Practice-changing evidence from academic trials in VTE: COBRRA, RENOVE, and API-CAT

Free AccessEditorialPractice-changing evidence from academic trials in VTE: COBRRA, RENOVE, and API-CATStefano Barco, Tobias Tritschler, and Marc BlondonStefano BarcoStefano Barco, MD, Universitätsspital Zürich, Raemistrasse 100, RAE C04, 8091 Zürich, Switzerlandemail protected Department of Vascular Medicine, University Hospital Zurich, Switzerland Center for Thrombosis and Hemostasis, Johannes Gutenberg University Mainz, Germany , Tobias Tritschler Department of General Internal Medicine, Inselspital, Bern University Hospital, University of Bern, Switzerland , and Marc Blondon Division of Angiology and Hemostasis, Geneva University Hospitals and Faculty of Medicine, Geneva, Switzerland Published Online:September 26, 2025https://doi.org/10.1024/0301-1526/a001231PDF ToolsAdd to favoritesTrack Citations Cite ShareShare onFacebookXLinkedInRedditE-Mail SectionsMore The first half of 2025 brought several and partly unexpected advances in VTE management, thanks to three phase 3 trials evaluating different anticoagulation strategies and drug agents for VTE. For the first time since DOAC approval via pharma-sponsored trials, we now have high-quality, head-to-head data from academically sponsored investigator-initiated investigations. Let's review these findings in detail. The COBRRA trial 1, 2 directly compared the safety of rivaroxaban and apixaban during the acute treatment phase of VTE. This investigator-initiated, randomized, open-label trial with blinded endpoint adjudication enrolled 2,760 patients with acute symptomatic pulmonary embolism and/or proximal deep vein thrombosis. Patients received either rivaroxaban (15 mg twice daily for 21 days followed by 20 mg once daily) or apixaban (10 mg twice daily for 7 days followed by 5 mg twice daily) for 3 months. The primary outcome – "clinically relevant bleeding" encompassing major and clinically relevant non-major bleeding – was significantly reduced with apixaban (3.3%) than with rivaroxaban (7.2%) (odds ratio, 0.44; 95% CI, 0.31 to 0.63; P120 kg were excluded from COBRRA), its high protein-binding rate (>95%) makes its pharmacokinetics less influenced by body weight 9. In rare cases of short bowel syndrome 10, 11, rivaroxaban is theoretically more reliably absorbed, since its primary absorption site is in the stomach, whereas apixaban is absorbed more distally, beginning in the duodenum 12. Interactions with specific drug classes may also influence the choice of treatment. Finally, it is unknown if apixaban is superior to rivaroxaban for the prevention of post-thrombotic syndrome in patients with deep vein thrombosis 13. With regard to secondary VTE prevention after an initial therapeutic anticoagulation of at least six months, the RENOVE 3 and API-CAT 4 trials provide strong parallel confirmation that extended treatment with reduced-dose apixaban or rivaroxaban is safer than full-dose anticoagulation, while maintaining similar efficacy. These findings support the routine use of reduced-dose therapy in most patients with a history of acute VTE, except in those with contraindications to DOAC therapy – such as patients with thrombotic antiphospholipid syndrome or severe renal impairment, and specific subgroups, such as those with obesity in whom full-dose anticoagulation might be safer 14. It should be emphasized that there is a growing number of generic drugs available for both agents, which will help reduce the economic burden on patients and healthcare systems. An open question remains: should also secondary prevention of VTE be influenced from these results with respect to the use of a specific factor Xa inhibitor? It is important to note that in the RENOVE 3 trial – where both apixaban and rivaroxaban were permitted – the overall rate of bleeding events was low across both treatment groups. Indeed, the study was not designed to directly compare the two drugs, but rather to evaluate two anticoagulation strategies (reduced-dose vs. full-dose for secondary prevention). That said, the investigators conducted a pre-specified subgroup analysis which showed that, at reduced doses, the risk-benefit profile (balancing thrombotic and bleeding events) was similar for apixaban and rivaroxaban. At five years, recurrent VTE occurred in 7 of 575 (1.2%) patients treated with low-dose apixaban and 12 of 674 (1.8%) patients treated with low-dose rivaroxaban. The slight reduction in recurrent event was counterbalanced by clinically relevant bleedings: 48 of 580 (8.3%) patients on low-dose apixaban and 48 of 674 (7.1%) patients on low-dose rivaroxaban. These non-randomized data suggest a comparable profile for both agents in the reduced-dose setting, although, it's important to emphasize again that the study was not powered for direct comparison. Moreover, the findings may be confounded by indication, namely by the clinical decision to select one drug over another in the acute VTE phase (prior to trial enrolment) or at the time of the dose reduction (at trial enrolment). Another relevant consideration is the current and future role of a third factor Xa inhibitor: edoxaban. Whether this agent will be preferred in future strategies remains to be seen; however, it is worth recalling that the edoxaban approval trial, Hokusai-VTE 15, remains the largest study to date on the treatment of acute VTE, enrolling over 8,000 patients. In our opinion, several pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic characteristics of edoxaban, which is given once daily, deserve attention: its lower potential for drug–drug interaction profile may be more favourable in patients on some immunosuppressants or chemotherapy 16. It also allows for dose reduction during the first months of acute treatment based on predefined clinical criteria (i.e., low body weight, renal function, concomitant P-gp inhibitors) 15 – a flexibility not offered by apixaban or rivaroxaban. Moreover, it may have a better safety profile in terms of gastrointestinal bleeding compared to the other once-daily anti-Xa inhibitor rivaroxaban 17, 18. These features could support a more individualized approach in specific patient populations where standard dosing of the other agents may be seen as suboptimal. The results of the COBRRA study 2 may also have implications for patients with atrial fibrillation. It is well known that, compared to patients with VTE, AF patients are on average about 10 years older at the time of anticoagulation initiation. Moreover, they tend to have a higher baseline bleeding risk, not only due to advanced age but also due to a higher burden of comorbidities and more frequent use of concomitant antithrombotic therapies. This raises the question of whether the findings of COBRRA 2 can be extrapolated to the population with atrial fibrillation, where indirect evidence from phase 3 trials and real-world data suggest that apixaban may have a more favourable safety profile than rivaroxaban 19, 20, 21. The COmparison of Bleeding Risk Between Rivaroxaban and Apixaban in Patients With Atrial Fibrillation (COBRRA-AF; NCT04642430) is being conducted to answer this question. Another related question is how best to interpret the results of the AZALEA trial 22, which compared safety outcomes in atrial fibrillation patients randomized to receive the factor XI monoclonal antibody abelacimab (administered subcutaneously) versus standard-dose oral rivaroxaban. While abelacimab was associated with a 62% reduction in bleeding events, one could argue that a similar reduction might have been achievable with apixaban in this setting, assuming the results of COBRRA 2 are applicable. That said, a key potential advantage of the novel factor XI inhibitor therapy lies in its ease of administration – with subcutaneous injections given only once per month. Finally, we would like to highlight that it is indeed possible to successfully conduct ambitious, long-term studies, even when they are investigator-initiated and academically sponsored. These efforts deserve recognition, along with the institutions and networks that make them possible. The RENOVE study 3 was sponsored by the CHRU of the University of Brest, with support from the French InnoVTE Network. The API-CAT study 4 was sponsored by the Assistance Publique–Hôpitaux de Paris (AP-HP). The COBRRA study 1 was sponsored by the Ottawa Hospital Research Institute (OHRI), with organizational and network support from CanVECTOR and the INVENT-VTE Network.References1 Ottawa Hospital Research Institute. Comparison of bleeding risk between rivaroxaban and apixaban for the treatment of acute venous thromboembolism (COBRRA) Internet. ClinicalTrials.gov; 2017 Aug 10. Available from: https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT03266783. First citation in articleGoogle Scholar2 Castellucci L, Kovacs M, Cote BKDW, Wan T, Tran H, et al. Comparison of bleeding risk between rivaroxaban and apixaban in acute venous thromboembolism. ISTH Online Congress; 2025 Jun 22. First citation in articleGoogle Scholar3 Couturaud F, Schmidt J, Sanchez O, Ballerie A, Sevestre M-A, Meneveau N, et al. Extended treatment of venous thromboembolism with reduced-dose versus full-dose direct oral anticoagulants in patients at high risk of recurrence: a non-inferiority, multicentre, randomised, open-label, blinded endpoint trial. The Lancet. 2025;405(10480):725–35. First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar4 Mahé I, Carrier M, Mayeur D, Chidiac J, Vicaut E, Falvo N, et al. Extended reduced-dose apixaban for cancer-associated venous thromboembolism. N Eng J Med. 2025; 392(14):1363–73. First citation in articleCrossref Medline, Google Scholar5 Palareti G, Santagata D, De Ponti C, Ageno W, Prandoni P. Anticoagulation and compression therapy for proximal acute deep vein thrombosis. Vasa. 2024; 53(5):289–97. First citation in articleLink, Google Scholar6 Agnelli G, Buller HR, Cohen A, Curto M, Gallus AS, Johnson M, et al. Oral apixaban for the treatment of acute venous thromboembolism. N Eng J Med. 2013;369(9):799–808. First citation in articleCrossref Medline, Google Scholar7 Investigators TE. Oral rivaroxaban for symptomatic venous thromboembolism. N Eng J Med. 2010;363(26):2499–510. First citation in articleCrossref Medline, Google Scholar8 de Jong CMM, Blondon M, Ay C, Buchmuller A, Beyer-Westendorf J, Biechele J, et al. Incidence and impact of anticoagulation-associated abnormal menstrual bleeding in women after venous thromboembolism. Blood. 2022;140(16):1764–73. First citation in articleCrossref Medline, Google Scholar9 Kubitza D, Becka M, Zuehlsdorf M, Mueck W. Body weight has limited influence on the safety, tolerability, pharmacokinetics, or pharmacodynamics of rivaroxaban (BAY 59–7939) in healthy subjects. J Clin Pharmacol. 2007;47(2):218–26. First citation in articleCrossref Medline, Google Scholar10 Lunau F, Andersen KW, Kristensen SR, Rasmussen HH, Holst M, Vinter-Jensen L. Absorption and anticoagulant management of rivaroxaban in patients with short bowel syndrome. Thromb Res. 2025;253:1093–98. First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar11 Cheung YW, Barco S, Mathôt RAA, van den Dool E-J, Stroobants AK, Serlie MJ, et al. Pharmacokinetics of dabigatran etexilate and rivaroxaban in patients with short bowel syndrome requiring parenteral nutrition: the PDER PAN study. Thromb Res. 2017;160:76–82. First citation in articleCrossref Medline, Google Scholar12 Kennedy JM, Van Riji AM. Effects of surgery on the pharmacokinetic parameters of drugs. Clin Pharmacokinet. 1998;35(4):293–312. First citation in articleCrossref Medline, Google Scholar13 Hupperetz R, Ten Cate-Hoek A. The Postthrombotic syndrome, where are we now? Vasa. 2025;54(1):7–19. First citation in articleLink, Google Scholar14 Couturaud FSJ, Meneveau N, Pernod G, Tromeur C, Laporte S, Girard P, et al. Extended reduced vs full-dose oral anticoagulant after venous thromboembolism in obese patients. ISTH 2025 Online Congress; 2025 Jun 23. First citation in articleGoogle Scholar15 Investigator TH-V. Edoxaban versus warfarin for the treatment of symptomatic venous thromboembolism. N Engl J Med. 2013;369(15):1406–15. First citation in articleCrossref Medline, Google Scholar16 Corsini A, Ferri N, Proietti M, Boriani G. Edoxaban and the issue of drug-drug interactions: from pharmacology to clinical practice. Drugs. 2020;80(11):1065–83. First citation in articleCrossref Medline, Google Scholar17 Guo WQ, Chen XH, Tian XY, Li L. Differences in gastrointestinal safety profiles among novel oral anticoagulants: evidence from a network meta-analysis. Clin Epidemiol. 2019;11:911–21. First citation in articleCrossref Medline, Google Scholar18 Chen X, Wang L, Li H, Huang W, Zhao L, Guo W. Comparative differences in the risk of major gastrointestinal bleeding among different direct oral anticoagulants: An updated traditional and Bayesian network meta-analysis. Front Pharmacol. 2022;13:1049283. First citation in articleCrossref Medline, Google Scholar19 Lau WCY, Torre CO, Man KKC, Stewart HM, Seager S, Van Zandt M, et al. Comparative effectiveness and safety between apixaban, dabigatran, edoxaban, and rivaroxaban among patients with atrial fibrillation: a multinational population-based cohort study. Ann Intern Med. 2022;175(11):1515–24. First citation in articleCrossref Medline, Google Scholar20 Granger Christopher B, Alexander John H, McMurray John JV, Lopes Renato D, Hylek Elaine M, Hanna M, et al. Apixaban versus warfarin in patients with atrial fibrillation. N Engl J Med. 2011;365(11):981–92. First citation in articleCrossref Medline, Google Scholar21 Patel Manesh R, Mahaffey Kenneth W, Garg J, Pan G, Singer Daniel E, Hacke W, et al. Rivaroxaban versus warfarin in nonvalvular atrial fibrillation. N Engl J Med. 2011;365(10):883–91. First citation in articleCrossref Medline, Google Scholar22 Ruff CT, Patel SM, Giugliano RP, Morrow DA, Hug B, Kuder JF, et al. Abelacimab versus rivaroxaban in patients with atrial fibrillation. N Engl J Med. 2025;392(4):361–71. First citation in articleCrossref Medline, Google ScholarFiguresReferencesRelatedDetails Advance Article HistoryPublished onlineSeptember 26, 2025 Licenses & Copyright© 2025Hogrefe AGPDF download