0.65)) and the direct thrombin inhibitor (0.15 (0.04 to 0.37) and 0.23 (0.06 to 0.74)) although the risk of major bleeding was higher with standard-intensity VKAs (4.42 (1.99 to 12.24) and 4.14 (1.17 to 18.86)). Effect estimates were consistent in male patients and those with index pulmonary embolism or with unprovoked VTE and in sensitivity analyses. In addition, compared with placebo or observation, the risk of all-cause mortality was reduced with standard-intensity VKAs (0.44 (0.20 to 0.87)) and low-dose factor Xa inhibitors (0.38 (0.12 to 0.995)).ConclusionsStandard-intensity VKAs and DOACs are more efficacious than aspirin for extended VTE treatment. Despite a higher risk of major bleeding, standard-intensity VKAs was associated with a lower risk of all-cause mortality. Since overall efficacy and safety of standard-intensity VKAs and DOACs are in equipoise, patient factors, costs and patient preferences should be considered when recommending extending anticoagulation treatment.

Abstract 6048: An Indirect Comparison of the Efficacy and Safety of Factor Xa Inhibitors with Thrombin Inhibitors nn Preventing Venous Thromboembolism after Hip or Knee Surgery

Circulation ◽  
2008 ◽  
Vol 118 (suppl_18) ◽  
Author(s):  
Ganesan Karthikeyan ◽  
John W Eikelboom ◽  
Salim Yusuf ◽  
Jack Hirsh
Keyword(s):  
Venous Thromboembolism ◽  
Major Bleeding ◽  
Indirect Comparison ◽  
Factor Xa ◽  
Knee Surgery ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Thrombin Inhibitors ◽  
Factor Xa Inhibitors ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Efficacy And Safety

Introduction Selective factor Xa inhibitors and thrombin inhibitors are effective in the prevention of venous thromboembolism (VTE) after hip or knee surgery, but they have not been compared directly against each other. We performed an indirect comparison of the relative efficacy and safety of these two classes of inhibitors, from meta-analyses of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of these agents, in which a low molecular heparin (LMWH) was used as a common comparator. Methods Relevant RCTs were identified by searching MEDLINE (Ovid MEDLINE® 1950 to March week 1, 2008), EMBASE (1980 to 2008, week 10) and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (1 st quarter 2008), supplemented by hand searching and screening meeting websites. We restricted our search to the five agents (ximelagatran, dabigatran, fondaparinux, idraparinux and rivaroxaban) that have been evaluated in phase III trials. Trials were included if the study drug was compared against a LMWH and was administered in the pre- and/or postoperative (12–24hrs from surgery) period, to patients undergoing elective, hip or knee replacement surgery. The outcomes assessed were total VTE, symptomatic VTE, major bleeding and the need for blood transfusions. We obtained summary estimates (RR and 95% CI) for each outcome for the Xa and thrombin inhibitor studies, using a random-effects model. We then performed indirect comparisons between these estimates using standard statistical methods. Results We included 12 trials (18110 patients) of factor Xa inhibitors (fondaparinux, rivaroxaban) and 10 trials (17777 patients) of thrombin inhibitors (ximelagatran, dabigatran). These agents were compared with enoxaparin, except in two studies where dalteparin was the control agent. On indirect comparison, factor Xa inhibitors were significantly better than thrombin inhibitors in preventing total VTE (RR 0.54, 95% CI 0.40 – 0.75) and symptomatic VTE (RR 0.49, 95% CI 0.25– 0.97). There was no difference in the risk of major bleeding (RR 1.17, 95% CI 0.71–1.93) or the number of transfusions (RR 1.02, 95% CI 0.94–1.11). Conclusion Based on this indirect comparison, selective factor Xa inhibitors appear to be more effective than thrombin inhibitors, for the prevention of VTE after elective hip or knee surgery.

scholarly journals Safety and efficacy of direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) vs low molecular weight heparin (LMWH) in malignancy induced venous thromboembolism-a systematic review and meta analysis

2021 ◽  
Vol 10 (Supplement_1) ◽  
Author(s):  
A Abdul Razzack ◽  
N Hussain ◽  
S Adeel Hassan ◽  
S Mandava ◽  
F Yasmin ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Molecular Weight ◽  
Venous Thromboembolism ◽  
Major Bleeding ◽  
Low Molecular Weight Heparin ◽  
Oral Anticoagulants ◽  
Direct Oral Anticoagulants ◽  
Low Molecular Weight ◽  
Efficacy And Safety ◽  
Dichotomous Data ◽  
Significant Difference

Abstract Funding Acknowledgements Type of funding sources: None. Background- Low molecular weight heparin (LMWH) and direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) have been proven to be more effective in the management of venous thromboembolism (MVTE). The efficacy and safety of LMWH or DOACs in treatment of recurrent or malignancy induced VTE is not studied in literature. Objective To compare the efficacy and safety of LMWH and  DOACs in the management of malignancy induced  VTE Methods- Electronic databases ( PubMed, Embase, Scopus, Cochrane) were searched from inception to November  28th, 2020. Dichotomous data was extracted for prevention of VTE and risk of major bleeding in patients taking either LMWH or DOACs. Unadjusted odds ratios (OR) were calculated from dichotomous data using Mantel Haenszel (M-H) random-effects with statistical significance to be considered if the confidence interval excludes 1 and p &lt; 0.05.  Results- Three studies with 2607 patients (DOACs n = 1301 ; LMWH n = 1306) were included in analysis. All the study population had active cancer of any kind diagnosed within the past 6 months. Average follow-up period for each trial was 6 months. Patients receiving DOACs have a lower odds of recurrence of MVTE as compared to LMWH( OR 1.56; 95% CI 1.17-2.09; P = 0.003, I2 = 0). There was no significant difference in major bleeding among patients receiving LMWH or DOACs  (OR-0.71, 95%CI 0.46-1.10, P = 0.13, I2 = 22%) (Figure 1). We had no publication bias in our results (Egger’s regression p &gt; 0.05). Conclusion- DOACs are superior to LMWH in prevention of MVTE and have similar major bleeding risk as that of LMWH. Abstract Figure. A)VTE Recurrence B)Major Bleeding events

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document