Key result
Direct oral anticoagulants hold promise for the treatment of cancer-associated venous thromboembolism, though additional studies are needed to establish them as the standard of care.
Why the study?
Do direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) improve efficacy and safety compared to low molecular weight heparins (LMWH) in the treatment of cancer-associated venous thromboembolism?
Population
Cancer patients with venous thromboembolism (VTE)
Comparison
Direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) vs Low molecular weight heparins (LMWH)
Design
Review
Authors
Loading...
DOACs may offer a convenient alternative to LMWH for cancer-associated VTE; leaves open need for definitive trials before changing practice.
Do direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) improve efficacy and safety compared to low molecular weight heparins (LMWH) in the treatment of cancer-associated venous thromboembolism?
DOACs are an attractive, oral alternative to LMWH for cancer-associated VTE, with emerging data supporting their potential as a standard-of-care treatment.
Al‐Samkari et al. (2018) conducted a review in Cancer-associated venous thromboembolism. Direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) vs. Low molecular weight heparins (LMWH) was evaluated. Direct oral anticoagulants hold promise for the treatment of cancer-associated venous thromboembolism, though additional studies are needed to establish them as the standard of care.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: