Dataset Information

Safety and Efficacy of Apixaban vs Enoxaparin for Preventing Postoperative Venous Thromboembolism in Women Undergoing Surgery for Gynecologic Malignant Neoplasm: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

ABSTRACT:

Importance

Current guidelines recommend a 28-day course of enoxaparin for thromboprophylaxis after surgery for gynecologic cancer. The high cost of this medication and the low adherence rates observed in prior studies provide an opportunity to benefit patients by demonstrating the safety of a more cost-effective, easier to use thromboprophylactic.

Objective

To investigate the safety and efficacy of an oral treatment alternative for thromboprophylaxis in postoperative patients with gynecologic cancer.

Design, setting, and participants

This was a patient-based, multicenter, open-label, blinded, end point, randomized clinical trial conducted May 2015 to March 2019 in outpatient and inpatient gynecologic oncology settings. Women undergoing surgery for suspected or confirmed gynecologic cancer were approached for recruitment. The trial compared rates of major bleeding and clinically relevant nonmajor bleeding events during a 90-day follow-up period in patients taking apixaban or enoxaparin for postoperative thromboprophylaxis using a modified intent-to-treat analysis. Data analysis was performed from October to December 2019.

Interventions

Women were randomized to 28 days of apixaban (2.5 mg orally twice daily) or enoxaparin (40 mg subcutaneously daily).

Main outcomes and measures

The primary outcome was major bleeding and clinically relevant nonmajor bleeding events. Secondary outcomes included incidence of venous thromboembolic events, adverse events, medication adherence, participant quality of life, and medication satisfaction.

Results

Of 500 women recruited for the study, 400 were enrolled and randomized (median age, 58.0 years; range, 18.0-89.0 years); 204 received apixaban and 196 received enoxaparin. Treatment groups did not differ in terms of race/ethnicity, cancer stage, or surgery modality (open vs robotic). There were no statistically significant differences between the apixaban and enoxaparin groups in terms of rates of major bleeding events (1 patient [0.5%] vs 1 patient [0.5%]; odds ratio [OR], 1.04; 95% CI, 0.07-16.76; P > .99), clinically relevant nonmajor bleeding events (12 patients [5.4%] vs 19 patients [9.7%]; OR, 1.88; 95% CI, 0.87-4.1; P = .11), venous thromboembolic events (2 patients [1.0%] vs 3 patients [1.5%]; OR, 1.57; 95% CI, 0.26-9.50; P = .68), adverse events, medication adherence, or quality of life between the groups. Participant satisfaction was significantly greater in the apixaban group with regard to ease of taking the medication (186 patients [98.9%] vs 110 patients [58.8%]; OR, 0.06; 95% CI, 0.01-0.25; P < .001) and pain associated with taking the medication (4 patients [2.1%] vs 92 patients [49.2%]; OR, 9.20; 95% CI, 2.67-31.82; P < .001).

Conclusions and relevance

These findings suggest that oral apixaban is a potentially safe, less painful, and easier-to-take alternative to subcutaneous enoxaparin for thromboprophylaxis after surgery for gynecologic cancer. The efficacy of apixaban to prevent venous thromboembolic events is hypothesized as being equivalent.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02366871.

SUBMITTER: Guntupalli SR

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7320298 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:The impact of pharmacologic prophylaxis for venous thromboembolism in patients undergoing neurosurgical intervention remains uncertain. We reviewed the efficacy and safety of pharmacologic compared with nonpharmacologic thromboprophylaxis in neurosurgical patients. Three databases were searched through April 2018, including those for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and for nonrandomized controlled studies (NRSs). Independent reviewers assessed the certainty of evidence using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach. Seven RCTs and 3 NRSs proved eligible. No studies reported on symptomatic proximal and distal deep vein thrombosis (DVT). Two RCTs reported on screening-detected proximal and distal DVTs. We used the findings of these 2 RCTs as the closest surrogate outcomes to inform the proximal and distal DVT outcomes. These 2 RCTs suggest that pharmacologic thromboprophylaxis may decrease the risk of developing asymptomatic proximal DVT (relative risk [RR], 0.50; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.30-0.84; low certainty). Findings were uncertain for mortality (RR, 1.27; 95% CI, 0.57-2.86; low certainty), symptomatic pulmonary embolism (PE) (RR, 0.84; 95% CI, 0.03-27.42; very low certainty), asymptomatic distal DVT (RR, 0.54; 95% CI, 0.27-1.08; very low certainty), and reoperation (RR, 0.43; 95% CI, 0.06-2.84; very low certainty) outcomes. NRSs also reported uncertain findings for whether pharmacologic prophylaxis affects mortality (RR, 0.72; 95% CI, 0.46-1.13; low certainty) and PE (RR, 0.18; 95% CI, 0.01-3.76). For risk of bleeding, findings were uncertain in both RCTs (RR, 1.57; 95% CI, 0.70-3.50; low certainty) and NRSs (RR, 1.45; 95% CI, 0.30-7.12; very low certainty). In patients undergoing neurosurgical procedures, low certainty of evidence suggests that pharmacologic thromboprophylaxis confers benefit for preventing asymptomatic (screening-detected) proximal DVT with very low certainty regarding its impact on patient-important outcomes.

Project description:BackgroundThere is considerable debate regarding the ideal agent for venous thromboembolism (VTE) prophylaxis after TKA. Numerous studies and meta-analyses have yet to provide a clear answer and often omit one or more of the commonly used agents such as aspirin, warfarin, enoxaparin, and factor Xa inhibitors.Questions/purposesUsing a large database analysis, we asked: (1) What are the differences in VTE incidence in primary TKA after administration of aspirin, warfarin, enoxaparin, or factor Xa inhibitors? (2) What are the differences in bleeding risk among these four agents? (3) How has use of these agents changed with time?MethodsWe queried a combined Humana and Medicare database between 2007 and Quarter 1 of 2016, and identified all primary TKAs performed using ICD-9 and Current Procedural Terminology codes. All patients who had any form of antiplatelet or anticoagulation prescribed within 1 year before TKA were excluded from our study cohort. We then identified patients who had either aspirin, warfarin, enoxaparin, or factor Xa inhibitors prescribed within 2 weeks of primary TKA. Each cohort was matched by age and sex. Elixhauser comorbidities and Charlson Comorbidity Index for each group were calculated. We identified 1016 patients with aspirin, and age- and sex-matched 6096 patients with enoxaparin, 6096 patients with warfarin, and 5080 patients with factor Xa inhibitors. Using ICD-9 codes, with the understanding that patients at greater risk may have had more-attentive surveillance, the incidence of postoperative deep venous thrombosis (DVT), pulmonary embolism (PE), bleeding-related complications (bleeding requiring surgical intervention, hemorrhage, hematoma, hemarthrosis), postoperative anemia, and transfusion were identified at 2 weeks, 30 days, 6 weeks, and 90 days postoperatively. A four-way chi-squared test was used to determine statistical significance. Utilization was calculated using compound annual growth rate.ResultsThere was a difference in the incidence of DVT at 90 days (p < 0.01). Factor Xa inhibitors (2.9%) had the lowest incidence of DVT followed by aspirin (3.0%) and enoxaparin (3.5%), and warfarin (4.8%). There was a difference in the incidence of PE at 90 days (p < 0.01). Factor Xa inhibitors (0.9%) had the lowest incidence of PE followed by enoxaparin (1.1%), aspirin (1.2%), and warfarin (1.6%). There was a difference in the incidence of postoperative anemia at 90 days (p < 0.01). Aspirin (19%) had the lowest incidence of postoperative anemia followed by warfarin (22%), enoxaparin (23%), and factor Xa inhibitors (23%). There was a difference in the incidence of a blood transfusion at 90 days (p < 0.01). Aspirin (7%) had the lowest incidence of a blood transfusion followed by factor Xa inhibitors (9%), warfarin (12%), and enoxaparin (13%). There were no differences in bleeding-related complications (p = 0.81) between the groups. Aspirin use increased at a compound annual growth rate of 30%, enoxaparin at 3%, and factor Xa inhibitors at 43%, while warfarin use decreased at a compound annual growth rate of -3%.ConclusionsFactor Xa inhibitors had the highest growth in utilization during our study period, followed by aspirin, when compared with enoxaparin and warfarin. When selected for the right patient, factor Xa inhibitors provided improved VTE prophylaxis compared with enoxaparin and warfarin, with a lower rate of blood transfusion. Aspirin provided comparable VTE prophylaxis compared with factor Xa inhibitors with improved VTE prophylaxis compared with enoxaparin and warfarin with the lowest risk of bleeding.Level of evidenceLevel III, therapeutic study.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Critically ill patients are considered a high-risk group for developing venous thromboembolism (VTE). Due to their impaired cardiopulmonary reserve, these VTEs may result in significant morbidity and mortality. In this study, we compared two types of low molecular weight heparin, enoxaparin, and bemiparin, as regards to their efficacy and safety in VTE prevention among Intensive Care Unit (ICU) patients. METHODS:This study was a prospective, randomized trial of 100 critically ill patients who are at high risk for developing VTE were included in this study and assigned to receive subcutaneous injections of either 3500 international units (IU) anti-factor Xa of bemiparin sodium or 40 mg of enoxaparin given once a day and patient were followed for 60 days after initiation of anticoagulant therapy for the development of documented deep venous thrombosis (DVT) using bilateral lower limb venous duplex, documented pulmonary embolism using computed tomography pulmonary angiography, and complications related to injectant anticoagulant. RESULTS:Confirmed DVT was observed in two patients (4%) in the bemiparin group compared with 10 patients (20%) in the enoxaparin group with P < 0.05. Confirmed pulmonary embolism (PE) was observed in seven patients (14%) in the enoxaparin group with no recorded cases of confirmed PE in the bemiparin group (P < 0.05). No deaths were recorded in either group. Adverse events such as ecchymosis or hematoma at the injection site were observed in one patient (2%) in the bemiparin group and eight patients (16%) in the enoxaparin group (P < 0.05). There was no significant statistical difference between both groups as regards other adverse effects and complications related to the injectant anticoagulant. CONCLUSION:Bemiparin was superior to enoxaparin as a prophylactic anticoagulant for VTE in critically ill patients with less adverse local complications at the injection site. The study was registered on www.clinicaltrials.gov. Registration ID: NCT02795065. Registered June 8, 2016.