Key result
This paper is a study protocol for a systematic review and network meta-analysis evaluating DOACs for cancer-associated thrombosis, and therefore contains no clinical results.
Why the study?
There is unresolved uncertainty regarding the exact hierarchy of risks and effectiveness among various DOAC analogues in patients with cancer associated thrombosis.
Do direct-acting oral anticoagulants (DOACs) reduce recurrent venous thromboembolism and major bleeding compared to standard of care in patients with cancer associated thrombosis?
Systematic Review
Do direct-acting oral anticoagulants (DOACs) reduce recurrent venous thromboembolism and major bleeding compared to standard of care in patients with cancer associated thrombosis?
This protocol outlines a planned network meta-analysis to determine the comparative effectiveness and safety of various DOAC analogues in patients with cancer-associated thrombosis.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
No clinical results from this protocol; leaves open comparative effectiveness and safety of DOACs in cancer-associated thrombosis pending network meta-analysis completion.
BACKGROUND: There has been a significant improvement in both our understanding and therapeutic choices available to clinicians for the management of cancer associated thrombosis (CAT). Even with the recent publication of a systematic review and landmark trials demonstrating the non-inferiority of DOACS-based anticoagulation strategy compared to the standard of care in patients with CAT, there is unresolved uncertainty regarding the exact hierarchy of risks and effectiveness of various DOAC analogues in these cohorts of patients. METHOD: We will carry out a network meta-analyses, utilizing a novel generalized pairwise methodology to generate direct and indirect comparisons between the various DOAC analogues. We will search the following databases for studies that satisfies pre-specified inclusions criteria; these include PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane library, Clinicaltrials.gov, conference abstracts among other sources. The primary efficacy and safety outcomes are recurrent VTE and major hemorrhagic events, respectively. Two reviewers will Search the databases independently with the view to identify studies that meet eligibility criteria. The methodological quality of the included studies will be determined using a recently validated risk of bias assessment tool. RESULTS: We expect that the result of this review will ascertain the hierarchy of risks and effectiveness of various DOAC analogues in patients with CAT. CONCLUSION: Results of this review will assist in informed decisions making regarding therapeutic guidelines of DOAC in CAT.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Danjuma et al. (2020) conducted a systematic review in Cancer associated thrombosis (CAT). Direct-acting oral anticoagulants (DOACs) vs. Usual standard of care (LMWH, VKA) or placebo was evaluated on Recurrence of VTE events and rate of major bleeding. This paper is a study protocol for a systematic review and network meta-analysis evaluating DOACs for cancer-associated thrombosis, and therefore contains no clinical results.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: