Why the study?
The study was conducted to evaluate the efficacy and safety of rivaroxaban for treating cancer-associated venous thromboembolism.
Does rivaroxaban safely and effectively treat venous thromboembolism in patients with active cancer?
Does rivaroxaban safely and effectively treat venous thromboembolism in patients with active cancer?
Rivaroxaban appears to be a safe and effective option for treating cancer-associated VTE, demonstrating low rates of recurrence and major bleeding in a real-world cohort.
Supports rivaroxaban consideration in cancer VTE; leaves open need for RCT confirmation.
ABSTRCT: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of rivaroxaban for the treatment of cancer-associated venous thromboembolism (VTE).We performed a retrospective chart review of cancer patients with a pulmonary embolism, deep vein thrombosis, or both. Our analysis included all patients who received rivaroxaban from March 2013 to June 2016 at the Hemato-Oncology Division at the Pusan National University Hospital in Korea.Preliminary results identified 123 patients with a history of cancer that were treated with rivaroxaban. The average duration of rivaroxaban therapy was 95.25 days. While 35 patients had resolved VTE after the initiation of rivaroxaban, only one patient had it recur on rivaroxaban treatment. Major bleeding was observed in 6 (4.9%) patients and minor bleeding in 12 (9.8%) patients. The majority of bleeding events occurred spontaneously and most incidences of bleeding could be treated conservatively. Recurrence and major bleeding events on rivaroxaban were relatively low despite the fact that many patients had metastatic disease. Among 52 patient deaths (42.3%), none were due to VTE or bleeding complications; the cause of death in the majority of cases was cancer progression.Rivaroxaban is effective and safe for the treatment of cancer-associated VTE.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Oh et al. (2019) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: