Key result
In patients with cancer-associated thrombosis, rivaroxaban exposure was associated with low rates of major bleeding (1.4%), recurrent venous thromboembolism (3.4%), and all-cause mortality (4.8%).
Why the study?
Does rivaroxaban provide safe and effective treatment for deep vein thrombosis in patients with cancer compared to standard anticoagulation?
Observational (n=587)
Does rivaroxaban provide safe and effective treatment for deep vein thrombosis in patients with cancer compared to standard anticoagulation?
In real-world practice, anticoagulant choice for cancer-associated thrombosis varies by cancer type, and patients selected for rivaroxaban therapy demonstrated low rates of bleeding, recurrent VTE, and mortality.
May support rivaroxaban in cancer-associated thrombosis; hypothesis-generating and requires RCT confirmation.
Background The noninterventional XALIA study compared rivaroxaban with standard anticoagulation for deep vein thrombosis treatment. This substudy describes the demographics, clinical characteristics, and outcomes of the patients with cancer. Methods Therapy type, dose, and duration were at the physician's discretion. The cohorts identified were rivaroxaban (rivaroxaban alone or after heparin or fondaparinux for ≤48 hours); early switchers (rivaroxaban after heparin or fondaparinux for >48 hours to 14 days and/or a vitamin K antagonist [VKA] for 1–14 days); standard anticoagulation (heparin or fondaparinux and a VKA); low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) alone; and miscellaneous (other heparins, fondaparinux alone, VKA alone). Primary outcomes were major bleeding, recurrent venous thromboembolism, and all-cause mortality. Results In XALIA, 587 patients (11.4% of the XALIA cohort) were with cancer: 146 (24.9%) rivaroxaban, 30 (5.1%) early switchers, 141 (24.0%) standard anticoagulation, 223 (38.0%) LMWH, and 47 (8.0%) miscellaneous. Patients with gastrointestinal or lung cancer more commonly received LMWH than rivaroxaban; the opposite occurred in patients with breast or genitourinary cancer. Rates of primary outcome in the rivaroxaban group were as follows: major bleeding, 1.4% (n = 2); recurrent venous thromboembolism, 3.4% (n = 5); and all-cause mortality, 4.8% (n = 7). Conclusion In XALIA, physicians treated cancer-associated thrombosis with various anticoagulant regimens, most commonly LMWH. In addition, the choice of anticoagulant varied with cancer type. In rivaroxaban-treated patients, rates for the primary outcomes were low, suggesting that patients administered rivaroxaban were a good prognosis group.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Ageno et al. (2017) conducted an observational in cancer-associated deep vein thrombosis (n=587). Rivaroxaban vs. Standard anticoagulation, low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH), and other regimens was evaluated on major bleeding, recurrent venous thromboembolism, and all-cause mortality. In patients with cancer-associated thrombosis, rivaroxaban exposure was associated with low rates of major bleeding (1.4%), recurrent venous thromboembolism (3.4%), and all-cause mortality (4.8%).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: