Rivaroxaban vs Dalteparin in Cancer-Associated Thromboembolism: A Randomized Trial.

BACKGROUND: Direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) are an alternative to low-molecular-weight heparin for treating cancer-associated VTE. RESEARCH QUESTION: Is rivaroxaban as efficient and safe as dalteparin to treat patients with cancer-associated VTE? STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: In a randomized open-label noninferiority trial, patients with active cancer who had proximal DVT, pulmonary embolism (PE), or both were assigned randomly to therapeutic doses of rivaroxaban or dalteparin for 3 months. The primary outcome was the cumulative incidence of recurrent VTE, a composite of symptomatic or incidental DVT or PE, and worsening of pulmonary vascular or venous obstruction at 3 months. RESULTS: Of 158 randomized patients, 74 and 84 patients were assigned to receive rivaroxaban and dalteparin, respectively. Mean age was 69.4 years, and 115 patients (76.2%) had metastatic disease. The primary outcome occurred in 4 and 6 patients in the rivaroxaban and dalteparin groups, respectively (both the intention-to-treat and per-protocol populations: cumulative incidence, 6.4% vs 10.1%; subdistribution hazard ratio [SHR], 0.75; 95% CI, 0.21-2.66). Major bleeding occurred in 1 and 3 patients in the rivaroxaban and dalteparin groups, respectively (cumulative incidence, 1.4% vs 3.7%; SHR, 0.36; 95% CI, 0.04-3.43). Major or clinically relevant nonmajor bleeding occurred in 9 and 8 patients in the rivaroxaban and dalteparin groups, respectively (cumulative incidence, 12.2% vs 9.8%; SHR, 1.27; 95% CI, 0.49-3.26). Overall, 19 patients (25.7%) and 20 patients (23.8%) died in the rivaroxaban and dalteparin groups, respectively (hazard ratio, 1.05; 95% CI, 0.56-1.97). INTERPRETATION: In this trial comparing rivaroxaban and dalteparin in the treatment of cancer-associated VTE, the number of patients was insufficient to reach the predefined criteria for noninferiority, but efficacy and safety results were consistent with those previously reported with DOACs. An updated meta-analysis of randomized trials comparing DOACs with low-molecular-weight heparin in patients with cancer-associated VTE is provided. TRIAL REGISTRY: ClinicalTrials.gov; No.: NCT02746185; URL: www. CLINICALTRIALS: gov.

Anti-tumour effect of low molecular weight heparin in localised lung cancer: a phase III clinical trial.

The anti-tumour and anti-metastatic properties of heparins have not been tested in patients with early stage cancer. Whether adjuvant low molecular weight heparin (LMWH) tinzaparin impacts the survival of patients with resected non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) was investigated.Patients with completely resected stage I, II or IIIA NSCLC were randomly allocated to receive subcutaneous tinzaparin 100 IU·kg-1 once a day for 12 weeks or no treatment in addition to standard of care. The trial was open-label with blinded central adjudication of study outcomes. The primary outcome was overall survival.In 549 patients randomised to tinzaparin (n=269) or control (n=280), mean±sd age was 61.6±8.9 years, 190 (34.6%) patients had stage II-III disease, and 220 (40.1%) patients received adjuvant chemotherapy. Median follow-up was 5.7 years. There was no significant difference in overall survival between groups (hazard ratio (HR) 1.24, 95% CI 0.92-1.68; p=0.17). There was no difference in the cumulative incidence of recurrence between groups (subdistribution HR 0.94, 95% CI 0.68-1.30; p=0.70).Adjuvant tinzaparin had no detectable impact on overall and recurrence-free survival of patients with completely resected stage I-IIIA NSCLC. These results do not support further clinical evaluation of LMWHs as anti-tumour agents.

Pregnancy-associated venous thromboembolism (VTE) in combined heterozygous factor V Leiden (FVL) and prothrombin (FII) 20210 A mutation and in heterozygous FII single gene mutation alone.

The risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE) in the absence of prophylaxis was evaluated in a retrospective study of 47 women (84 pregnancies) with combined thrombophilia [heterozygous factor V Leiden (FVL) plus prothrombin (FII) 20210A mutation (group I)] and in 82 women (193 pregnancies) with the FII alone (group II). VTE was more frequent in group I than in group II [17.8% versus 6.2%, P = 0.003, relative risk (RR) 2.9, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.4-5.9], ante partum (7.1% and 2.1%) and post partum (11.5% and 4.2%). The risk was higher in index cases than in family members (RR 2.5, 95% CI 1.2-5.2 and RR 2.1, 95% CI 0.2-22.3 respectively) Even women who had no history of VTE before pregnancy had an increased risk (RR 2.2, 95% CI 1.0-4.8). Our results suggest that, during ante partum, prophylaxis is indicated in women with combined thrombophilia and with a VTE before pregnancy. In those without VTE before pregnancy, prophylaxis might be decided for each individual case, taking into consideration all risk factors. In women with the FII mutation alone, the low risk may not justify prophylaxis in the absence of previous VTE. In post partum, prophylaxis is indicated in all cases.