Dataset Information

Non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants and the treatment of venous thromboembolism in cancer patients: a semi systematic review and meta-analysis of safety and efficacy outcomes.

ABSTRACT:

Background

This study sought to investigate the relative efficacy and safety of non-vitamin K oral anticoagulants (NOACs) for the treatment of venous thromboembolism (VTE) in cancer patients.

Methods

A systematic search of the PubMed, EMBASE, and ClinicalTrials.gov databases identified all multicentre, randomised phase III trials investigating the initial use of NOAC against a vitamin K antagonist (VKA) together with subcutaneous heparin or low molecular weight heparin (upstart) for treatment of VTE. Outcomes of interest were recurrent VTE (deep venous thrombosis or pulmonary embolism), and clinically relevant bleeding.

Results

Four randomised controlled phase III trials were included, comprising a total of 19,060 patients randomised to either NOAC or VKA. For patients with active cancer (N = 759), the analysis on the efficacy outcomes demonstrated a trend in favour of NOAC (OR 0.56, 95% CI 0.28-1.13). Similar, analyses on the safety outcomes comparing NOAC to VKA and enoxaparin demonstrated a trend in favour of NOAC (OR 0.88, 95% CI 0.57-1.35).

Conclusion

Point estimates of the effect size suggest an important estimated beneficial effect of NOAC in the treatment of VTE in cancer, in terms of efficacy and safety, but given the small numbers of patients with cancer in the randomised trials, statistical significance was not achieved.

SUBMITTER: Larsen TB

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4257692 | biostudies-literature | 2014

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants and the treatment of venous thromboembolism in cancer patients: a semi systematic review and meta-analysis of safety and efficacy outcomes.

Larsen Torben Bjerregaard TB Nielsen Peter Brønnum PB Skjøth Flemming F Rasmussen Lars Hvilsted LH Lip Gregory Y H GY

PloS one 20141205 12

<h4>Background</h4>This study sought to investigate the relative efficacy and safety of non-vitamin K oral anticoagulants (NOACs) for the treatment of venous thromboembolism (VTE) in cancer patients.<h4>Methods</h4>A systematic search of the PubMed, EMBASE, and ClinicalTrials.gov databases identified all multicentre, randomised phase III trials investigating the initial use of NOAC against a vitamin K antagonist (VKA) together with subcutaneous heparin or low molecular weight heparin (upstart) f ...[more]

PMID: 25479007

Similar Datasets

Project description:ObjectiveSeveral trials had compared the efficacy and safety between non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants and warfarin for acute venous thromboembolism, but the results were incomplete. This updated review comprehensively assessed the efficacy and safety of non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants for venous thromboembolism.DesignMeta-analysis of randomised control trials. Six databases were searched from January 2000 to December 2018.SettingAdult patients had got non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants or warfarin for venous thromboembolism.ParticipantsRandomised control trials that compared the efficacy and safety between non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants and warfarin.Main outcome measuresThe efficacy and safety of non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants .ResultsSeven studies involving 29,879 cases were included, among which 14,943 cases were assigned to non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants group and 14,936 cases to warfarin group. Meta-analysis showed that compared with warfarin, recurrent venous thromboembolism (odds ratio 0.94 [95% confidence interval 0.81 to 1.11]), death related to venous thromboembolism or fatal pulmonary embolism (odds ratio 1.00 [95% confidence interval 0.63 to 1.60]), symptomatic deep-vein thrombosis (odds ratio 0.88 [95% confidence interval 0.72 to 1.09]), symptomatic nonfatal pulmonary embolism (odds ratio 1.03 [(95% confidence interval 0.82 to 1.30]) and all deaths (odds ratio 0.92 [95% confidence interval 0.76 to 1.12]) are similar in non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants group, but major bleeding event (odds ratio 0.61 [95% confidence interval 0.50 to 0.75]) and clinically relevant non-major bleeding event (odds ratio [95% confidence interval 0.53 to 0.85]) are less in non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants group. .ConclusionsFor the treatment of venous thromboembolism, non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants is as effective as warfarin, and has a better safety profile than warfarin.

Project description:BackgroundThe real-world studies on recurrent venous thromboembolism (VTE) and bleeding events of non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants (NOACs) in VTE patients have reported conflicting findings. Our study aimed to provide the direct comparison evidence of different NOACs for VTE patients in clinical practice settings.MethodsSearch of the medical literature was conducted using PubMed, Web of Science, EMBASE, Clinical Trials.gov, and the Cochrane Library from inception to March 22, 2021. Among the 19,996 citations retrieved, a total of 63,144 patients from 6 studies were analyzed. Clinical outcomes included recurrent VTE, death, and different bleeding events.ResultsAdjusted hazard ratio (HR) analysis suggested that apixaban had significant lower bleeding riskthan rivaroxaban (major, minor and any bleeding: HR = 0.61, 0.56, 0.70; p = 0.008, < 0.0001, 0.006, respectively), but no statistics difference found in recurrent VTE events (HR = 1.02, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.71-1.47, p = 0.93). There was no significant difference of major bleeding between dabigatran and rivaroxaban (odds ratios (OR) = 0.41, 95% CI 0.09-1.90, p = 0.25), apixaban and dabigatran (OR 0.64, 95% CI 0.15-2.72, p = 0.83). No significant difference was found in the comparison of edoxaban and other NOACs in VTE recurrence, major bleeding and composite outcome.ConclusionsIn the prevention of bleeding events, apixaban was associated with a lower risk than rivaroxaban, but equivalent efficacy for different NOACs in prevention of recurrent VTE. Evidence generated from the meta-analysis based on real-world data can help to guide selection between apixaban and rivaroxaban in routine clinical practice.Trial registrationThis systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted and reported according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analysis and Meta-analysis of Observational Studies in Epidemiology statements and was registered with PROSPERO (CRD42019140553).

Project description:BackgroundEmulating randomized controlled trials (RCTs) by real-world evidence (RWE) studies would benefit future clinical and regulatory decision-making by balancing the limitations of RCT. We aimed to evaluate whether the findings from RWE studies can support regulatory decisions derived from RCTs of non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants (NOACs) in patients with venous thromboembolism (VTE).MethodsFive landmark trials (AMPLIFY, RE-COVER II, Hokusai-VTE, EINSTEIN-DVT, and EINSTEIN-PE) of NOACs were emulated using the South Korean nationwide claims database (January 2012 to August 2020). We applied an active comparator and new-user design to include patients who initiated oral anticoagulants within 28 days from their VTE diagnoses. The prespecified eligibility criteria, exposure (each NOAC, such as apixaban, rivaroxaban, dabigatran, and edoxaban), comparator (conventional therapy, defined as subcutaneous heparin followed by warfarin), and the definition of outcomes from RCTs were emulated as closely as possible in each separate emulation cohort. The primary outcome was identical to each trial, which was defined as recurrent VTE or VTE-related death. The safety outcome was major bleeding. Propensity score matching was conducted to balance 69 covariates between the exposure groups. Effect estimates for outcomes were estimated using the Mantel-Haenszel method and Cox proportional hazards model and subsequently compared with the corresponding RCT estimates.ResultsCompared to trial populations, real-world study populations were older (range: 63-69 years [RWE] vs. 54-59 years [RCT]), with more females (55-60.5% vs. 39-48.3%) and had a higher prevalence of active cancer (4.2-15.4% vs. 2.5-9.5%). The emulated estimates for effectiveness outcomes showed superior effectiveness of NOAC (AMPLIFY: relative risk 0.81, 95% confidence interval 0.70-0.94; RE-COVER II: hazard ratio [HR] 0.60, 0.37-0.96; Hokusai-VTE: 0.49, 0.31-0.78; EINSTEIN-DVT: 0.54, 0.33-0.89; EINSTEIN-PE: 0.50, 0.34-0.74), when contrasted with trials that showed non-inferiority. For safety outcomes, all emulations except for AMPLIFY and EINSTEIN-DVT yielded results consistent with their corresponding RCTs.ConclusionsThis study revealed the feasibility of complementing RCTs with RWE studies by using claims data in patients with VTE. Future studies to consider the different demographic characteristics between RCT and RWE populations are needed.

Project description:BackgroundUse of the non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants (NOACs) is endorsed by current guidelines for stroke prevention in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF). However efficacy and safety of NOACs in patients undergoing catheter ablation (RFCA) of AF has not been well established yet.ObjectivesTo perform a meta-analysis of all studies comparing NOACs and vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants (VKAs) in patients undergoing RFCA.Data sourcesStudies were searched for in PubMed and Google Scholar databases.Study eligibility criteriaStudies were considered eligible if: they evaluated the clinical impact of NOACs versus VKAs; they specifically analyzed the use of anticoagulants during periprocedural phase of RFCA; they reported clinical outcome data.Study appraisal and synthesis methods25 studies were selected, including 9881 cases. The summary measure used was the risk ratio (RR) with 95% confidence interval (CI). The random-effects or the fixed effect model were used to synthesize results from the selected studies.ResultsThere was no significant difference in thromboembolic complications (RR 1.39; p=0.13). Bleeding complications were significantly lower in the NOACs-treated arm as compared to VKAs (RR=0.67, p<0.001). Interestingly, a larger number of thromboembolic events was found in the VKAs-treated arm in those studies where VKAs had been interrupted during the periprocedural phase (RR=0.68; p=ns). In this same subgroup a significantly higher incidence of both minor (RR=0.54; p=0.002) and major bleeding (RR=0.41; p=0.01) events was recorded. Conversely, the incidence of thromboembolic events in the VKAs-treated arm was significantly lower in those studies with uninterrupted periprocedural anticoagulation treatment (RR=1.89; p=0.02).LimitationsAs with every meta-analysis, no patients-level data were available.Conclusions and implicationsThe use of NOACs in patients undergoing RFCA is safe, given the lower incidence of bleedings observed with NOACs. On the other side, periprocedural interruption of VKAs and bridging with heparin is associated with a higher bleeding rate with no significant benefit on onset of thromboembolic events.

Project description:ImportanceIt is unclear whether the clinical benefits associated with non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants (NOACs) are similar to those associated with low-molecular-weight heparins (LMWHs) in Asian individuals with cancer and acute venous thromboembolism (VTE).ObjectiveTo compare the risk of recurrent thromboembolic events and bleeding associated with use of a NOAC vs use of the LMWH enoxaparin in Asian individuals with cancer-associated VTE.Design, setting, and participantsThis cohort study was conducted using data from the Chang Gung Research Database, a multi-institutional electronic medical records database in Taiwan. A cohort of 1109 patients with cancer-associated VTE were identified between January 1, 2012, and January 31, 2019. Data were analyzed from March 2019 through December 2020.ExposuresReceiving a NOAC (including rivaroxaban, apixaban, edoxaban, or dabigatran) or the LMWH enoxaparin.Main outcomes and measuresThe primary outcomes were composite recurrent VTE or major bleeding. Stabilized inverse probability of treatment weighting was used to balance baseline covariates. We compared risks of recurrent VTE or major bleeding between groups using Cox proportional hazards models. In addition, we conducted an analysis using a Fine and Gray subdistribution hazard model that considered death as a competing risk.ResultsAmong 1109 patients with cancer and newly diagnosed VTE, 578 (52.1%) were women and the mean (SD) age at index date was 66.0 (13.0) years; 529 patients (47.7%) received NOACs and 580 patients (52.3%) received the LMWH enoxaparin. Composite recurrent VTE or major bleeding occurred in 75 patients (14.1%) in the NOAC group and 101 patients (17.4%) in the enoxaparin group (weighted hazard ratio [HR], 0.77; 95% CI, 0.56-1.07; P?=?.11). The groups had similar risk of VTE recurrence (HR, 0.62; 95% CI, 0.39-1.01; P?=?.05) and major bleeding (HR, 0.80; 95% CI, 0.52-1.24; P?=?.32) at 12 months of follow-up. However, taking a NOAC was associated with a significantly lower risk of gastrointestinal bleeding compared with receiving enoxaparin (10 patients [1.9%] vs 41 patients [7.1%]; HR, 0.29; 95% CI, 0.15-0.59; P?<?.001). Findings for both primary outcomes were consistent with competing risk analyses (recurrent VTE: HR, 0.68; 95% CI, 0.45-1.01; P?=?.05; major bleeding: HR, 0.77; 95% CI, 0.51-1.16; P?=?.21).Conclusions and relevanceThis cohort study found that in real-world practice, among Asian patients with cancer-associated VTE, use of a NOAC was associated with a similar risk for recurrent VTE or major bleeding compared with use of the LMWH enoxaparin. Nonetheless, use of a NOAC was associated with a significantly lower rate of gastrointestinal bleeding. Further prospective studies are needed to confirm these findings.

Project description:ObjectiveTo summarise and compare the efficacy and safety of various oral anticoagulants (dabigatran, rivaroxaban, apixaban, and vitamin K antagonists) and antiplatelet agents (acetylsalicylic acid) for the secondary prevention of venous thromboembolism.DesignSystematic review and network meta-analysis.Data sourcesLiterature search using Medline (1950 to present), Embase (1980 to present), and the Cochrane Register of Controlled Trials using the OVID interface. Publications from potentially relevant journals were also searched by hand.Review methodsRandomised controlled trials of patients receiving anticoagulants, antiplatelet drugs, or placebo or observation for secondary prevention of venous thromboembolism. Selected outcomes were rates of recurrent venous thromboembolism and major bleeding. Two reviewers independently extracted data onto standardised forms.Results12 articles met our inclusion criteria, with 11,999 patients evaluated for efficacy and 12,167 for safety. All treatments reduced the risk of recurrent venous thromboembolism. Compared with placebo or observation, vitamin K antagonists at a standard adjusted dose (target international normalised ratio 2.0-3.0) showed the highest risk difference (odds ratio 0.07; 95% credible interval 0.03 to 0.15) and acetylsalicylic acid showed the lowest risk difference (0.65; 0.39 to 1.03). Risk of major bleeding was higher with a standard adjusted dose of vitamin K antagonists (5.24; 1.78 to 18.25) than with placebo or observation. Fatal recurrent venous thromboembolism and fatal bleeding were rare. Detailed subgroup and individual patient level data were not available.ConclusionsAll oral anticoagulants and antiplatelet agents investigated in this analysis were associated with a reduced recurrence of venous thromboembolism compared with placebo or observation, although acetylsalicylic acid was associated with the lowest risk reduction. Vitamin K antagonists given at a standard adjusted dose was associated with the greatest risk reduction in recurrent venous thromboembolism, but also the greatest risk of major bleeding.

Project description:ImportanceExtending the duration of oral anticoagulation for venous thromboembolism (VTE) beyond the initial 3 to 6 months of treatment is often recommended, but it is not clear whether clinical outcomes differ when using direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) or warfarin.ObjectiveTo compare rates of recurrent VTE, hospitalizations for hemorrhage, and all-cause death among adults prescribed DOACs or warfarin whose anticoagulant treatment was extended beyond 6 months after acute VTE.Design, setting, and participantsThis cohort study was conducted in 2 integrated health care delivery systems in California with adults aged 18 years or older who received a diagnosis of incident VTE between 2010 and 2018 and completed at least 6 months of oral anticoagulant treatment with DOACs or warfarin. Patients were followed from the end of the initial 6-month treatment period until discontinuation of anticoagulation, occurrence of an outcome event, health plan disenrollment, or end of the study follow-up period (December 31, 2019). Data were obtained from the Kaiser Permanente Virtual Data Warehouse and electronic health records. Data analysis was conducted from March 2022 to January 2023.ExposureDispensed prescriptions of DOACs or warfarin after a 6-month initial treatment for VTE.Main outcomes and measuresThe primary outcomes were rates per 100 person-years of recurrent VTE, hospitalizations for hemorrhage, and all-cause death. Comparison of DOAC and warfarin outcomes were performed using multivariable Cox proportional hazards regression.ResultsA total of 18 495 patients (5477 [29.6%] aged ≥75 years; 8973 women [48.5%]) with VTE who were treated with at least 6 months of anticoagulation were identified, of whom 2134 (11.5%) were receiving DOAC therapy and 16 361 (88.5%) were receiving warfarin therapy. Unadjusted event rates were lower for patients receiving DOAC therapy than warfarin therapy for recurrent VTE (event rate per 100 person-years, 2.92 [95% CI, 2.29-3.54] vs 4.14 [95% CI, 3.90-4.38]), hospitalizations for hemorrhage (event rate per 100 person-years, 1.02 [95% CI, 0.66-1.39] vs 1.81 [95% CI, 1.66-1.97]), and all-cause death (event rate per 100 person-years, 3.79 [95% CI, 3.09-4.49] vs 5.40 [95% CI, 5.13-5.66]). After multivariable adjustment, DOAC treatment was associated with a lower risk of recurrent VTE (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR], 0.66; 95% CI, 0.52-0.82). For patients prescribed DOAC treatment, the risks of hospitalization for hemorrhage (aHR, 0.79; 95% CI, 0.54-1.17) and all-cause death (aHR, 0.96; 95% CI, 0.78-1.19) were not significantly different than those for patients prescribed warfarin treatment.Conclusions and relevanceIn this cohort study of patients with VTE who continued warfarin or DOAC anticoagulation beyond 6 months, DOAC treatment was associated with a lower risk of recurrent VTE, supporting the use of DOACs for the extended treatment of VTE in terms of clinical outcomes.

Project description:Background: The drug therapy of venous thromboembolism (VTE) presents a significant economic burden to the health-care system in low- and middle-income countries. To understand which anticoagulation therapy is most cost-effective for clinical decision-making , the cost-effectiveness of apixaban (API) versus rivaroxaban (RIV), dabigatran (DAB), and low molecular weight heparin (LMWH), followed by vitamin K antagonist (VKA), in the treatment of VTE in China was assessed. Methods: To access the quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs), a long-term cost-effectiveness analysis was constructed using a Markov model with 5 health states. The Markov model was developed using patient data collected from the Xijing Hospital from January 1, 2016 to January 1, 2021. The time horizon was set at 30 years, and a 6-month cycle length was used in the model. Costs and ICERs were reported in 2020 U.S. dollars. One-way sensitivity analysis and probabilistic sensitivity analysis (PSA) were used to test the uncertainties. A Chinese health-care system perspective was used. Results: In the base case, the data of 231 VTE patients were calculated in the base case analysis retrospectively. The RIV group resulted in a mean VTE attributable to 95% effective treatment. API, DAB, and VKA have a negative ICER (-187017.543, -284,674.922, and -9,283.339, respectively) and were absolutely dominated. The Markov model results confirmed this observation. The ICER of the API and RIV was negative (-216176.977), which belongs to the absolute inferiority scheme, and the ICER value of the DAB and VKA versus RIV was positive (110,577.872 and 836,846.343). Since the ICER of DAB and VKA exceeds the threshold, RIV therapy was likely to be the best choice for the treatment of VTE within the acceptable threshold range. The results of the sensitivity analysis revealed that the model output varied mostly with the cost in the DAB on-treatment therapy. In a probabilistic sensitivity analysis of 1,000 patients for 30 years, RIV has 100% probability of being cost-effective compared with other regimens when the WTP is $10973 per QALY. When WTP exceeded $148,000, DAB was more cost-effective than RIV. Conclusions: Compared with LMWH + VKA and API, the results proved that RIV may be the most cost-effective treatment for VTE patients in China. Our findings could be helpful for physicians in clinical decision-making to select the appropriate treatment option for VTE.

Dataset Information

Non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants and the treatment of venous thromboembolism in cancer patients: a semi systematic review and meta-analysis of safety and efficacy outcomes.

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Publications

Non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants and the treatment of venous thromboembolism in cancer patients: a semi systematic review and meta-analysis of safety and efficacy outcomes.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets