Effectiveness and safety of apixaban and rivaroxaban for acute venous thromboembolism therapy in patients with extremes in bodyweight.

OBJECTIVES: To investigate the association of extremes in bodyweight (EBW) and outcomes in patients with acute venous thromboembolism (VTE). Recurrent VTE, major bleeding, and clinically relevant non-major bleeding were compared between patients with bodyweight <60 kg, 60-120 kg, and >120 kg. METHODS: Consecutive patients enrolled in the Mayo Clinic VTE Registry (03/28/2013-8/31/2019) with acute VTE were followed prospectively. Patient status was assessed in person, by mailing a written questionnaire, or by a scripted phone interview. RESULTS: Among 2577 patients with weight ranging from 27.0 kg to 263.2 kg, 2123 (82%) had a bodyweight between 60 and 120 kg, 223 (8.7%) had bodyweight < 60 kg, and 230 (8.9%) had bodyweight >120 kg. Patients with bodyweight <60 kg treated with DOACs had higher 3- and 6-month incidence of major bleeding compared to the bodyweight 60-120kg group (4.4% vs 1.1%, P = .03, and 4.4% vs 1.4%, P = .05, respectively). Patients with bodyweight >120 kg and cancer on rivaroxaban had higher VTE recurrence compared to bodyweight 60-120kg group (P = .01). CONCLUSIONS: Treatment of acute VTE is associated with a higher incidence of bleeding in patients with bodyweight <60 kg. A higher VTE recurrence rate occurred only in cancer patients with bodyweight >120 kg on rivaroxaban.

Treatment of upper extremity deep vein thrombosis with apixaban and rivaroxaban.

Randomized controlled trials leading to the approval of apixaban and rivaroxaban for venous thromboembolism (VTE) did not include patients with upper extremity deep vein thrombosis (UE-DVT). We sought to evaluate the safety and effectiveness of rivaroxaban and apixaban for the treatment of acute UE-DVT. Consecutive patients with VTE enrolled into the Mayo Clinic VTE Registry, between March 1, 2013 and December 31, 2019, were followed prospectively. Clinical, demographic and imaging data were collected at the time of study recruitment. Patients with a diagnosis of acute UE-DVT who received rivaroxaban, apixaban, LMWH or warfarin were included. Recurrent VTE, major bleeding, clinical-relevant non-major bleeding (CRNMB), and death were assessed at 3-month intervals. During the study period, 210 patients with acute UE-DVT were included; 63 were treated with apixaban, 39 with rivaroxaban, and 108 with LWMH and/or warfarin. Overall 51% had catheter-associated UE-DVT, 60% had a diagnosis of malignancy, and 14% had concurrent pulmonary embolism. Malignancy was more common in patients treated with LMWH/warfarin (67% vs 52%, P = .03). At 3 months of follow up, one (0.9%) recurrent VTE occurred in a patient treated with LMWH/warfarin and one (1.0%) patient treated with apixaban or rivaroxaban (P = .97). Major bleeding occurred in three patients treated with LMWH/warfarin, and in none of those treated with apixaban or rivaroxaban (P = .09). Clinical-relevant non-major bleeding occurred in one patient (0.9%) treated with LWMH/warfarin and two patients (2.0%) treated with apixaban or rivaroxaban (P = .53). Treatment of UE-DVT with apixaban or rivaroxaban appears to be as safe and effective as LMWH/warfarin.

Resolution of acute lower extremity deep vein thrombosis with rivaroxaban compared to warfarin.

Thrombosis resolution is an important component of treatment for deep vein thrombosis (DVT) and multiple anticoagulants are now available. It is unknown whether rivaroxaban contributes to a higher degree of thrombus resolution compared to conventional anticoagulation with warfarin. Our objective was to compare thrombus resolution for rivaroxaban versus warfarin treated patients with acute lower extremity DVT. Consecutive patients treated for proximal or distal lower extremity DVT with rivaroxaban were identified from the Mayo Thrombophilia Clinic Anticoagulants Registry (November 2015-June 2016) and compared to patients treated with warfarin. Ultrasonography/Doppler images were analyzed by two independent radiologists blinded to anticoagulant and using a standardized assessment algorithm. A total of 111 patients with DVT were studied. Sixty-three rivaroxaban treated patients were compared to 48 warfarin treated patients over a median follow up of 92 and 97 days, respectively. Percentage of patients with total or partial resolution of thrombosis was similar in rivaroxaban and warfarin treated groups (95.2% vs. 91.7%, p = 0.46, respectively); also the proportion of patients with total thrombus resolution was not significantly different (38.1% vs. 29.2%, p = 0.42, respectively). There was no significant difference in the proportion of patients with no thrombus resolution between rivaroxaban and warfarin treated groups either (4.8% vs. 2.1%, p = 0.63). Thrombus propagation with warfarin therapy was observed in 6.3% of patients treated with warfarin and in none of the patients from the rivaroxaban group (p = 0.08). Resolution of acute lower extremity DVT in patients treated with rivaroxaban is similar to those treated with warfarin.

Comparison of apixaban to rivaroxaban and enoxaparin in acute cancer-associated venous thromboembolism.

To provide direct comparison between apixaban and rivaroxaban in patients with acute cancer-associated venous thromboembolism (Ca-VTE), consecutive patients treated with apixaban, rivaroxaban, or enoxaparin at Mayo Thrombophilia Clinic (March 1, 2013 to January 31, 2018)) were followed prospectively. The primary effectiveness outcome was venous thromboembolism (VTE) recurrence, and the secondary was mortality. The primary safety outcome was major bleeding, the secondary clinically relevant safety outcome was non-major bleeding (CRNMB), and the third a composite of major and CRNMB. There were 750 patients treated for acute Ca-VTE with apixaban (n = 224), rivaroxaban (n = 163), and enoxaparin (n = 363) within 14 days of diagnosis and for at least 3 months, or until study event. Recurrent VTE was diagnosed in 11 receiving apixaban, 7 receiving rivaroxaban (apixaban vs rivaroxaban hazard ratio (HR) 1.31, 95% confidence interval (95% CI) 0.51-3.36) and 17 in the enoxaparin receiving group (apixaban vs enoxaparin HR 1.14, 95% CI: 0.54, 2.42 and rivaroxaban vs enoxaparin HR 0.85, 95% Cl: 0.36, 2.06). There were 82 deaths in apixaban, 74 rivaroxaban (apixaban vs rivaroxaban HR 1.67, 95% Cl: 1.20, 2.33) and 171 in enoxaparin group (rivaroxaban vs enoxaparin HR 0.73, 95% Cl: 0.56, 0.96). Major bleeding occurred in 11 apixaban, 12 rivaroxaban (apixaban vs rivaroxaban HR 0.73, 95% Cl: 0.32, 1.66) and 21 enoxaparin group (apixaban vs enoxaparin HR 0.89, 95% Cl: 0.43, 1.84 and rivaroxaban vs enoxaparin HR 1.23, 95% Cl: 0.61, 2.50). The CRNMB rate was higher in rivaroxaban compared to apixaban (P = .03) and LMWH (P = .01) groups. Recurrence of VTE and major bleeding were similar in apixaban, rivaroxaban, and enoxaparin groups. Rivaroxaban was associated with higher CRNMB but lower mortality compared to apixaban and enoxaparin.

Apixaban and Rivaroxaban in Patients With Acute Venous Thromboembolism.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the clinical efficacy and safety of apixaban with those of rivaroxaban for the treatment of acute venous thromboembolism (VTE). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Consecutive patients enrolled in the Mayo Thrombophilia Clinic Registry (between March 1, 2013, and January 30, 2018) and treated with apixaban or rivaroxaban for acute VTE were followed forward in time. The primary efficacy outcome was VTE recurrence. The primary safety outcome was major bleeding; the second safety outcome was clinically relevant nonmajor bleeding (CRNMB); and the third was a composite of major bleeding or CRNMB. RESULTS: Within the group of 1696 patients with VTE enrolled, 600 (38%) were treated either with apixaban (n=302, 50%) or rivaroxaban (n=298, 50%) within the first 14 days of VTE diagnosis and who completed at least 3 months of therapy or had a study event. Recurrent VTE was diagnosed in 7 patients (2.3%) treated with apixaban and in 6 (2%) treated with rivaroxaban (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR], 1.4; 95% CI, 0.5-3.8). Major bleeding occurred in 11 patients (3.6%) receiving apixaban and in 9 patients (3.0%) receiving rivaroxaban (aHR, 1.2; 95% CI, 0.5-3.2). Clinically relevant nonmajor bleeding was diagnosed in 7 patients (2.3%) receiving apixaban and in 20 (6.7%) receiving rivaroxaban (aHR, 0.4; 95% CI, 0.2-0.9). The rates of composite major bleeding or CRNMB were similar (aHR, 0.6; 95% CI, 0.3-1.2). Most study events occurred in patients with cancer. CONCLUSION: In the setting of a standardized, guideline-directed, patient-oriented clinical practice, the efficacy and safety of apixaban and rivaroxaban for the treatment of acute VTE were comparable.