Direct oral anticoagulants in antiphospholipid syndrome with venous thromboembolism: Impact of the European Medicines Agency guidance.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Fazili M
PROVIDER: S-EPMC6971326 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Jan
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
Direct oral anticoagulants in antiphospholipid syndrome with venous thromboembolism: Impact of the European Medicines Agency guidance.
Fazili Masarret M Stevens Scott M SM Woller Scott C SC
Research and practice in thrombosis and haemostasis 20191212 1
Similar Datasets
Project description:BackgroundThe efficacy and safety of direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) versus warfarin in patients with antiphospholipid syndrome-associated venous thromboembolism (APS-VTE) remain uncertain. We aimed to evaluate efficacy and safety of DOACs in patients with APS-VTE.MethodsUsing the Korean Health Insurance Review and Assessment Service database, we retrospectively identified all APS-VTE cases. We examined the VTE recurrence, arterial thrombosis, death and bleeding in patients who received DOACs compared with warfarin for therapeutic anticoagulation.ResultsOf all the VTE cases (n = 84,916) detected between 2014 and 2018, patients with APS-VTE (n = 410) accounted for 0.48%. Most patients with APS-VTE (73%) were aged < 60 years. The recurrent VTE occurred in 8 of 209 patients (3.8%) who received DOACs and in 7 of 201 (3.5%) who received warfarin (relative risk [RR], 1.099; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.41-2.98; P = 1.000). The arterial thrombosis (ATE) occurred in 8 of 209 patients (3.8%) who received DOAC and in 20 of 201 (10%) who received warfarin (RR, 0.385; 95% CI, 0.17-0.85; P = 0.024). The composite outcomes of VTE recurrence, ATE, or mortality were significantly lower in patients (9.1%) on DOAC than in those (16.3%) on warfarin (RR, 0.537; 95% CI, 0.32-0.91; P = 0.028). The bleeding outcome occurred in 7 of 209 (3.4%) patients in the DOACs group and 7 of 201 (3.5%) patients in the warfarin group (RR, 0.96; 95% CI, 0.34-2.69; P = 0.840).ConclusionIn patients with APS-VTE, DOACs group showed comparable rates of recurrent VTE, bleeding, and deaths, but a significantly lower incidence of ATE and composite outcomes compared with the warfarin group in Korea.
| S-EPMC11419963 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC4090339 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundDirect oral anticoagulants for the treatment of venous thromboembolism are supported by robust clinical trial evidence. Despite published guidance, general practitioners are faced with increasingly complex decisions and implementation remains sub-optimal in certain real-world scenarios.MethodsA two stage formal consensus exercise was performed to formulate consensus statements and a summary guide, facilitating optimal management of direct oral anticoagulants in venous thromboembolism patients by generalist physicians across Europe. An online questionnaire distributed to a broad panel (Phase 1), followed by a virtual panel discussion by an expert group (Phase 2) were conducted. Phase 1 statements covered nine management domains, and were developed via a literature review and expert steering committee. Participants rated statements by their level of agreement. Phase 1 responses were collated and analysed prior to discussion and iterative refinement in Phase 2.ResultsIn total 56 participants from across Europe responded to Phase 1. The majority had experience working as general practitioners. Consensus indicated that direct oral anticoagulants are the treatment of choice for managing patients with venous thromboembolism, at initiation and for extended treatment, with a review at three to six months to re-assess treatment effect and risk profile. Direct oral anticoagulant choice should be based on individual patient factors and include shared treatment choice between clinicians and patients; the only sub-group of patients requiring specific guidance are those with cancer.ConclusionResults demonstrate an appreciation of best practices, but highlight challenges in clinical practice. The patient pathway and consensus recommendations provided, aim to highlight key considerations for general practice decision making, and aid optimal venous thromboembolism treatment.
| S-EPMC10946109 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Treatment options for patients with venous thromboembolism (VTE) include warfarin and direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs). Although DOACs are easier to administer than warfarin and do not require routine laboratory monitoring, few studies have directly assessed whether patients are more satisfied with DOACs. We surveyed adults from two large integrated health systems taking DOACs or warfarin for incident VTE occurring between January 1, 2015 and June 30, 2018. Treatment satisfaction was assessed using the validated Anti-Clot Treatment Scale (ACTS), divided into the ACTS Burdens and ACTS Benefits scores; higher scores indicate greater satisfaction. Mean treatment satisfaction was compared using multivariable linear regression, adjusting for patient demographic and clinical characteristics. The effect size of the difference in means was calculated using a Cohen's d (0.20 is considered a small effect and ≥ 0.80 is considered large). We surveyed 2217 patients, 969 taking DOACs and 1248 taking warfarin at the time of survey. Thirty-one point five percent of the cohort was aged ≥ 75 years and 43.1% were women. DOAC users were on average more satisfied with anticoagulant treatment, with higher adjusted mean ACTS Burdens (50.18 v. 48.01, p < 0.0001) and ACTS Benefits scores (10.21 v. 9.84, p = 0.046) for DOACs vs. warfarin, respectively. The magnitude of the difference was small (Cohen's d of 0.29 for ACTS Burdens and 0.12 for ACTS Benefits). Patients taking DOACs for venous thromboembolism were on average more satisfied with anticoagulant treatment than were warfarin users, although the magnitude of the difference was small.
| S-EPMC8605968 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background: Direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) are increasingly prescribed for the treatment of venous thromboembolism (VTE). However, little is known regarding pharmacists' practice patterns and preferences in clinical areas of contention, such as initiation dosing, obesity, and renal impairment. Objective: To determine pharmacist trends in practice regarding DOACs for the treatment of VTE overall and within areas of clinical controversy. Methods: An electronic survey was distributed to pharmacists in the United States through national and state pharmacy organizations. Responses were collected for 30 days. Results: One hundred fifty-three complete responses were submitted. The majority of pharmacists preferred apixaban (90.2%) for the oral treatment of venous thromboembolism. When initiating apixaban or rivaroxaban for a new VTE, 76% and 64% of pharmacists surveyed, respectively, state the duration of the initiation dose phases are reduced if the patient received parenteral anticoagulation. Fifty-eight percent of pharmacists used body mass index to evaluate the appropriateness of DOACs in obese patients whereas 42% used total body weight. Preference for rivaroxaban (31.4%) was higher in this population compared to the global population (10%). Apixaban was preferred for patients with renal impairment (92.2%). However, as creatinine clearance as calculated by the Cockcroft-Gault equation (CrCl) reduced to ≤15 milliliters/minute (mL/min), preference for warfarin increased (36%). Conclusion: This national survey of pharmacists demonstrated an overall preference for apixaban and significant variability in practice patterns regarding DOACs for patients with new VTE, patients with obesity, and patients with renal impairment. Further research is warranted to evaluate the efficacy and safety of DOAC initiation dosing phase modifications. Prospective evaluations of DOACs in obese and renal dysfunction populations would confirm the safety and efficacy of DOACs in these populations.
| S-EPMC9986580 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background The efficacy and safety of the direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) in fragile patients (age ≥ 75 years and/or creatinine clearance levels ≤ 50 mL/min and/or body weight ≤ 50kg) with venous thromboembolism (VTE) has not been evaluated. Methods We used the RIETE database to compare the rates of the composite of VTE recurrences or major bleeding during anticoagulation in fragile patients with VTE, according to the use of DOACs or standard anticoagulant therapy. Results From January 2013 to April 2018, 24,701 patients were recruited. Of these, 10,054 (41%) were fragile. Initially, 473 fragile patients (4.7%) received DOACs and 8,577 (85%) low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH). For long-term therapy, 1,298 patients (13%) received DOACs and 5,038 (50%) vitamin K antagonists (VKAs). Overall, 95 patients developed VTE recurrences and 262 had major bleeding. Patients initially receiving DOACs had a lower rate of the composite outcome (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.32; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.08-0.88) than those on LMWH. Patients receiving DOACs for long-term therapy had a nonsignificantly lower rate of the composite outcome (HR: 0.70; 95% CI: 0.46-1.03) than those on VKAs. On multivariable analysis, patients initially receiving DOACs had a nonsignificantly lower risk for the composite outcome (HR: 0.36; 95% CI: 0.11-1.15) than those on LMWH, while those receiving DOACs for long-term therapy had a significantly lower risk (HR: 0.61; 95% CI: 0.41-0.92) than those on VKAs. Conclusions Our data suggest that the use of DOACs may be more effective and safe than standard therapy in fragile patients with VTE, a subgroup of patients where the risk for bleeding is particularly high.
| S-EPMC6524917 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Anticoagulation for cancer-associated venous thromboembolism (VTE) can be challenging due to complications-including bleeding and potential drug-drug interactions with chemotherapy-associated with vitamin K antagonists and inconvenience of low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH). Direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) could partially overcome these issues, but until recently there were no large clinical trials assessing their efficacy and safety in cancer patients. This review summarizes clinical treatment guidelines, prior clinical and real-world evidence for anticoagulant choice, recent clinical trials assessing DOACs for cancer-associated VTE (i.e. Hokusai-VTE Cancer, SELECT-D, CARAVAGGIO, and ADAM VTE), and special considerations for DOAC use. Based on established data, clinical guidelines recommend patients with cancer-associated VTE receive LMWH treatment of at least 3-6 months. Nevertheless, LMWH is underused and associated with poor compliance and persistence in these patients relative to oral anticoagulants. Clinical data supporting DOAC use in cancer patients are becoming available. In Hokusai-VTE Cancer, edoxaban was noninferior to dalteparin for the composite of recurrent VTE and major bleeding (12.8% versus 13.5%), with numerically lower recurrent VTE (7.9% versus 11.3%) and significantly higher major bleeding (6.9% versus 4.0%); only patients with gastrointestinal cancer had significantly higher risk of bleeding with edoxaban. In SELECT-D, rivaroxaban had numerically lower VTE recurrence (4% versus 11%), comparable major bleeding (6% versus 4%), and numerically higher clinically relevant nonmajor bleeding (13% versus 4%) versus dalteparin. Most bleeding events were gastrointestinal or urologic; patients with esophageal/gastroesophageal cancer had higher rates of major bleeding with rivaroxaban (36% versus 11%). For comparison of apixaban versus dalteparin, CARAVAGGIO is ongoing, and preliminary results from ADAM VTE are favorable. This review concludes that DOACs appear to be reasonable alternatives to LMWH for treatment of cancer-associated VTE. In patients with gastrointestinal cancer, DOAC use should be considered on a case-by-case basis with consideration of the relative risks and benefits.
| S-EPMC6594460 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is a common cause of morbidity and mortality in patients with cancer. Compared with the general population, cancer patients with VTE have higher rates of both VTE recurrence and bleeding. While low molecular weight heparin (LMWH) has been the mainstay of treatment for cancer-associated VTE for over a decade, direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) have recently emerged as a new therapeutic option due to their ease of administration and because they do not require laboratory monitoring. Several large randomized clinical trials have been performed or are ongoing at the time of writing, comparing DOACs with LMWH in this population. Three of these trials have thus far been published and suggest that DOACs are a reasonable alternative to LMWH for management of cancer-associated VTE. Despite the advantages offered by DOACs, these agents may not be appropriate for certain patient groups owing to increased risk of bleeding, organ compromise, extremes of weight, and other issues. Finally, data are emerging suggesting that DOACs may be useful for primary thromboprophylaxis in cancer patients in conjunction with validated risk assessment scores. In this evidence-based review, data for the use of DOACs to treat cancer-associated VTE will be examined, focusing on efficacy, safety, and timing of treatment. Guidance on choosing the optimal anticoagulant for a given patient is also offered.
| S-EPMC6593743 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Data on specific studies in cancer patients using direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) for the prevention and treatment of venous thromboembolism (VTE) are still scarce. For preventing VTE with DOACs, current experience is still very limited, so definite conclusions cannot yet be drawn. However, DOACs have so far been compared with vitamin K antagonists (VKAs) in patients with acute VTE in 5 studies, and several hundreds of patients included in these studies had either active cancer, a history of cancer, or a new occurrence of cancer during the course of disease. Meta-analyses have revealed an at least similar efficacy and safety profile of DOACs compared with VKAs. A number of studies of cancer patients investigating primary prevention and treatment are underway, and some will be finalized soon. Nevertheless, we might need further trials, specifically on the prevention of VTE in patients who are at particularly high risk. This article also includes a personal opinion on the use of DOACs in cancer patients. In conclusion, the currently available data show that DOACs might be safe and efficacious in the treatment of VTE, however, this has yet to be proven in specifically designed trials in patients with cancer. With regard to prevention, thus far, even less data exist, and the outcomes of the ongoing studies have to be evaluated before DOACs may be used for primary prevention.
| S-EPMC6142595 | biostudies-literature
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.
| S-EPMC10427945 | biostudies-literature