Brijesh Patel, C. Bianco, D. Harris, E. Michos, M. Saleem, Mohammad Osman, S. Farid, Stephen V Liu
{"title":"直接口服抗凝剂治疗与癌症相关的静脉血栓栓塞:系统回顾和荟萃分析","authors":"Brijesh Patel, C. Bianco, D. Harris, E. Michos, M. Saleem, Mohammad Osman, S. Farid, Stephen V Liu","doi":"10.31487/j.cor.2020.06.14","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"There is uncertainty about the choice of anticoagulation therapy in patients with malignancy and venous\nthromboembolism (VTE). While low-molecular weight heparin (LMWH) remains the current standard,\ndirect oral anticoagulants (DOACs) have emerged as an appealing alternative option. The primary objective\nof this analysis was to compare the efficacy and safety of DOACs versus LMWH in patients with\nmalignancy and VTE. The secondary objective was to compare the safety and efficacy of the different\nDOACs. An online search of PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library and ClinicalTrials.gov from\ninception until April 2020 was conducted. Four RCTs encompassing 2,907 patients, (50.5% men and mean\nage of 65.7 ± 10.5) were selected. At a mean follow up of 12 months, moderate certainty evidence showed\nno differences between DOAC and LMWH in VTE recurrence (HR, 0.54 [CI 0.23 to 1.28], I2 = 56%,\np=0.23), in major bleeding (HR, 1.38 [CI 0.45 to 4.22], I2 = 33%, p=0.21) or clinically relevant non-major\nbleeding (CRNMB) (HR, 1.77 [CI 0.49 to 6.40], I2 = 73.9%, p=0.087). There was no difference between\nthe DOACs when compared to each other. In conclusion, DOACs are an acceptable alternative to LMWHs\nfor the treatment of VTE in patients with malignancy.\n","PeriodicalId":10487,"journal":{"name":"Clinical Oncology and Research","volume":"42 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-06-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"3","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Direct Oral Anticoagulants for Treatment of Venous Thromboembolism Associated with Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis\",\"authors\":\"Brijesh Patel, C. Bianco, D. Harris, E. Michos, M. Saleem, Mohammad Osman, S. Farid, Stephen V Liu\",\"doi\":\"10.31487/j.cor.2020.06.14\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"There is uncertainty about the choice of anticoagulation therapy in patients with malignancy and venous\\nthromboembolism (VTE). While low-molecular weight heparin (LMWH) remains the current standard,\\ndirect oral anticoagulants (DOACs) have emerged as an appealing alternative option. The primary objective\\nof this analysis was to compare the efficacy and safety of DOACs versus LMWH in patients with\\nmalignancy and VTE. The secondary objective was to compare the safety and efficacy of the different\\nDOACs. An online search of PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library and ClinicalTrials.gov from\\ninception until April 2020 was conducted. Four RCTs encompassing 2,907 patients, (50.5% men and mean\\nage of 65.7 ± 10.5) were selected. At a mean follow up of 12 months, moderate certainty evidence showed\\nno differences between DOAC and LMWH in VTE recurrence (HR, 0.54 [CI 0.23 to 1.28], I2 = 56%,\\np=0.23), in major bleeding (HR, 1.38 [CI 0.45 to 4.22], I2 = 33%, p=0.21) or clinically relevant non-major\\nbleeding (CRNMB) (HR, 1.77 [CI 0.49 to 6.40], I2 = 73.9%, p=0.087). There was no difference between\\nthe DOACs when compared to each other. In conclusion, DOACs are an acceptable alternative to LMWHs\\nfor the treatment of VTE in patients with malignancy.\\n\",\"PeriodicalId\":10487,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Clinical Oncology and Research\",\"volume\":\"42 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-06-18\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"3\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Clinical Oncology and Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.31487/j.cor.2020.06.14\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clinical Oncology and Research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.31487/j.cor.2020.06.14","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
Direct Oral Anticoagulants for Treatment of Venous Thromboembolism Associated with Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
There is uncertainty about the choice of anticoagulation therapy in patients with malignancy and venous
thromboembolism (VTE). While low-molecular weight heparin (LMWH) remains the current standard,
direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) have emerged as an appealing alternative option. The primary objective
of this analysis was to compare the efficacy and safety of DOACs versus LMWH in patients with
malignancy and VTE. The secondary objective was to compare the safety and efficacy of the different
DOACs. An online search of PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library and ClinicalTrials.gov from
inception until April 2020 was conducted. Four RCTs encompassing 2,907 patients, (50.5% men and mean
age of 65.7 ± 10.5) were selected. At a mean follow up of 12 months, moderate certainty evidence showed
no differences between DOAC and LMWH in VTE recurrence (HR, 0.54 [CI 0.23 to 1.28], I2 = 56%,
p=0.23), in major bleeding (HR, 1.38 [CI 0.45 to 4.22], I2 = 33%, p=0.21) or clinically relevant non-major
bleeding (CRNMB) (HR, 1.77 [CI 0.49 to 6.40], I2 = 73.9%, p=0.087). There was no difference between
the DOACs when compared to each other. In conclusion, DOACs are an acceptable alternative to LMWHs
for the treatment of VTE in patients with malignancy.