Key result
DOACs show no major bleeding or VTE benefit over LMWHs in GI cancer but increase CRNMB ~76%.
Why the study?
Do DOACs compared to LMWHs increase bleeding or prevent recurrent VTE in patients with gastrointestinal cancer-associated thrombosis?
Meta-Analysis (n=2,226)
Do DOACs compared to LMWHs increase bleeding or prevent recurrent VTE in patients with gastrointestinal cancer-associated thrombosis?
Relative Risk: 1.31 (95% CI 0.84–2.04)
p-value: p=0.23
In patients with gastrointestinal cancer-associated thrombosis, DOACs provide similar efficacy for preventing recurrent VTE compared to LMWHs but significantly increase the risk of clinically relevant nonmajor bleeding.
DOACs increase CRNMB risk without raising major bleeding in GI cancer VTE; supports LMWH preference while confirming comparable recurrent VTE prevention.
Background The association between gastrointestinal (GI) cancer and a high incidence of venous thromboembolism (VTE) is well known. Previous randomized controlled studies demonstrated that direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) effectively treat cancer-associated thrombosis (CAT). However, some DOACs appeared to increase the risk of bleeding, particularly in patients with GI malignancies. Therefore, the current systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted to evaluate the safety and efficacy of DOACs in GI cancer-associated thrombosis. Methods Two investigators individually reviewed all studies that compared DOACs and low-molecular-weight heparins (LMWHs) in GI cancer-associated thrombosis and were published in MEDLINE and EMBASE before February 2022. The effect estimates and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) from each eligible study were combined using the Mantel–Haenszel method. Results A total of 2226 patients were included in the meta-analysis. The rates of major bleeding in the DOAC and LMWH groups were not significantly different (relative risk [RR]: 1.31; 95% CI: 0.84–2.04; P = 0.23; I 2 = 41%). However, the rate of clinically relevant nonmajor bleeding (CRNMB) was significantly higher in the DOAC group (RR: 1.76; 95% CI: 1.24–2.52; P = 0.002; I 2 = 8%). The risks of recurrent VTE in the groups did not significantly differ (RR: 0.72; 95% CI: 0.49–1.04; P = 0.08; I 2 = 0%). Conclusions The current data suggest that treatment of GI cancer-associated thrombosis with DOACs significantly increases the risk of CRNMB. However, the risk of major bleeding was not significantly different. The efficacy of DOACs for preventing recurrent VTE in GI cancer was comparable to that of LMWHs. Trial registration INPLASY202180113 .
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Rungjirajittranon et al. (2022) conducted a meta-analysis in Gastrointestinal cancer-associated venous thromboembolism (n=2,226). Direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) vs. Low-molecular-weight heparins (LMWHs) was evaluated on Major bleeding (RR 1.31, 95% CI 0.84-2.04, p=0.23). Treatment with DOACs for gastrointestinal cancer-associated thrombosis did not significantly alter major bleeding (RR 1.31) or recurrent VTE (RR 0.72) compared to LMWHs, but increased CRNMB (RR 1.76).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: