Key result
Reduced lead-in dosing of direct oral anticoagulants for VTE resulted in similar rates of recurrent VTE compared to full lead-in dosing (3% vs 2%; P=1.0).
Why the study?
Guidelines do not currently address whether the full direct oral anticoagulant lead-in dosing duration is necessary after receiving parenteral anticoagulation for venous thromboembolism.
Does reduced lead-in dosing duration of apixaban or rivaroxaban prevent VTE recurrence compared to full lead-in dosing in hospitalized patients with newly diagnosed VTE?
Cohort (n=192)
No
Does reduced lead-in dosing duration of apixaban or rivaroxaban prevent VTE recurrence compared to full lead-in dosing in hospitalized patients with newly diagnosed VTE?
Absolute Event Rate: 3% vs 2%
p-value: p=1.0
Reduced lead-in dosing of direct oral anticoagulants for VTE appears to have similar efficacy to full lead-in dosing, though higher bleeding rates in the reduced group likely reflect confounding by indication in less stable patients.
Various lead-in dosing strategies have been used in clinical practice for venous thromboembolism (VTE), and guidelines do not currently address if the full lead-in dosing duration is necessary after receiving parenteral anticoagulation. This study aims to identify whether full lead-in dosing duration surrounding parenteral anticoagulation affects thrombotic and bleeding outcomes. A single-center, retrospective cohort study was conducted of hospitalized patients diagnosed with VTE and treated with apixaban or rivaroxaban. Patients were grouped depending on duration of lead-in dosing, with the full lead-in dosing group considered as the appropriate duration of the direct oral anticoagulant. The primary outcome was the recurrence of VTE within the index admission to 6 months. Secondary outcomes included major bleeding, clinically relevant minor bleeding, and mortality. Ninety-three patients were prescribed full lead-in dosing, while 99 patients received reduced lead-in dosing. The primary outcome of recurrent VTE was similar between the reduced lead-in group compared to the full lead-in group (3% vs 2%; P = 1.0). Major bleeding within the index admission was significantly higher in the reduced lead-in group: 11 versus 2 (P = .02). There were no significant differences in other secondary outcomes. Full lead-in dosing compared to reduced lead-in dosing duration for VTE had similar rates of thrombotic and mortality events. The higher rate of major bleeding in the reduced lead-in dosing group likely reflects the prescribing practices in less stable patients. This study provides evidence to support reduced lead-in dosing duration in high-risk patients without compromising efficacy outcomes.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Cho et al. (2023) conducted a cohort in Venous thromboembolism (n=192). Reduced lead-in dosing of direct oral anticoagulants vs. Full lead-in dosing was evaluated on Recurrence of VTE within the index admission to 6 months (p=1.0). Reduced lead-in dosing of direct oral anticoagulants for VTE resulted in similar rates of recurrent VTE compared to full lead-in dosing (3% vs 2%; P=1.0).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: