Dabigatran was noninferior to warfarin for preventing recurrent venous thromboembolism (HR 1.44; 95% CI 0.78-2.64; P=0.01 for noninferiority) and superior to placebo (HR 0.08; P<0.001).
RCT (n=4,199)
randomized
Double-blind
Venous thromboembolism (n=4,199)
Dabigatran vs Warfarin or placebo (150 mg twice daily)
Recurrent venous thromboembolism (active-control study) — HR 1.44 (0.78 to 2.64), p=0.01 for noninferiority
Effect estimate: HR 1.44 (95% CI 0.78 to 2.64)
Absolute Event Rate: 1.8% vs 1.3%
p-value: p=0.01 for noninferiority
BACKGROUND: Dabigatran, which is administered in a fixed dose and does not require laboratory monitoring, may be suitable for extended treatment of venous thromboembolism. METHODS: In two double-blind, randomized trials, we compared dabigatran at a dose of 150 mg twice daily with warfarin (active-control study) or with placebo (placebo-control study) in patients with venous thromboembolism who had completed at least 3 initial months of therapy. RESULTS: In the active-control study, recurrent venous thromboembolism occurred in 26 of 1430 patients in the dabigatran group (1.8%) and 18 of 1426 patients in the warfarin group (1.3%) (hazard ratio with dabigatran, 1.44; 95% confidence interval CI, 0.78 to 2.64; P=0.01 for noninferiority). Major bleeding occurred in 13 patients in the dabigatran group (0.9%) and 25 patients in the warfarin group (1.8%) (hazard ratio, 0.52; 95% CI, 0.27 to 1.02). Major or clinically relevant bleeding was less frequent with dabigatran (hazard ratio, 0.54; 95% CI, 0.41 to 0.71). Acute coronary syndromes occurred in 13 patients in the dabigatran group (0.9%) and 3 patients in the warfarin group (0.2%) (P=0.02). In the placebo-control study, recurrent venous thromboembolism occurred in 3 of 681 patients in the dabigatran group (0.4%) and 37 of 662 patients in the placebo group (5.6%) (hazard ratio, 0.08; 95% CI, 0.02 to 0.25; P<0.001). Major bleeding occurred in 2 patients in the dabigatran group (0.3%) and 0 patients in the placebo group. Major or clinically relevant bleeding occurred in 36 patients in the dabigatran group (5.3%) and 12 patients in the placebo group (1.8%) (hazard ratio, 2.92; 95% CI, 1.52 to 5.60). Acute coronary syndromes occurred in 1 patient each in the dabigatran and placebo groups. CONCLUSIONS: Dabigatran was effective in the extended treatment of venous thromboembolism and carried a lower risk of major or clinically relevant bleeding than warfarin but a higher risk than placebo. (Funded by Boehringer Ingelheim; RE-MEDY and RE-SONATE ClinicalTrials.gov numbers, NCT00329238 and NCT00558259, respectively.).
Building similarity graph...
Analyzing shared references across papers
Loading...
Sam Schulman
Vascular Medicine
Clive Kearon
Vascular Medicine
Ajay K. Kakkar
Vascular Medicine
New England Journal of Medicine
Harvard University
University College London
Brigham and Women's Hospital
Building similarity graph...
Analyzing shared references across papers
Loading...
Schulman et al. (Wed,) conducted a rct in Venous thromboembolism (n=4,199). Dabigatran vs. Warfarin or placebo was evaluated on Recurrent venous thromboembolism (active-control study) (HR 1.44, 95% CI 0.78 to 2.64, p=0.01 for noninferiority). Dabigatran was noninferior to warfarin for preventing recurrent venous thromboembolism (HR 1.44; 95% CI 0.78-2.64; P=0.01 for noninferiority) and superior to placebo (HR 0.08; P<0.001).
synapsesocial.com/papers/6a12bebdb761793c20c0786c — DOI: https://doi.org/10.1056/nejmoa1113697
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: