Key result
Edoxaban yields similar VTE recurrence rates compared to VKAs in gynecological cancer.
Why the study?
There is limited evidence of the efficacy of direct oral anticoagulants for the treatment of gynecological cancer-associated venous thromboembolism.
Does edoxaban prevent recurrence of venous thromboembolism in patients with gynecological cancer-associated venous thromboembolism compared to vitamin K antagonist?
Cohort (n=371)
Does edoxaban prevent recurrence of venous thromboembolism in patients with gynecological cancer-associated venous thromboembolism compared to vitamin K antagonist?
Edoxaban appears as effective and safe as vitamin K antagonists for the treatment of gynecological cancer-associated venous thromboembolism in a real-world setting.
Adds real-world Japanese data on edoxaban for gynecological CAT; leaves open questions of efficacy and safety pending randomized trials.
OBJECTIVE: Direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) are increasingly being used for the treatment of cancer-associated venous thromboembolism (CAT). However, there is limited evidence of the efficacy of DOACs for the treatment of gynecological CAT. Thus, this study aimed to investigate the efficacy and safety of edoxaban for the treatment of gynecological CAT using Japanese real-world data. METHODS: We reviewed the medical records of patients with 371 gynecological cancer who received edoxaban or vitamin K antagonist (VKA) between January 2011 and December 2018. RESULTS: Altogether, 211 and 160 patients were treated with edoxaban and VKA, respectively. Fourteen patients (6.8%) in the edoxaban group and 22 (13.8%) in the VKA group showed recurrence of venous thromboembolism (VTE). Cumulative VTE recurrence was not significantly different between the 2 groups (p=0.340). Adverse events occurred in 15 (7.1%) and 11 (6.9%) patients in the edoxaban and VKA groups, respectively (p=0.697). Subgroup analysis of the edoxaban and VKA groups according to different tumor types, including ovarian, endometrial, and cervical cancer, showed equivalent outcomes in terms of VTE recurrence and adverse events. Patients without pulmonary embolism (PE) were mostly omitted from initial unfractionated heparin (UFH) therapy prior to administration of edoxaban. However, this did not increase the recurrence of VTE. CONCLUSION: This study confirmed that edoxaban is effective and safe for the treatment of gynecological CAT. This finding was consistent for different types of gynecological cancer. Additionally, initial UFH therapy prior to the administration of edoxaban may be unnecessary for patients without PE.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Odajima et al. (2022) conducted a cohort in Gynecological cancer-associated venous thromboembolism (n=371). Edoxaban vs. Vitamin K antagonist (VKA) was evaluated on Recurrence of venous thromboembolism (VTE) (p=0.340). Edoxaban treatment for gynecological cancer-associated venous thromboembolism resulted in similar VTE recurrence rates compared to vitamin K antagonists (6.8% vs 13.8%; p=0.340).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: