Dataset Information

Comparison of rivaroxaban and dalteparin for the long-term treatment of venous thromboembolism in patients with gynecologic cancers.

ABSTRACT: OBJECTIVES:Two randomized, controlled studies comparing outcomes in patients treated with direct oral anticoagulants or low-molecular weight heparin for cancer-associated venous thromboembolism (VTE) have previously been performed. However, gynecologic cancers accounted for approximately 10% of the study populations. We compared the outcomes of patients with primary gynecological cancers who were treated for cancer-associated VTE with either rivaroxaban or dalteparin. METHODS:The 162 eligible patients with gynecologic cancers who were treated with either dalteparin (n=60) or rivaroxaban (n=102) were reviewed. The primary outcome was a composite event, which included recurrence or clinically relevant bleeding events during the therapeutic period. Secondary outcomes were recurrence, clinically relevant bleeding events, and mortality. RESULTS:During the therapeutic period, there were no significant differences between the groups in the proportion of composite events, recurrence, or clinically relevant bleeding. Multivariate analysis using the Cox proportional hazards model also showed no significant difference in the number of composite events and clinically relevant bleeding between the groups. In the rivaroxaban group, 44.0% of patients experienced gastrointestinal bleeding and 24.0% experienced urinary tract bleeding. In the dalteparin group, bleeding was most common in the urinary tract (44.4%) and at the injection site (22.2%). CONCLUSION:In this study, although there were no significant differences in effectiveness or safety between the rivaroxaban and dalteparin groups, rivaroxaban use was associated with a higher rate of clinically relevant bleeding than dalteparin. Therefore, caution should be taken when prescribing rivaroxaban for gynecologic cancer-associated VTE and bleeding events should be carefully monitored.

SUBMITTER: Lee JH

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6918888 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Jan

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Comparison of rivaroxaban and dalteparin for the long-term treatment of venous thromboembolism in patients with gynecologic cancers.

Lee Jang Ho JH Lee Joo Hee JH Jo Kyung Wook KW Huh Jin Won JW Oh Yeon Mok YM Lee Jae Seung JS

Journal of gynecologic oncology 20190805 1

<h4>Objectives</h4>Two randomized, controlled studies comparing outcomes in patients treated with direct oral anticoagulants or low-molecular weight heparin for cancer-associated venous thromboembolism (VTE) have previously been performed. However, gynecologic cancers accounted for approximately 10% of the study populations. We compared the outcomes of patients with primary gynecological cancers who were treated for cancer-associated VTE with either rivaroxaban or dalteparin.<h4>Methods</h4>The ...[more]

PMID: 31789000

Similar Datasets

Project description:ObjectivesIn the 'Comparison of an Oral Factor Xa Inhibitor With Low Molecular Weight Heparin in Patients With Cancer With Venous Thromboembolism' (SELECT-D) trial, rivaroxaban showed relatively low venous thromboembolism (VTE) recurrence but higher bleeding compared with dalteparin in patients with cancer. We aim to calculate the cost-effectiveness and budget impact of rivaroxaban compared with dalteparin in patients with cancer at risk of recurrent VTE.SettingWe built a Markov model to calculate the cost-effectiveness from a societal perspective over a 5-year time horizon for the Dutch healthcare setting.ParticipantsA hypothetical cohort of 1000 cancer patients with VTE entered the model with baseline characteristics based on the SELECT-D trial.InterventionSix months of treatment with rivaroxaban (15 mg two times per day for first 3 weeks followed by 20 mg once daily) was compared with 6 months of treatment with dalteparin (200 IU/kg daily during month 1 followed by 150 IU/kg daily).Primary and secondary outcome measuresThe primary outcome of the cost-effectiveness analysis was the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER). The robustness of the model was evaluated in probabilistic and univariate sensitivity analyses. A budget impact analysis was performed to calculate the total annual financial consequences for a societal perspective in the Netherlands.ResultsIn the base case and all scenarios, rivaroxaban were cost-saving while also slightly improving the patient's health, resulting in economically dominant ICERs. In the probabilistic sensitivity analysis, 77.8% and 98.7% of the simulations showed rivaroxaban to be cost-saving and more effective for a 5-year and 6-month time horizon, respectively. Rivaroxaban can save up to €11 326 763 (CI €5 164 254 to €17 363 231) in approximately 8000 cancer patients with VTE per year compared with dalteparin based on a 1-year time horizon.ConclusionsTreatment with rivaroxaban is economically dominant over dalteparin in patients with cancer at risk for recurrent VTE in the Netherlands. The use of rivaroxaban instead of dalteparin can save over €10 million per year, primarily driven by the difference in drug costs.

Project description:BackgroundAnticoagulation with low molecular weight heparin and vitamin K antagonists is the current standard of care (SOC) for venous thromboembolism (VTE) treatment and prevention. Although novel oral anti-coagulants (NOACs) have been compared with SOC in this indication, no head-to-head randomised controlled trials (RCTs) have directly compared NOACs. A systematic review and network meta-analysis (NMA) were conducted to compare the efficacy and safety of NOACs for the initial and long-term treatment of VTE.MethodsElectronic databases (accessed July 2014) were systematically searched to identify RCTs evaluating apixaban, dabigatran, edoxaban, and rivaroxaban versus SOC. Eligible patients included adults with an objectively confirmed deep vein thrombosis (DVT), pulmonary embolism (PE) or both. A fixed-effect Bayesian NMA was conducted for outcomes of interest, and results were presented as relative risks (RR) and 95% credible intervals (Crl).ResultsSix Phase III RCTs met criteria for inclusion: apixaban (one RCT; n = 5,395); rivaroxaban (two RCTs; n = 3,423/4,832); dabigatran (two RCTs; n = 2,539/2,568); edoxaban (one RCT; n = 8,240). There were no statistically significant differences between the NOACs with regard to the risk of 'VTE and VTE-related death. Apixaban treatment was associated with the most favourable safety profile of the NOACs, showing a statistically significantly reduced risk of 'major or clinically relevant non-major (CRNM) bleed' compared with rivaroxaban (0.47 [0.36, 0.61]), dabigatran (0.69 [0.51, 0.94]), and edoxaban (0.54 [0.41, 0.69]). Dabigatran was also associated with a significantly lower risk of 'major or CRNM bleed' compared with rivaroxaban (0.68 [0.53, 0.87]) and edoxaban (0.77 [0.60, 0.99]).ConclusionsIndirect comparisons showed statistically similar reductions in the risk of 'VTE or VTE-related death for all NOACs. In contrast, reductions in 'major or CRNM bleed' for initial/long-term treatment were significantly better with apixaban compared with all other NOACs, and with dabigatran compared with rivaroxaban and edoxaban. Results from the current analysis indicate that the NOACs offer clinical benefit over conventional therapy while highlighting relative differences in their bleeding profile.

Dataset Information

Comparison of rivaroxaban and dalteparin for the long-term treatment of venous thromboembolism in patients with gynecologic cancers.

Publications

Comparison of rivaroxaban and dalteparin for the long-term treatment of venous thromboembolism in patients with gynecologic cancers.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure