Venous Thromboembolism-related Death Research Articles

Utility of the modified Ottawa score for identification of more preferable candidates of extended anticoagulation therapy in cancer-associated isolated distal deep vein thrombosis: insight from the ONCO DVT Study

BackgroundThe ONCO DVT study (Edoxaban for 12 Months Versus 3 Months in Patients With Cancer With Isolated Distal Deep Vein Thrombosis) revealed superiority of 12-month relative to 3-month edoxaban treatment for the thrombotic risk in cancer-associated isolated distal deep vein thrombosis. However, it is unknown whether the superiority could be common in different modified Ottawa score subgroups. ObjectivesTo identify more preferable candidates for extended anticoagulation in patients with cancer-associated isolated distal deep vein thrombosis using the modified Ottawa score. MethodsIn this post-hoc subgroup analysis of the ONCO DVT study, we stratified 601 patients into the low (≤−1, N = 126), intermediate (0, N = 323), and high (≥1, N = 152) modified Ottawa score subgroups and compared clinical outcomes between the 12-month and 3-month edoxaban treatment groups. ResultsThe cumulative incidence of symptomatic recurrent venous thromboembolism or venous thromboembolism–related death was not different between the 12-month and 3-month edoxaban treatment groups in the low score subgroup (0.0% vs 2.2%), whereas it was lower in the 12-month than in the 3-month edoxaban treatment group in the intermediate (0.8% vs 7.6%) and high (3.1% vs 15.6%) score subgroups. There were no significant differences in the cumulative incidences of the major bleeding between the 12-month and 3-month edoxaban treatment groups in the low (10.1% vs 7.6%), intermediate (8.8% vs 5.0%), and high (13.9% vs 12.6%) score subgroups. ConclusionA 12-month compared with 3-month edoxaban treatment showed a lower risk of thrombotic events in patients with cancer-associated isolated distal deep vein thrombosis in the intermediate and high modified Ottawa score subgroups but not in the low score subgroup, suggesting a limited benefit of extended anticoagulation therapy beyond 3 months in patients with low modified Ottawa score.

Extended Thromboprophylaxis in Hospitalized Patients with Heart Failure: A Post Hoc Analysis of the MAGELLAN Study.

This post hoc subgroup analysis examined efficacy and safety outcomes with extended thromboprophylaxis rivaroxaban compared with in-hospital enoxaparin in 2,078 patients from the MAGELLAN study who had a hospitalization for heart failure or a history of heart failure and a lower risk of bleeding. A significant 36% reduction in the composite endpoint of asymptomatic proximal deep vein thrombosis (DVT) in the lower extremity, symptomatic DVT in the lower extremity (proximal or distal), symptomatic nonfatal pulmonary embolism, and venous thromboembolism-related death was observed with rivaroxaban. Major bleeding was low in both groups and not significantly increased with rivaroxaban.

Comparison of Bleeding Risk between Rivaroxaban and Apixaban: a Pilot Feasibility Study

Introduction: The direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) apixaban and rivaroxaban have simplified the treatment of acute venous thromboembolism (VTE). Phase III randomized controlled trials demonstrated each DOAC to have similar or better safety and efficacy profiles to vitamin K antagonists, while network meta-analyses suggest that apixaban might be associated with fewer bleeding events than rivaroxaban. Trial limitations and lack of direct comparison between these agents make it impossible to know which DOAC confers the best risk-benefit ratio. The COBRRA (COmparison of Bleeding Risk between Rivaroxaban and Apixaban) pilot feasibility study (NCT02559856) was designed to determine if it is feasible to conduct a large randomized multicenter trial comparing apixaban to rivaroxaban for the treatment of acute VTE.Methods: Adult patients with symptomatic acute VTE were eligible for randomization to apixaban or rivaroxaban in an open-label fashion. The exclusion criteria were: had received >72 hours of therapeutic anticoagulation; creatinine clearance <30 ml/min; another indication for long term anticoagulation; weight >120 Kg; known Child-Pugh B or C liver disease; active bleeding; active malignancy; pregnancy/breastfeeding; and use of contraindicated medications. Patients were followed on anticoagulation for 3 or 6 months.The pilot trial was conducted in 4 Canadian centers that are part of the CanVECTOR network. Two sites are established Thrombosis research centers and the other 2 sites are emerging research centers with minimal established research infrastructure. The primary outcome was recruitment of at least 2 patients per month per site over a mean of 6 months recruitment. Secondary outcomes included major bleeding, clinically relevant non-major bleeding, and minor bleeding events; recurrent VTE; VTE related deaths; and all-cause mortality.Results: Seventy-two patients were enrolled with mean recruitment of 4 patients per month at experienced sites and 2 patients per month at new sites. Baseline clinical characteristics are available in Table 1. Thirty-four patients were randomized to apixaban with mean age 58 years; 37 patients were randomized to rivaroxaban and had mean age of 63 years.Follow up visits are ongoing at three participating sites and results will be available in October 2017. No patients have been lost to follow up.Conclusions: This pilot trial is the first direct comparison of rivaroxaban and apixaban for acute VTE treatment. Recruitment targets were met hence we demonstrated feasibility of the main trial. The sample size of the full study is estimated to be 2760 patients. With recruitment rates similar to those observed in this pilot study, we would need at least 10 experienced centers and 8 emerging sites to ensure enrolment is completed over 4 years. Secondary outcome reporting will be available for the 59th ASH Annual Meeting. [Display omitted] DisclosuresCastellucci:BMS: Honoraria; Bayer: Honoraria; Leo Pharma: Honoraria; Boehringer-Ingelheim: Honoraria; Pfizer: Honoraria. Le Gal:Bayer: Honoraria; BMS: Honoraria.

Dabigatran etexilate for the treatment of acute venous thromboembolism in children (DIVERSITY): a randomised, controlled, open-label, phase 2b/3, non-inferiority trial

Dabigatran etexilate is a direct oral anticoagulant with potential to overcome the limitations of standard of care in children with venous thromboembolism. The aims of this clinical trial were to study the appropriateness of a paediatric dabigatran dosing algorithm, and the efficacy and safety of dabigatran dosed according to that algorithm versus standard of care in treating children with venous thromboembolism. DIVERSITY is a randomised, controlled, open-label, parallel-group, phase 2b/3 non-inferiority trial done in 65 centres in 26 countries. Standard of care (low-molecular-weight heparins, unfractionated heparin, vitamin K antagonists or fondaparinux) was compared with a paediatric oral dabigatran dosing regimen (an age-adjusted and weight-adjusted nomogram) in children younger than 18 years with acute venous thromboembolism initially treated (5-21 days) with parenteral anticoagulation, requiring anticoagulation therapy for at least 3 months. Patients were randomised 1:2 (standard of care:dabigatran) and stratified by age (12 to <18 years, 2 to <12 years, and birth to <2 years) via interactive response technology. The primary composite efficacy endpoint (intention-to-treat analysis) was the proportion of children with complete thrombus resolution, and freedom from recurrent venous thromboembolism and venous thromboembolism-related death. A non-inferiority margin of absolute differences of 20% was used. Secondary endpoints included safety (determined by major bleeding events [time-to-event analysis on the treated set]), and pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic relationships (descriptive analyses). This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01895777 and is completed. 328 children were enrolled between Feb 18, 2014, and Nov 14, 2019. 267 were randomly assigned (90 [34%] to standard of care and 177 [66%] to dabigatran) and included in the analyses. Median exposure to standard of care was 85·0 days (IQR 80·0-90·0) and to dabigatran was 84·5 days (78·0-89·0). Similar proportions of children treated with standard of care and dabigatran met the composite efficacy endpoint (38 [42%] of 90 vs 81 [46%] of 177; Mantel-Haenszel weighted difference, -0·04; 90% CI -0·14 to 0·07; p<0·0001 for non-inferiority). On-treatment bleeding events were reported in 22 (24%) of 90 children receiving standard of care and 38 (22%) of 176 children receiving dabigatran (hazard ratio [HR] 1·15, 95% CI 0·68 to 1·94; p=0·61); major bleeding events were similar between the groups (two [2%] of 90 and four [2%] of 176; HR 0·94, 95% CI 0·17 to 5·16; p=0·95). Pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic curves showed a linear relationship between total dabigatran plasma concentration and diluted thrombin time and ecarin clotting time, and a non-linear relationship with activated partial thromboplastin time; curves were similar to those for adults. Serious adverse events were reported for 18 (20%) of 90 children receiving standard of care and 22 (13%) of 176 children receiving dabigatran. The most common severe adverse events were vascular disorders (standard of care three [3%] of 90, dabigatran two [1%] of 176), and gastrointestinal disorders (standard of care two [2%] of 90 and dabigatran five [3%] of 176). One on-treatment death occurred in the standard of care group (retroperitoneal bleeding, not considered treatment related by the study investigators). An age-adjusted and weight-adjusted dabigatran dosing algorithm was appropriate in children aged birth to less than 18 years with venous thromboembolism. Dabigatran was non-inferior to standard of care in terms of efficacy, with similar pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic relationships as those seen in adults, and might be a suitable alternative to standard of care. Boehringer Ingelheim.

C-reactive protein level predicts 30-day mortality and bleeding in patients with venous thromboembolism: A prospective single-center study

AimsThe association of on-admission CRP and early adverse outcomes in acute venous thromboembolism (VTE) has not been investigated. We hypothesized that increased on-admission CRP levels would correlate with adverse outcomes in patients with acute VTE. MethodIn this prospective observational study, consecutive patients with acute VTE were enrolled and CRP levels were measured within the first 24h after diagnosis. Mortality, bleeding and recurrence were recorded during a 30-day follow-up. Results586 patients were included. Higher CRP levels were found in patients with mortality (7.5 vs 4.0mg/dL; p=0.01) and bleeding (7.8 vs 3.9mg/dL; p=0.03). Multivariable logistic regression showed that CRP levels >5mg/dL were associated with higher mortality (OR 6.25; 95% CI, 2.1–18.6) and bleeding (OR 2.7; CI 95% 1.3–5.7). These results were independent to ESC risk score and simplified PESI score for mortality prediction. The predictive capacity of CRP showed an area under the ROC curve – AUC – of .7 (CI 95% .56–.85) for mortality and .65 (CI 95% .54–.75) for bleeding. The prognostic capacity of the ESC risk score and simplified PESI score was improved after adding the CRP cutoff of 5mg/dL (AUC of .87 CI 95% .79–.95). ConclusionOur findings suggest that on-admission CRP level may be a simple, widely available and valuable biomarker to identify high-risk VTE patients for early mortality and bleeding. CRP ≥5mg/dL was independently associated with 30-day VTE related death and bleeding.

Rivaroxaban or Enoxaparin in Nonmajor Orthopedic Surgery

BackgroundNonmajor orthopedic surgery of the lower limbs that results in transient reduced mobility places patients at risk for venous thromboembolism. Rivaroxaban may be noninferior to enoxaparin with regard to the prevention of major venous thromboembolism in these patients.MethodsIn this international, parallel-group, randomized, double-blind, noninferiority trial, we randomly assigned adult patients undergoing lower-limb nonmajor orthopedic surgery who were considered to be at risk for venous thromboembolism on the basis of the investigator’s judgment to receive either rivaroxaban or enoxaparin. The primary efficacy outcome of major venous thromboembolism was a composite of symptomatic distal or proximal deep-vein thrombosis, pulmonary embolism, or venous thromboembolism–related death during the treatment period or asymptomatic proximal deep-vein thrombosis at the end of treatment. A test for superiority was planned if rivaroxaban proved to be noninferior to enoxaparin. For all outcomes, multiple imputation was used to account for missing data. Prespecified safety outcomes included major bleeding (fatal, critical, or clinically overt bleeding or bleeding at the surgical site leading to intervention) and nonmajor clinically relevant bleeding.ResultsA total of 3604 patients underwent randomization; 1809 patients were assigned to receive rivaroxaban, and 1795 to receive enoxaparin. Major venous thromboembolism occurred in 4 of 1661 patients (0.2%) in the rivaroxaban group and in 18 of 1640 patients (1.1%) in the enoxaparin group (risk ratio with multiple imputation, 0.25; 95% confidence interval, 0.09 to 0.75; P<0.001 for noninferiority; P=0.01 for superiority). The incidence of bleeding did not differ significantly between the rivaroxaban group and the enoxaparin group (1.1% and 1.0%, respectively, for major bleeding or nonmajor clinically relevant bleeding; 0.6% and 0.7%, respectively, for major bleeding).ConclusionsRivaroxaban was more effective than enoxaparin in the prevention of venous thromboembolic events during a period of immobilization after nonmajor orthopedic surgery of the lower limbs. (Funded by Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Saint-Etienne and Bayer; PRONOMOS ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02401594.)

C-reactive protein level predicts 30-day mortality and bleeding in patients with venous thromboembolism: A prospective single-center study

AimsThe association of on-admission CRP and early adverse outcomes in acute venous thromboembolism (VTE) has not been investigated. We hypothesized that increased on-admission CRP levels would correlate with adverse outcomes in patients with acute VTE. MethodIn this prospective observational study, consecutive patients with acute VTE were enrolled and CRP levels were measured within the first 24h after diagnosis. Mortality, bleeding and recurrence were recorded during a 30-day follow-up. Results586 patients were included. Higher CRP levels were found in patients with mortality (7.5 vs 4.0mg/dL; p=0.01) and bleeding (7.8 vs 3.9mg/dL; p=0.03). Multivariable logistic regression showed that CRP levels >5mg/dL were associated with higher mortality (OR 6.25; 95% CI, 2.1–18.6) and bleeding (OR 2.7; CI 95% 1.3–5.7). These results were independent to ESC risk score and simplified PESI score for mortality prediction. The predictive capacity of CRP showed an area under the ROC curve – AUC – of .7 (CI 95% .56–.85) for mortality and .65 (CI 95% .54–.75) for bleeding. The prognostic capacity of the ESC risk score and simplified PESI score was improved after adding the CRP cutoff of 5mg/dL (AUC of .87 CI 95% .79–.95). ConclusionOur findings suggest that on-admission CRP level may be a simple, widely available and valuable biomarker to identify high-risk VTE patients for early mortality and bleeding. CRP ≥5mg/dL was independently associated with 30-day VTE related death and bleeding.

The case for extended thromboprophylaxis in medically hospitalised patients - not yet made.

The role of extended thromboprophylaxis is established for surgical patients, but not yet for hospitalised medical patients. This systematic review and meta-analysis sought to explore the role of extended thromboprophylaxis for medically ill hospitalised patients. Medline, EMBASE and Cochrane Libraries were searched and five randomised controlled trials were identified, comprising 20,046 extended and 20,078 standard duration thromboprophylaxis patients. Allocation to extended treatment, compared with standard duration therapy, significantly reduced the risk of symptomatic deep vein thrombosis (relative risk (RR) 0.47, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.29-0.78, P = 0.003) and non-fatal pulmonary embolism (RR 0.59, 95% CI 0.39-0.91, P = 0.02). The risk of venous thromboembolism-related death was comparable between the extended and standard duration treatment groups (RR 0.81, 95% CI 0.6-1.09, P = 0.16). Extended treatment also doubled the risk of major bleeding (RR 2.04, 95% CI 1.42-2.91, P < 0.001), without significantly affecting the risk of intracranial bleeding or bleeding-associated death. The cost of preventing one symptomatic deep vein thrombosis and non-fatal pulmonary embolism was found to be £24,972 (€27,969) and £45,148 (€50,566), respectively, which outweigh the direct cost of managing established venous thromboembolism as previously reported. Extended duration thromboprophylaxis caused a reduction in the risk of venous thromboembolic events, but also a numerically comparable increase in major bleeding. Further trials are required in high-risk subpopulations who may derive mortality benefits from treatment. Only then could a change in current policy and practice be supported.

The Case for Extended Thromboprophylaxis in Medically Hospitalised Patients – Not Yet Made

BACKGROUND The role of extended thromboprophylaxis is established for surgical patients, but not yet for hospitalised medical patients. DESIGN This systematic review and meta-analysis sought to explore the role of extended thromboprophylaxis for medically ill hospitalised patients. METHODS Medline, EMBASE and Cochrane Libraries were searched and five randomised controlled trials were identified, comprising 20,046 extended and 20,078 standard duration thromboprophylaxis patients. RESULTS Allocation to extended treatment, compared with standard duration therapy, significantly reduced the risk of symptomatic deep vein thrombosis (relative risk (RR) 0.47, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.29-0.78, P = 0.003) and non-fatal pulmonary embolism (RR 0.59, 95% CI 0.39-0.91, P = 0.02). The risk of venous thromboembolism-related death was comparable between the extended and standard duration treatment groups (RR 0.81, 95% CI 0.6-1.09, P = 0.16). Extended treatment also doubled the risk of major bleeding (RR 2.04, 95% CI 1.42-2.91, P < 0.001), without significantly affecting the risk of intracranial bleeding or bleeding-associated death. The cost of preventing one symptomatic deep vein thrombosis and non-fatal pulmonary embolism was found to be £24,972 (€27,969) and £45,148 (€50,566), respectively, which outweigh the direct cost of managing established venous thromboembolism as previously reported. CONCLUSIONS Extended duration thromboprophylaxis caused a reduction in the risk of venous thromboembolic events, but also a numerically comparable increase in major bleeding. Further trials are required in high-risk subpopulations who may derive mortality benefits from treatment. Only then could a change in current policy and practice be supported.

Medically Ill Patients with Moderate Renal Insufficiency Have More Thrombotic and Bleeding Events Than Those with Normal Renal Function: Insights from the Magellan and Mariner Trials of Extended Thrombprophylaxis

Background: Hospitalized medically ill patients are at risk for venous thromboembolism (VTE) for at least 45 days after discharge. This observation prompted the MAGELLAN and MARINER trials, which evaluated the efficacy and safety of rivaroxaban for extended thromboprophylaxis. In MAGELLAN, rivaroxaban (10 mg once daily) started in hospital and continued for 35 days was compared with a 10±4 day course of enoxaparin (40 mg once daily) followed by placebo. In MARINER, a 45-day course of rivaroxaban (10 mg once daily for those with creatinine clearance [CrCl] ≥50ml/min and 7.5 mg once daily for those with CrCl 30-<50ml/min) started at discharge was compared with placebo. The goals of this analysis were: (i) to compare rates of VTE (total or symptomatic) and VTE related death and major or clinically relevant bleeding in patients with moderate renal insufficiency (CrCl 30-<50ml/min) and those with normal renal function (CrCL ≥50ml/min), and (ii) to determine if revised criteria for selecting patients for extended thromboprophylaxis are associated with reduced bleeding, particularly in those with moderate renal insufficiency.Methods: We evaluated key efficacy and safety outcomes in patients with moderate renal insufficiency and those with normal renal function from days 1 to 35 in the MAGELLAN study and in a MARINER-like subpopulation of MAGELLAN using the criteria defined a priori for patient exclusion used in the MARINER study. These criteria were: 1) active gastroduodenal ulcer within 3 months of randomization or currently symptomatic, 2) any bleeding within 3 months prior to randomization or during index hospitalization prior to randomization, 3) active cancer at randomization, 4) medical history of severe bronchiectasis or pulmonary cavitation, or 5) dual antiplatelet therapy at baseline. These criteria excluded approximately 20% of subjects in MAGELLAN at high risk of bleeding.Results: The rates of VTE and VTE related death in both the rivaroxaban and enoxaparin/placebo groups were approximately twofold higher in subjects with renal impairment than in those with normal renal function, but the relative risk reduction with rivaroxaban treatment (10mg) compared with enoxaparin/placebo was similar in both renal function subgroups. Rates of major and clinically relevant bleeding in the rivaroxaban group were approximately 50% higher in patients with renal impairment compared with those with normal renal function. In the MARINER like subpopulation, the relative risk reductions for efficacy outcomes were maintained in both renal subgroups, whereas the increase in major bleeding with rivaroxaban was reduced by approximately 50%.Conclusions: Medically-ill patients with renal impairment given extended thromboprophylaxis are at increased risk for both VTE and major bleeding. Use of the MARINER criteria to exclude patients at increased risk of bleeding appears to reduce the major bleeding risk without compromising the efficacy of 10mg daily of rivaroxaban. [Display omitted] DisclosuresWeitz:Novartis: Honoraria; Servier: Honoraria; Janssen: Honoraria; Ionis: Consultancy, Honoraria; Daiichi-Sankyo: Honoraria; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Honoraria; Boehringer Ingelheim: Honoraria, Research Funding; Bayer: Honoraria. Raskob:Janssen: Consultancy; Bayer: Consultancy; BMS: Consultancy; Daiichi Sankyo: Consultancy; Boehringer Ingelheim: Consultancy; Eli Lilly: Consultancy; Pfizer: Consultancy, Honoraria; Novartis: Consultancy. Spyropoulos:Bayer: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Colorado Prevention Center - ATLAS: Consultancy; Portola: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Boehringer Ingelheim: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Cohen:Aspen: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Bayer: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Boehringer Ingelheim: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; BMS: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Daiichi Sankyo: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; GSK: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Speakers Bureau; Medscape: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Pfizer: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Portola: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; AbbVie: Consultancy; ACI Clinical: Consultancy; Boston Scientific: Consultancy; CLS Behring: Consultancy; GLG: Consultancy; Guidepoint Global: Consultancy; Leo Pharma: Consultancy; McKinsey: Consultancy; Sanofi: Consultancy; Navigant: Consultancy; ONO: Consultancy; Takeda: Consultancy; Temasek Capital: Consultancy; TRN: Consultancy. Spiro:Bayer: Employment, Equity Ownership. De Sanctis:Bayer: Employment, Equity Ownership. Xu:Janssen Research and Development LLC: Employment, Equity Ownership. Suh:Janssen Research and Development LLC: Employment, Equity Ownership. Lu:Janssen Research and Development LLC: Employment. Lipardi:Janssen Research and Development LLC: Employment, Equity Ownership. Barnathan:Janssen Research and Development LLC: Employment, Equity Ownership.

The safety and efficacy of full- versus reduced-dose betrixaban in the Acute Medically Ill VTE (Venous Thromboembolism) Prevention With Extended-Duration Betrixaban (APEX) trial

The APEX trial assessed the safety and efficacy of extended-duration thromboprophylaxis using betrixaban versus standard dosing of enoxaparin among hospitalized, acutely ill medical patients. The 80-mg betrixaban dose was halved to 40 mg among subjects with severe renal insufficiency and those receiving a concomitant strong P-glycoprotein inhibitor. This analysis assessed the pharmacokinetics, efficacy, and safety of full- (80 mg) and reduced-dose (40 mg) betrixaban relative to enoxaparin in the APEX trial. The median concentration of betrixaban among subjects administered the 80-mg dose was higher than that of the 40-mg dose (19 ng/mL vs 11 ng/mL, P<.001). In the primary analysis cohort 1 (d-dimer ≥2× upper limit of normal), the primary efficacy outcome (asymptomatic proximal deep vein thrombosis, symptomatic proximal or distal deep vein thrombosis, symptomatic nonfatal pulmonary embolism, or venous thromboembolism-related death) was significantly reduced among subjects treated with 80 mg of extended-duration betrixaban versus enoxaparin (6.27% [95/1516] vs 8.39% [130/1549], relative risk reduction=0.26 [0.04-0.42], P=.023), and similarly in the entire primary efficacy outcome population (4.87% [122/2506] vs 7.06% [181/2562], relative risk reduction=0.30 [0.13-0.44], P=.001). There was no difference in the primary outcome for subjects treated with 40 mg betrixaban vs enoxaparin across cohorts. In addition, there was no excess of major bleeding associated with either betrixaban dose compared with enoxaparin. The 80-mg betrixaban dose achieves higher plasma concentrations than the 40-mg dose and, in contrast to the 40-mg dose, is associated with improved efficacy across all cohorts relative to standard-dose enoxaparin without an excess risk of major bleeding in the management of medically ill subjects.

Apixaban Reduces Hospitalizations in Patients With Venous Thromboembolism: An Analysis of the Apixaban for the Initial Management of Pulmonary Embolism and Deep-Vein Thrombosis as First-Line Therapy (AMPLIFY) Trial.

BackgroundIn the Apixaban for the Initial Management of Pulmonary Embolism and Deep‐Vein Thrombosis as First‐Line Therapy (AMPLIFY) trial, apixaban was noninferior to enoxaparin/warfarin in preventing recurrent symptomatic venous thromboembolism (VTE) or venous thromboembolism–related death, with significantly less bleeding. This analysis evaluated the effects of apixaban versus enoxaparin/warfarin on all‐cause hospitalizations during AMPLIFY.Methods and ResultsOf the 5365 patients included, 2676 received apixaban and 2689 received enoxaparin/warfarin. All‐cause hospitalizations during the treatment period after the index event were captured using dedicated case report forms. Outcomes included all‐cause hospitalizations and time from randomization to first hospitalization. Patients were censored at death, loss to follow‐up, or end of study, whichever came first. Treatment effects were assessed using Cox proportional hazards regression models. During the treatment period after the index event, 343 patients were hospitalized at least once: 153 (5.72%) in the apixaban group and 190 (7.07%) in the enoxaparin/warfarin group. Compared with enoxaparin/warfarin, apixaban significantly reduced all‐cause hospitalizations (hazard ratio 0.804, 95% CI=0.650–0.995, P=0.045). All‐cause hospitalization rates within the first 30 days after the index event were 2.28% and 3.35% in the apixaban and enoxaparin/warfarin groups, respectively (hazard ratio 0.676, 95% CI=0.488–0.935, P=0.018). For all patients, the average per‐patient estimated mean length of hospital stay was also shorter with apixaban than enoxaparin/warfarin (0.57 days versus 1.01 days, P<0.0001).ConclusionsApixaban significantly reduced all‐cause hospitalizations versus enoxaparin/warfarin, and shortened the length of hospital stay in patients with acute venous thromboembolism.Clinical Trial RegistrationURL: https://Clinicaltrials.Gov/. Unique identifier: NCT00643201.

Extended venous thromboembolism prophylaxis after colorectal cancer surgery: the current state of the evidence.

There is level one evidence to support combined mechanical and chemical thromboprophylaxis for 7-10days after colorectal cancer surgery, but there remains a paucity of data to support extended prophylaxis after discharge. The aim of this clinical review is to summarise the currently available evidence for extended venous thromboprophylaxis after elective colorectal cancer surgery. Clinical review of the major clinical guidelines and published clinical data evaluating extended venous thromboprophylaxis after elective colorectal cancer surgery. Five major guideline recommendations are outlined, and the results of the five published randomised controlled trials are summarised and reviewed with a specific focus on the efficacy and cost-effectiveness of extended heparin prophylaxis to prevent clinically relevant post-operative venous thromboembolism (VTE) after colorectal cancer surgery. Extended VTE prophylaxis after colorectal cancer surgery reduces the incidence of asymptomatic screen detected deep venous thrombosis (DVT) only, with no demonstrable reduction in symptomatic DVT, symptomatic PE, or VTE related death. Evidence for cost-effectiveness is limited. As the incidence of clinical VTE is very low in this patient subgroup overall, future research should be focused on higher risk patient subgroups in whom a reduction in VTE may be both more demonstrable and clinically relevant.

Safety and efficacy of edoxaban in patients undergoing hip fracture surgery

IntroductionEdoxaban is an oral, direct, once-daily factor Xa inhibitor. This study evaluated the safety and efficacy of edoxaban compared to subcutaneous enoxaparin in Japanese patients undergoing hip fracture surgery. Materials and methodsIn this multicenter, randomized, open-label, active-comparator, phase 3 trial, 92 patients were randomized 2:1 to receive edoxaban 30mg once daily (n=62) or enoxaparin sodium (enoxaparin) 2000IU (equivalent to 20mg) twice daily (n=30) for 11 to 14days. The primary endpoints were the incidence of major or clinically relevant non-major (CRNM) bleeding and incidence of any bleeding events (major, CRNM, or minor bleeding). Secondary efficacy endpoints included the incidence of thromboembolic events, venous thromboembolism-related deaths, and all-cause deaths. Additional adverse events were recorded throughout the study. ResultsIn the edoxaban and enoxaparin treatment groups, the incidence of major or CRNM bleeding was 3.4% and 6.9%, respectively, while any bleeding event occurred in 25.4% and 17.2% of patients, respectively. The incidence of thromboembolic events was 6.5% in the edoxaban group and 3.7% in the enoxaparin group. All events were asymptomatic deep vein thrombosis. The incidence of adverse events was 72.9% and 82.8% in the edoxaban and enoxaparin groups, respectively. ConclusionsCompared to subcutaneous enoxaparin 2000IU twice daily, oral edoxaban 30mg once daily demonstrated similar safety and efficacy in the prevention of thromboembolic events in Japanese patients undergoing hip fracture surgery.Clinical trials registration number: NCT01181141.

SINGLE WHOLE-LEG COMPRESSION ULTRASOUND FOR EXCLUSION OF DEEP VEIN THROMBOSIS IN SYMPTOMATIC AMBULATORY PATIENTS: A PROSPECTIVE OBSERVATIONAL COHORT STUDY

Objectives & BackgroundInternational guidance has recently recommended serial proximal compression ultrasound (CUS) as first line imaging for suspected deep vein thrombosis (DVT). Limitations with this strategy include attrition, lack of...

Efficacy and Safety of New Oral Anticoagulants for Extended Treatment of Venous Thromboembolism: Systematic Review and Meta-Analyses of Randomized Controlled Trials

Currently available anticoagulants have limitations for long term treatment of venous thromboembolism (VTE). A meta-analysis was performed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of new oral anticoagulants (NOACs) for extended treatment of VTE. PubMed, Cochrane Library, EMBASE, Web of Science and CINAHL databases were searched from January 01, 2001 through February 28, 2013. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing NOACs (apixaban, rivaroxaban and dabigatran) with placebo or warfarin for extended treatment of VTE were selected. Primary efficacy outcome was recurrent VTE or VTE related death, and primary safety outcome was major bleeding. We used random-effects models. Four RCTs included 7,877 participants. NOACs significantly lowered the risk of recurrent VTE or VTE-related death compared to placebo/warfarin (odds ratio [OR] 0.25, 95 % confidence interval [CI] 0.07 to 0.86; number needed to treat [NNT] = 30). All-cause mortality was significantly lower in NOACs group compared to placebo (OR 0.38, 95 % CI 0.18 to 0.80). Risk of major bleeding was not different with NOACs compared to placebo/warfarin (OR 0.88, 95 % CI 0.27 to 2.91). However, NOACs caused significantly higher rate of major or clinically relevant bleeding compared to placebo (OR 2.69, 95 % CI 1.25 to 5.77; number needed to harm [NNH] = 39). All three NOACs (apixaban, rivaroxaban and dabigatran) individually significantly reduced recurrent VTE or VTE-related death compared to placebo. Major or clinically relevant bleeding was higher with dabigatran and rivaroxaban but not with apixaban. NOACs are effective for the extended treatment of venous thromboembolism and may reduce the risk of all-cause mortality. Dabigatran and rivaroxaban may cause more major or clinically relevant bleeding.

Two Doses of Apixaban for the Extended Treatment of Venous Thromboembolism

Abstract Abstract LBA-1 Background: Apixaban, an oral factor Xa inhibitor, may provide a simple, fixed-dose regimen for extended treatment of venous thromboembolism. Objectives: To compare the efficacy and safety of two doses of apixaban (2.5 or 5 mg twice daily) with placebo for the extended treatment of venous thromboembolism in patients who have completed 6 to 12 months of prior anticoagulant therapy. Methods: This randomized, double-blind study (ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00633893) compared two apixaban doses (2.5 or 5 mg twice daily) with placebo for 12 months in patients with venous thromboembolism who had completed 6–12 months of anticoagulation. The primary efficacy outcome was symptomatic recurrent venous thromboembolism or all-cause mortality. Secondary efficacy outcomes included (a) the composite of symptomatic venous thromboembolism or venous thromboembolism-related death, and (b) the composite of symptomatic venous thromboembolism, venous thromboembolism-related death, myocardial infarction, stroke, or cardiovascular-related death. The primary safety outcome was major bleeding; the secondary safety outcome was major and clinically relevant non-major bleeding. Results: The study included 2486 patients: 829, 840, and 815 randomized to placebo, apixaban 2.5 mg, and apixaban 5 mg, respectively. Rates of the primary efficacy outcome were 11.6% in the placebo group, compared with 3.8% and 4.2% in the apixaban 2.5 mg and 5 mg groups, respectively (absolute risk differences of 7.8% and 7.4%, respectively; 95% confidence intervals 5.3% to 10.3% and 4.8% to 10%, respectively; p&lt;0.001 for both comparisons). Other outcomes are detailed in the Table. Conclusions: Both doses of apixaban reduced the risk of symptomatic recurrent fatal or non-fatal venous thromboembolism by approximately 80% without increasing the rate of major bleeding. In addition, both apixaban doses reduced arterial thrombotic events. The lower apixaban dose may be preferred for extended treatment, because of the trend for less clinically relevant non-major bleeding. Disclosures: Agnelli: Bristol Myers Squibb: Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Daiichi Sankyo: Consultancy; Boehringer Ingelheim: Consultancy; Bayer Healthcare: Consultancy, Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Sanofi-Aventis: Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau. Buller:Bayer: Consultancy, Research Funding; Bristol Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Research Funding; Daiichi: Consultancy, Research Funding; GlaxoSmithKline: Consultancy, Research Funding; Pfizer: Consultancy, Research Funding; Sanofi-aventis: Consultancy, Research Funding; Roche: Consultancy, Research Funding; Isis: Consultancy, Research Funding; Thrombogenics: Consultancy, Research Funding. Cohen:Astellas: Consultancy, Research Funding; AstraZenica: Consultancy, Research Funding; Bayer: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Boheringer-Ingelheim: Consultancy, Research Funding; Bristol Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Daiichi: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; GlaxoSmithKline: Consultancy, Research Funding; Johnson &amp; Johnson: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Mitsubishi Pharma: Consultancy, Research Funding; Pfizer: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Portola: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Sanofi: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Schering Plough: Consultancy, Research Funding; Takeda: Consultancy, Research Funding. Curto:Pfizer: Employment. Gallus:Pfizer: Consultancy, Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees; Bristol Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees; Daiichi Sankyo: Consultancy; Bayer: Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees; boehringer-Ingelheim: Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees. Johnson:Pfizer: Employment. Porcari:Pfizer: Employment. Raskob:Pfizer: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Bristol Myer Squibb: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Bayer: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Daiichi Sankyo: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Johnson &amp; Johnson: Consultancy, Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Portola: Consultancy; Quintiles: Consultancy; National Blood Clot Alliance: Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau. Weitz:Pfizer: Consultancy, Honoraria; Bristol Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Honoraria.

Cluster Analysis Followed by Network Meta-Analysis to Compare Efficacy and Safety of Dabigatran, Rivaroxaban and Apixaban After Elective Total Knee and Hip Replacement Surgery

AbstractAbstract 3409The new oral anticoagulant (NOAC) regimens (dabigatran 150mg od (D150) and 220mg od (D220), rivaroxaban 10mg od (R10), and apixaban 2.5mg bid (A5) have shown equivalent or superior efficacy and safety vs enoxaparin regimens for prevention of venous thromboembolism (VTE) following elective total knee (TKR) or hip replacement (THR) surgery. Due to a lack of head to head trials a network meta-analysis (NMA) may give information on a comparison between NOACs.Studies comparing a NOAC with low-molecular-weight heparin for prevention of VTE following TKR and THR were included into the following set of analyses. First, a cluster analysis was performed to identify homogenous groups. Second, only homogeneous studies regarding each endpoint (VTE and VTE related death, major bleeding, and mortality) were included into a meta-analysis for each NOAC regimen. The odds ratio (OR) and 95% confidence interval (CI) were calculated for each NOAC program versus the comparator. Third, these OR and 95% CI were used for the NMA comparing the 4 treatment regimens.First, cluster analysis identified duration of treatment (10+5 and 32+5 days) as the only measure for obtaining homogeneity of trials for every NOAC on every endpoint at 10+5 and 32+5 days (p>0.05) except for A5 and VTE over 10+5 days (analysis not performed). Third, the results of the NMA of the OR and 95% CI of the 4 NOAC regimens over 10+5 days were: D150 and D220 not different on any endpoint; D150 and D220 inferior to R10 for VTE (p<0.01, p<0.001); A5 trend for less major bleeding than R10 (p=0.0546); no differences for the other indirect comparisons. Results for 32+5 days were: D150 and D220 not different on any endpoint; D150 and D220 inferior to R10 VTE (p<0.001, p=0.0015) and to A5 for VTE (p<0.001, p<0001); R10 and A5 not different on VTE. Comparisons of major bleeding and mortality were not different.The lack of a standard definition of VTE and bleeding outcomes between and sometimes within the studies of the NOACs substantially reduce the number of homogenous studies for inclusion into the present NMA using cluster analysis. The differences may help doctors and patients to decide the optimal treatment regimen for individual patient groups. Disclosures:No relevant conflicts of interest to declare.

Certoparin versus unfractionated heparin to prevent venous thromboembolic events in patients hospitalized because of heart failure: A subgroup analysis of the randomized, controlled CERTIFY study

Despite the elevated risk for developing venous thromboembolic events in patients with heart failure, there are no randomized, double-blind, controlled trial data on the comparison of low-molecular-weight heparin with unfractionated heparin (UFH) in this patient population. This was a subgroup analysis of the CERTIFY trial, which included 3,239 nonsurgical, acutely ill medical patients 70 years or older. Patients were randomized to receive 3,000-U anti-Xa certoparin once daily or 5,000-IU UFH 3 times a day. The analysis was performed on a subgroup of 542 patients diagnosed with heart failure at hospital admission. Patients with heart failure differed from patients without heart failure in that they were more likely using antiplatelets (67.2% vs 48.9%; P < .0001) and had a lower glomerular filtration rate (8.0% vs 5.5%; ≤ 30 mL/min per 1.73 m²; P = .0232). Thromboembolic risk was comparable except for a higher incidence of distal deep venous thrombosis (DVT) in patients with heart failure (10.80% vs 7.26%; P = .0144). Within the heart failure population, patient characteristics were comparable between randomized treatment groups. The incidence of the primary end point (proximal DVT, symptomatic nonfatal pulmonary embolism, and venous thromboembolism-related death combined) was numerically, slightly smaller with certoparin (3.78% vs 4.74% with UFH; odds ratio 0.79, 95% CI 0.32-1.94), and the incidence of major bleeding was 0.72% with certoparin versus 0.38% with UFH. Patients hospitalized for heart failure are at high risk for developing distal DVT and bleeding complications compared with acutely ill medical patients without heart failure. Within the heart failure population, the observed differences in prophylactic efficacy between 3,000-U anti-Xa certoparin once daily and 5,000-IU UFH 3 times a day were similar to those observed in the overall study population; this suggests that certoparin might be at least as effective as UFH also in this subgroup. There were no relevant differences in bleeding risk or frequency of adverse events.

A randomized, double-blind study of certoparin vs. unfractionated heparin to prevent venous thromboembolic events in acutely ill, non-surgical patients: CERTIFY Study.

In medically ill patients, no contemporary double-blind head-to-head evaluation of low molecular weight heparin vs. unfractionated heparin (UFH) for the prevention of venous thromboembolic events is available. To compare the efficacy and safety of certoparin with those of UFH. In this double-blind, randomized, controlled trial, acutely ill, non-surgical patients aged > or = 70 years were randomized to certoparin (3000 U of anti-factor Xa once daily) or to UFH (5000 IU t.i.d.). The primary endpoint was the composite of proximal deep vein thrombosis as assessed by bilateral compression ultrasonography, symptomatic non-fatal pulmonary embolism and venous thromboembolism-related death, and was assessed by a blinded central adjudication committee. Non-inferiority margins were set at 1.8 for the odds ratio (OR) and 3.45% for the absolute difference. Three thousand two hundred and thirty-nine patients aged 78.8 + or - 6.3 years were treated for 9.1 + or - 3.4 days. The incidence of the primary endpoint was 3.94% in the certoparin group and 4.52% in the UFH group, with a difference in proportions of - 0.59% [95% confidence interval (CI) -2.09 to 0.92; P < 0.0001 for non-inferiority], and an OR of 0.87 (95% CI 0.60-1.26; P = 0.0001 for non-inferiority). Major bleeding occurred in 0.43% of certoparin-treated patients and 0.62% of UFH-treated patients (OR 0.69; 95% CI 0.26-1.83). Any bleeding occurred at 3.20% in certoparin-treated patients vs. 4.58% in UFH-treated patients (OR 0.69; 95% CI 0.48-0.99; P < 0.05), and 5.73% of certoparin-treated patients and 6.63% of UFH-treated patients experienced serious adverse events. All-cause mortality was 1.27% in certoparin-treated patients and 1.36% in UFH-treated patients. In acutely ill, non-surgical elderly patients, thromboprophylaxis with certoparin (3000 U of anti-FXa once daily) was non-inferior to 5000 IU of UFH t.i.d., with a favorable safety profile.