Key result
DOACs offer a better risk-benefit profile versus conventional anticoagulation for cancer-associated thrombosis per expert consensus.
Why the study?
Cancer-associated thrombosis poses a substantial burden in Vietnam, complicated by high bleeding and thrombosis risks, low treatment motivation, and low awareness among local physicians.
This expert consensus review provides tailored recommendations for managing cancer-associated thrombosis in Vietnam, emphasizing the role of direct oral anticoagulants.
Low physician awareness complicates CAT management in Vietnam; leaves open optimal DOAC strategies pending local prospective data.
Cancer-associated thrombosis (CAT) is a substantial burden and an emerging topic of great interest in Vietnam. The management of CAT is complex, with several challenges, including a high risk of bleeding and thrombosis, treatment burden, and low treatment motivation due to the short life expectancy of patients. Another challenge in CAT management is the low awareness among local physicians regarding CAT. The introduction of direct oral anticoagulants, which offer a better risk–benefit profile compared to conventional anticoagulation, has brought about a revolution in CAT management. To address these challenges, a group of 14 experts, including cardiologists and oncologists, convened in January 2023 to discuss and provide comprehensive information on CAT management in Vietnam, along with recommendations to optimize clinical outcomes. This review will encompass the available evidence in the medical literature and the expert opinions derived from the meeting.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Hoang et al. (2024) conducted a review in Cancer-associated thrombosis. Direct oral anticoagulants vs. Conventional anticoagulation was evaluated. Direct oral anticoagulants offer a better risk-benefit profile compared to conventional anticoagulation for the management of cancer-associated thrombosis in Vietnam based on expert consensus.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: