Structured benefit-risk assessment for enoxaparin, in the context of its label extension, for the extended treatment of deep vein thrombosis and pulmonary embolism, and prevention of its recurrence in patients with active cancer.

PURPOSE: Guidelines recommend low-molecular-weight heparins (LMWHs) for patients with cancer-associated thrombosis. However, until recently, only dalteparin and tinzaparin were approved in the European Economic Area (EEA) for these patients. This study compares the benefit-risk profile of enoxaparin with dalteparin and tinzaparin for the extended treatment of deep vein thrombosis (DVT) and pulmonary embolism (PE), and prevention of recurrence in adult patients with active cancer. METHODS: A semi-quantitative structured benefit-risk assessment was conducted for the label-extension application of enoxaparin based on the benefit-risk action team descriptive framework: define decision context; determine key benefit and risk outcomes; identify data sources; extract data; interpret results. RESULTS: The key benefits were defined as reduced all-cause mortality and venous thromboembolism (VTE) recurrence (including symptomatic DVT, fatal PE or non-fatal PE); the key risks were major and non-major bleeding of clinical significance, and heparin-induced thrombocytopenia (HIT). Enoxaparin demonstrated comparable effects for the reduction of VTE recurrence and all-cause mortality versus other EEA-approved LMWHs (dalteparin, tinzaparin). There was no evidence of a significant difference between enoxaparin and the comparator groups with regard to incidence of major and non-major bleeding. The data on HIT were too limited to assess the difference between the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: The assessment demonstrated a favourable benefit-risk profile for enoxaparin similar to that of other EEA-approved LMWHs for the treatment of DVT and PE and the prevention of recurrence in patients with active cancer and thus supported the label-extension approval.

Event rates and risk factors for venous thromboembolism and major bleeding in a population of hospitalized adult patients with acute medical illness receiving enoxaparin thromboprophylaxis.

BACKGROUND: We aimed to describe the event rates and risk-factors for symptomatic venous thromboembolism (VTE) and major bleeding in a population of hospitalized acutely ill medical patients. METHODS: Patients ≥40 years old and hospitalized for acute medical illness who initiated enoxaparin prophylaxis were selected from the US Optum research database. Rates of symptomatic VTE and major bleeding at 90-days were estimated via the Kaplan-Meier (KM) method. Risk factors were identified via the Cox proportional hazards model. RESULTS: A total of 123,022 patients met the selection criteria. The KM rates of VTE and major bleeding at 90-days were 3.5 % and 2.2 %, respectively. Among subgroups, the risk of VTE varied from 3.0 % in patients with ischemic stroke to 6.9 % in patients with a cancer-related hospitalization, and the risk of major bleeding varied from 1.9 % in patients with inflammatory conditions to 3.6 % in patients with ischemic stroke. Key risk factors for VTE were prior VTE (HR=4.15, 95 % confidence interval [CI] 3.80-4.53), cancer-related hospitalization (HR=2.35, 95 % CI 2.10-2.64), and thrombophilia (HR=1.64, 95 % CI 1.29-2.08). Key risk factors for major bleeding were history of major bleeding (HR=2.17, 95 % CI 1.72-2.74), history of non-major bleeding (HR=2.46, 95 % CI 2.24-2.70), and hospitalization for ischemic stroke (2.42, 95 % CI 2.11-2.78). CONCLUSION: There is substantial heterogeneity in the event rates for VTE and major bleeding in acute medically ill patients. History of VTE and cancer related hospitalization represent profiles with a high risk of VTE, where continued VTE prophylaxis may be warranted.