Key result
DOACs show no increased thrombosis or bleeding risk over alternative anticoagulants alongside antiandrogens.
Why the study?
Does concurrent use of DOACs with prostate cancer agents (enzalutamide, apalutamide, or abiraterone) increase the risk of thrombosis or bleeding compared to non-DOAC anticoagulants in patients with prostate cancer?
Cohort (n=2,997)
Yes
Does concurrent use of DOACs with prostate cancer agents (enzalutamide, apalutamide, or abiraterone) increase the risk of thrombosis or bleeding compared to non-DOAC anticoagulants in patients with prostate cancer?
Concurrent use of DOACs with potentially interacting prostate cancer therapies (enzalutamide, apalutamide, abiraterone) did not lead to clinically meaningful increases in thrombosis or bleeding risks compared with non-DOAC anticoagulants.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
No increased thrombosis or bleeding risk observed with concurrent DOACs and these agents; hypothesis-generating and should not yet change practice.
BACKGROUND: Pharmacokinetic studies suggest that specific prostate cancer therapies may alter the metabolism of direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs), leading to elevated risks of thrombosis or bleeding. METHODS: To assess the risk of thrombosis or bleeding, population-based, retrospective, parallel analyses were conducted in Ontario and Alberta, Canada, among adults patients with prostate cancer who were prescribed a DOAC and a potentially interacting androgen receptor pathway inhibitor (including enzalutamide, apalutamide, or abiraterone) compared with non-DOACs between 2012 and 2023. Analyses were stratified based on a DOAC-inducer cohort (enzalutamide or apalutamide, which might increase the risk of thrombosis) and a DOAC-inhibitor cohort (abiraterone, which might increase the risk of bleeding). Overlap weighted Cox proportional hazard models accounting for 37 covariates were performed independently in each jurisdiction and were pooled using random-effects meta-analysis. RESULTS: In total, 2997 individuals were included (2107 from Ontario and 890 from Alberta). In patients who received enzalutamide or apalutamide, there was no increased risk of all thrombosis in the DOAC groups compared with the non-DOAC groups (pooled hazard ratio, 0.83; 95% confidence interval, 0.36-1.93). In patients who received abiraterone, no significant differences were observed in any bleeding events comparing the DOAC and non-DOAC groups (pooled hazard ratio, 1.16; 95% confidence interval, 0.10-13.99). The results were consistent in multiple sensitivity analyses. CONCLUSIONS: The concurrent use of enzalutamide, apalutamide, or abiraterone with DOACs did not contribute to clinically meaningful changes in the risk of thrombosis or bleeding in individuals with prostate cancer.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Wang et al. (2026) conducted a cohort in Prostate cancer requiring anticoagulation (n=2,997). Direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) vs. Non-DOACs (LMWH or warfarin) was evaluated on All thrombosis events (arterial and venous) in the inducer cohort (enzalutamide or apalutamide) (HR 0.83, 95% CI 0.36-1.93). Concurrent use of DOACs with enzalutamide, apalutamide, or abiraterone did not significantly increase the risk of thrombosis (pooled HR 0.83) or bleeding compared to non-DOACs in men with prostate cancer.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: