Idraparinux versus standard therapy for venous thromboembolic disease

Best Clinical Practice: Controversies in Outpatient Management of Acute Pulmonary Embolism

BACKGROUND

Pulmonary embolism (PE) is a common condition managed in the emergency department (ED), with a wide range of morbidity and mortality. Patients are classically admitted for treatment and monitoring of anticoagulation.

OBJECTIVE

We sought to evaluate the controversy concerning outpatient therapy for patients with acute PE and investigate the feasibility, safety, and efficacy of outpatient management.

DISCUSSION

Patients with venous thromboembolism have historically been admitted for treatment and monitoring for concern of worsening disease or side effects of anticoagulation (bleeding). More than 90% of EDs admit patients with PE in the United States. However, close to 50% of patients may be appropriate for discharge and outpatient therapy. The published literature suggests that outpatient treatment is safe, feasible, and efficacious, with similar rates of recurrent venous thromboembolism and all-cause mortality, especially with novel oral anticoagulants. Multiple scoring criteria can be used, including the Pulmonary Embolism Severity Index (PESI), simplified PESI, Hestia criteria, Geneva Prognostic Score, European Society of Cardiology guidelines, Global Registry of Acute Coronary Events, and Aujesky score. Simplified PESI and the European Society of Cardiology guidelines have high-quality evidence, sufficient sensitivity, and ease of use for the ED. Patients considered for outpatient therapy should possess low hemorrhage risk, adequate social situation, negative biomarkers, ability to comply, and no alternate need for admission.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with acute PE are often admitted in the United States, but a significant proportion may be appropriate for discharge. Patients with low risk for adverse events according to clinical scoring criteria, adequate follow-up, ability to comply, and no other need for admission can be discharged with novel oral anticoagulant therapy.

Safety of warfarin in "high-risk" populations: A meta-analysis of randomized and controlled trials

INTRODUCTION

Few data are available about safety of vitamin K antagonists (VKAs) in patients with clinical/demographic characteristics predisposing to an increased risk of bleeding. We performed a meta-analysis to evaluate the safety of VKAs in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) or venous thromboembolism (VTE) in the following subgroups of "high-risk" patients: elderly patients, patients with low body weight and patients with impaired renal function.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Major electronic databases were systematically searched to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) addressing this issue. Pooled Risk Ratios (RR) and 95% Confidence Intervals (CI) were calculated for each outcome using a random effects model.

RESULTS

Eleven RCTs for a total of 41,015 patients treated with VKAs (25,901 with AF and 15,114 with VTE) were included. We found a significant association between age>75years and bleeding in patients receiving VKAs (RR: 1.62, 95%CI: 1.28-2.05; P<0.0001). Moreover, the prevalence of bleeding events under VKAs was significantly higher in patients with low body weight (RR: 1.20, 95%CI: 1.03-1.40; P=0.02) and in those with impaired renal function (RR: 1.59, 95%CI: 1.30-1.94; P<0.00001). Results were confirmed when separately analyzing data on AF and VTE. Regression models showed that treatment duration did not impact on the differences found in the safety profile of VKAs in different settings analyzed.

CONCLUSIONS

Results of our meta-analysis suggest an increased risk of bleeding complications in "high-risk" patients. Although all results are significant, other studies focused on this issue are warranted to further validate these results.

Pentasaccharides for the prevention of venous thromboembolism

BACKGROUND

Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is a common condition with potentially serious and life-threatening consequences. The standard method of thromboprophylaxis uses an anticoagulant such as low molecular weight heparin (LMWH) or warfarin. In recent years, another type of anticoagulant, pentasaccharide, an indirect factor Xa inhibitor, has shown good anticoagulative effect in clinical trials. Three types of pentasaccharides are available: short-acting fondaparinux, long-acting idraparinux and idrabiotaparinux. Pentasaccharides cause little heparin-induced thrombocytopenia and are better tolerated than unfractionated heparin, LMWH and warfarin. However, no consensus has been reached on whether pentasaccharides are superior or inferior to other anticoagulative methods.

OBJECTIVES

To assess effects of pentasaccharides versus other methods of thromboembolic prevention (thromboprophylaxis) in people who require anticoagulant treatment to prevent venous thromboembolism.

SEARCH METHODS

The Cochrane Vascular Information Specialist (CIS) searched the Specialised Register (last searched March 2016) and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL; 2016, Issue 2). The CIS searched trial databases for details of ongoing and unpublished studies. Review authors searched LILACS (Latin American and Caribbean Health Sciences) and the reference lists of relevant studies and reviews identified by electronic searches.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials on any type of pentasaccharide versus other anticoagulation methods (pharmaceutical or mechanical) for VTE prevention.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently selected trials, assessed methodological quality and extracted data in predesigned tables.

MAIN RESULTS

We included in this review 25 studies with a total of 21,004 participants. All investigated fondaparinux for VTE prevention; none investigated idraparinux or idrabiotaparinux. Studies included participants undergoing abdominal surgery, thoracic surgery, bariatric surgery or coronary bypass surgery; acutely ill hospitalised medical patients; people requiring rigid or semirigid immobilisation; and those with superficial venous thrombosis. Most studies focused on orthopaedic patients. We lowered the quality of the evidence because of heterogeneity between studies and a small number of events causing imprecision.When comparing fondaparinux with placebo, we found less total VTE (risk ratio (RR) 0.24, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.15 to 0.38; 5717 participants; 8 studies; I2 = 64%; P < 0.00001), less symptomatic VTE (RR 0.15, 95% CI 0.06 to 0.36; 6503 participants; 8 studies; I2 = 0%; P < 0.0001), less total DVT (RR 0.25, 95% CI 0.15 to 0.40; 5715 participants; 8 studies; I2 = 67%; P < 0.00001), less proximal DVT (RR 0.12, 95% CI 0.04 to 0.39; 2746 participants; 7 studies; I2 = 64%; P = 0.0004) and less total pulmonary embolism (PE) (RR 0.16, 95% CI 0.04 to 0.62; 6412 participants; 8 studies; I2 = 0%; P = 0.008) in the fondaparinux group. The quality of the evidence was moderate for total VTE, total DVT and proximal DVT, and high for symptomatic VTE and total PE.When fondaparinux was compared with LMWH, analyses indicated that fondaparinux reduced total VTE and DVT (RR 0.55, 95% CI 0.42 to 0.73; 9339 participants; 11 studies; I2 = 64%; P < 0.0001; and RR 0.54, 95% CI 0.40 to 0.71; 9356 participants; 10 studies; I2 = 67%; P < 0.0001, respectively), and showed a trend toward reduced proximal DVT (RR 0.58, 95% CI 0.33 to 1.02; 8361 participants; 9 studies; I2 = 53%; P = 0.06). Symptomatic VTE (RR 1.03, 95% CI 0.65 to 1.63; 12240 participants; 9 studies; I2 = 35%; P = 0.90) and total PE (RR 1.24, 95% CI 0.65 to 2.34; 12350 participants; 10 studies; I2 = 0%; P = 0.51) indicated no difference between fondaparinux and LMWH. The quality of the evidence was moderate for total VTE, symptomatic VTE, total DVT and total PE, and low for proximal DVT.We showed that fondaparinux increased major bleeding compared with both placebo and LWMH (RR 2.56, 95% CI 1.48 to 4.44; 6659 participants; 8 studies; I2 = 0%; P = 0.0008; moderate-quality evidence; and RR 1.38, 95% CI 1.09 to 1.75; 12,501 participants; 11 studies; I2 = 24%; P = 0.008; high-quality evidence, respectively). All-cause mortality was not different between fondaparinux and placebo or LMWH (RR 0.76, 95% CI 0.48 to 1.22; 6674 participants; 8 studies; I2 = 14%; P = 0.26; moderate-quality evidence; and RR 0.88, 95% CI 0.63 to 1.22; 12,400 participants; 11 studies; I2 = 0%; P = 0.44; moderate-quality evidence, respectively).One study compared fondaparinux with variable and fixed (1 mg per day) doses of warfarin after elective hip or knee replacement surgery and showed no difference in primary and secondary outcomes between fondaparinux and both variable and fixed doses of warfarin. The quality of the evidence was very low. One small study compared fondaparinux with edoxaban in patients with severe renal impairment undergoing lower-limb orthopaedic surgery and reported no thromboembolic events, major bleeding events or deaths in either group. The quality of the evidence was very low. One small study compared fondaparinux with mechanical thromboprophylaxis. Results showed no difference in total VTE and total DVT between fondaparinux and mechanical thromboprophylaxis. This study reported no cases pertaining to the other outcomes of this review. The quality of the evidence was low.There were insufficient studies to permit meaningful conclusions for subgroups of clinical conditions other than orthopaedic surgery.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Moderate to high quality evidence shows that fondaparinux is effective for short-term prevention of VTE when compared with placebo. It can reduce total VTE, DVT, total PE and symptomatic VTE, and does not demonstrate a reduction in deaths compared with placebo. Low to moderate quality evidence shows that fondaparinux is more effective for short-term VTE prevention when compared with LMWH. It can reduce total VTE and total DVT and does not demonstrate a reduction in deaths when compared with LMWH. However, at the same time, moderate to high quality evidence shows that fondaparinux increases major bleeding when compared with placebo and LMWH. Therefore, when fondaparinux is chosen for the prevention of VTE, attention should be paid to the person's bleeding and thrombosis risks. Most data were derived from patients undergoing orthopaedic surgery. Therefore, the conclusion predominantly pertains to these patients. Data on fondaparinux for other clinical conditions are sparse.

Prevalence of Pulmonary Embolism among Patients Hospitalized for Syncope

BACKGROUND

The prevalence of pulmonary embolism among patients hospitalized for syncope is not well documented, and current guidelines pay little attention to a diagnostic workup for pulmonary embolism in these patients.

METHODS

We performed a systematic workup for pulmonary embolism in patients admitted to 11 hospitals in Italy for a first episode of syncope, regardless of whether there were alternative explanations for the syncope. The diagnosis of pulmonary embolism was ruled out in patients who had a low pretest clinical probability, which was defined according to the Wells score, in combination with a negative d-dimer assay. In all other patients, computed tomographic pulmonary angiography or ventilation-perfusion lung scanning was performed.

RESULTS

A total of 560 patients (mean age, 76 years) were included in the study. A diagnosis of pulmonary embolism was ruled out in 330 of the 560 patients (58.9%) on the basis of the combination of a low pretest clinical probability of pulmonary embolism and negative d-dimer assay. Among the remaining 230 patients, pulmonary embolism was identified in 97 (42.2%). In the entire cohort, the prevalence of pulmonary embolism was 17.3% (95% confidence interval, 14.2 to 20.5). Evidence of an embolus in a main pulmonary or lobar artery or evidence of perfusion defects larger than 25% of the total area of both lungs was found in 61 patients. Pulmonary embolism was identified in 45 of the 355 patients (12.7%) who had an alternative explanation for syncope and in 52 of the 205 patients (25.4%) who did not.

CONCLUSIONS

Pulmonary embolism was identified in nearly one of every six patients hospitalized for a first episode of syncope. (Funded by the University of Padua; PESIT ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01797289 .).

The accuracy of combined use of troponin and red cell distribution width in predicting mortality of patients with acute pulmonary embolism

BACKGROUND

Cardiac troponins and red cell distribution width (RDW) are associated with increased mortality in acute pulmonary embolism (PE). In this study, we aimed to investigate the accuracy of the combined use of troponin and RDW in predicting short-term mortality in acute PE patients.

METHODS

The data of 201 patients with the diagnosis of acute PE were retrospectively analyzed. We obtained troponin-RDW scores (TR scores) using a combination of troponin and RDW values, and then evaluated this score's accuracy in predicting mortality in patients with acute PE.

RESULTS

The mean participant age was 68 ± 16 years, and 52 % of patients were female. Fifteen (7.4 %) patients died during the first month. Patients classified as high-risk according to TR scores were older (72 ± 15 vs. 66 ± 15 years, p = 0.005), and they had higher heart rates (101 ± 20 vs. 90 ± 15 beat/min, p < 0.001) and respiratory rates (23 ± 4 vs. 21 ± 3 breath/min, p = 0.001). In multivariate analysis, TR (odds ratio [OR] 4.93, 95 % confidence interval [CI] 1.13-21.38, p = 0.033) and simplified pulmonary embolism severity index (sPESI) scores (OR 3.78, 95 % CI 1.71-8.37, p = 0.002) were independent predictors of 30-day mortality. For 30-day mortality, the TR score had a slightly lower sensitivity (87 % vs. 93 %), but a higher specificity (69 % vs. 52 %) compared to the sPESI score.

CONCLUSION

The TR score is easy to calculate, and it may be used to predict early mortality in patients with acute PE.

Treatment of Venous Thromboembolism With New Anticoagulant Agents

Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is a common disease associated with high risk for recurrences, death, and late sequelae, accounting for substantial health care costs. Anticoagulant agents are the mainstay of treatment for deep vein thrombosis and pulmonary embolism. The recent availability of oral anticoagulant agents that can be administered in fixed doses, without laboratory monitoring and dose adjustment, is a landmark change in the treatment of VTE. In Phase III trials, rivaroxaban, apixaban, edoxaban (antifactor Xa agents), and dabigatran (an antithrombin agent) were noninferior and probably safer than conventional anticoagulation therapy (low-molecular-weight heparin followed by vitamin K antagonists). These favorable results were confirmed in specific patient subgroups, such as the elderly and fragile. However, some patients, such as those with cancer or with intermediate- to high-risk pulmonary embolism, were underrepresented in the Phase III trials. Further clinical research is required before new oral anticoagulant agents can be considered standard of care for the full spectrum of patients with VTE.

Clinical presentation and course of bleeding events in patients with venous thromboembolism, treated with apixaban or enoxaparin and warfarin. Results from the AMPLIFY trial

Apixaban, a direct acting oral anticoagulant (DOAC), was found to be non-inferior to and safer as enoxaparin followed by warfarin for treatment of venous thromboembolism (VTE) in the AMPLIFY trial. Information is needed on how bleeding events with DOACs present and develop. In this post-hoc analysis, the clinical presentation and course of all major and clinically relevant non major (CRNM) bleeding events in the AMPLIFY trial were blindly classified by three investigators, using pre-designed classification schemes containing four categories. Odds ratios (OR) for classifying as category three or four (representing a more severe clinical presentation and course) were calculated between apixaban and enoxaparin/warfarin. In total, 63 major and 311 CRNM bleeding events were classified. Of the major bleeds, a more severe clinical presentation occurred in 28.5 % of apixaban versus 44.9 % of enoxaparin/warfarin related recipients (OR 0.49, 95 % confidence interval [CI] 0.14-1.78). A severe clinical course was observed in 14.3 % and in 12.2 %, respectively (OR 1.19, 95 %CI 0.21-6.69). Of the CRNM bleeding events, a more severe clinical presentation and extent of clinical care was found in 25 % of apixaban recipients compared to 22.7 % in the enoxaparin/warfarin group (OR 1.13, 95 %CI 0.65-1.97). The clinical presentation and course of major and CRNM bleeds were similar in apixaban and enoxaparin/warfarin treated patients. This finding should reassure physicians and patients that even in the absence of a specific reversal agent, apixaban is a convenient and safe choice for VTE.

Extended Thromboprophylaxis with Betrixaban in Acutely Ill Medical Patients

BACKGROUND

Patients with acute medical illnesses are at prolonged risk for venous thrombosis. However, the appropriate duration of thromboprophylaxis remains unknown.

METHODS

Patients who were hospitalized for acute medical illnesses were randomly assigned to receive subcutaneous enoxaparin (at a dose of 40 mg once daily) for 10±4 days plus oral betrixaban placebo for 35 to 42 days or subcutaneous enoxaparin placebo for 10±4 days plus oral betrixaban (at a dose of 80 mg once daily) for 35 to 42 days. We performed sequential analyses in three prespecified, progressively inclusive cohorts: patients with an elevated d-dimer level (cohort 1), patients with an elevated d-dimer level or an age of at least 75 years (cohort 2), and all the enrolled patients (overall population cohort). The statistical analysis plan specified that if the between-group difference in any analysis in this sequence was not significant, the other analyses would be considered exploratory. The primary efficacy outcome was a composite of asymptomatic proximal deep-vein thrombosis and symptomatic venous thromboembolism. The principal safety outcome was major bleeding.

RESULTS

A total of 7513 patients underwent randomization. In cohort 1, the primary efficacy outcome occurred in 6.9% of patients receiving betrixaban and 8.5% receiving enoxaparin (relative risk in the betrixaban group, 0.81; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.65 to 1.00; P=0.054). The rates were 5.6% and 7.1%, respectively (relative risk, 0.80; 95% CI, 0.66 to 0.98; P=0.03) in cohort 2 and 5.3% and 7.0% (relative risk, 0.76; 95% CI, 0.63 to 0.92; P=0.006) in the overall population. (The last two analyses were considered to be exploratory owing to the result in cohort 1.) In the overall population, major bleeding occurred in 0.7% of the betrixaban group and 0.6% of the enoxaparin group (relative risk, 1.19; 95% CI, 0.67 to 2.12; P=0.55).

CONCLUSIONS

Among acutely ill medical patients with an elevated d-dimer level, there was no significant difference between extended-duration betrixaban and a standard regimen of enoxaparin in the prespecified primary efficacy outcome. However, prespecified exploratory analyses provided evidence suggesting a benefit for betrixaban in the two larger cohorts. (Funded by Portola Pharmaceuticals; APEX ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01583218.).

Edoxaban for venous thromboembolism in patients with cancer: results from a non-inferiority subgroup analysis of the Hokusai-VTE randomised, double-blind, double-dummy trial

BACKGROUND

Venous thromboembolism occurs commonly in patients with cancer. Direct oral anticoagulants are non-inferior to conventional anticoagulants for the treatment of venous thromboembolism. We hypothesised that edoxaban, a direct oral inhibitor of activated clotting factor Xa, might be more suitable than conventional anticoagulants in the management of cancer-associated venous thromboembolism. The aim of this study was to assess the efficacy and safety of edoxaban compared with warfarin in a subgroup of patients with cancer enrolled in the Hokusai-VTE trial.

METHODS

We did a prespecified subgroup analysis in August, 2013, and a post-hoc analysis of non-inferiority and safety in March, 2016, of the patients with cancer enrolled in the randomised, double-blind, double-dummy, multicentre, Hokusai-VTE trial done between Jan 28, 2010, and Oct 31, 2012. In this study, patients aged at least 18 years with acute symptomatic deep-vein thrombosis or acute symptomatic pulmonary embolism (with or without deep-vein thrombosis) were assigned to receive edoxaban 60 mg once per day (or 30 mg once per day for patients with a creatinine clearance of 30-50 mL/min, bodyweight <60 kg, or who were receiving concomitant treatment with the P-glycoprotein inhibitors quinidine or verapamil) or warfarin (dose adjusted to maintain the international normalised ratio between 2·0 and 3·0) or placebos for either group for at least 3 months up to 12 months. All patients received initial therapy with open-label enoxaparin or unfractionated heparin for at least 5 days. Edoxoban (or placebo) was started after discontinuation of initial heparin; warfarin (or placebo) started concurrently with the study regimen of heparin. In our analysis we examined data for a subgroup of these patients who had a history of cancer or who had been categorised as having active cancer by the study physician at the time of enrolment. Additionally, all patients with a history of cancer were reviewed post hoc and categorised according to the presence or absence of active cancer. The primary efficacy outcome was the proportion of these patients with symptomatic recurrent venous thromboembolism during the 12-month study period, analysed in the modified intention-to-treat population, with an upper limit of the CI for the hazard ratio (HR) of 1·5. The principal safety outcome was the proportion of patients who had clinically relevant bleeding in the population of patients who received at least one dose of the study drug. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00986154.

FINDINGS

Of 771 patients with cancer enrolled in the trial, 378 were assigned to edoxaban and 393 to warfarin. Recurrent venous thromboembolism occurred in 14 (4%) of 378 patients given edoxaban and in 28 (7%) of 393 patients given warfarin (hazard ratio [HR] 0·53, 95% CI 0·28-1·00; p=0·0007). The upper limit of this 95% CI did not exceed the non-inferiority margin of 1·5 that was prespecified for the trial. Clinically relevant bleeding (major or non-major) occurred in 47 (12%) of 378 patients who received edoxaban and in 74 (19%) of 393 patients who received warfarin; HR for clinically relevant bleeding 0·64, 95% CI 0·45-0·92; p=0·017. Major bleeding occurred in ten (3%) of 378 patients with a history of cancer who received edoxaban and in 13 (3%) of 393 who received warfarin (HR 0·80, 95% CI 0·35-1·83).

INTERPRETATION

Edoxaban might be as effective as warfarin for the treatment of patients with cancer with venous thromboembolism, and with less clinically relevant bleeding. Additional clinical trials of edoxaban versus low-molecular-weight heparin for the treatment of venous thromboembolism in patients with cancer are warranted.

FUNDING

Daiichi Sankyo.

Advantages of a Warfarin Protocol for Long-term Care Pharmacists: a Retrospective Cohort Study

Background

Warfarin is an anticoagulant prescribed to 12% of long-term care residents to reduce the risk of thrombo-embolism. This study used indicators to compare warfarin management by pharmacists to usual care.

Methods

This was a retrospective cohort study comparing a pharmacist-managed warfarin protocol with usual care of qualified warfarin recipients at long-term care facilities (two protocol, one control) in Calgary, Alberta. We compared the proportion of international normalized ratio (INR) tests in the range 2.0 to 3.0, time in range, number of tests, and frequency of bleeding at protocol and control sites. Our primary outcome, time in INR therapeutic range, is an indicator for assuring care quality. A cross-sectional survey at these sites compared health professionals’ perceptions of workload and effectiveness of warfarin management.

Results

Of the 197 residents’ charts reviewed in the study period, those on protocol had 45.0 INR tests while those on usual care had 52.7 tests (p = .034, 95% CI for the difference: 0.6 to 14.6 INR tests). No significant difference was found for time in therapeutic range, number of tests in range, or major bleeding events. Of 178 health professionals surveyed, those from protocol facilities were more satisfied with warfarin management (p = .013). Workload and safety were perceived similarly at all sites.

Interpretation

Our results suggest that a pharmacist-managed warfarin protocol is as effective as usual care and has advantages pertaining to work satisfaction, knowledge of drug interactions, consistent documentation, and fewer INR tests. Further research on teamwork and coagulation management in long-term care facilities is recommended.

Evidence-Based Development and Rationale for Once-Daily Rivaroxaban Dosing Regimens Across Multiple Indications

Background:

Rivaroxaban, a direct factor Xa inhibitor, has been developed to meet clinical needs in a broad range of indications in adults: prevention of venous thromboembolism after elective hip or knee replacement surgery, treatment and secondary prevention of venous thromboembolism, prevention of stroke and systemic embolism in patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation having one or more risk factors, and in Europe, prevention of atherothrombotic events after an acute coronary syndrome in patients with elevated cardiac biomarkers. However, the precise dose and regimen vary with the indication, leading to this effort to provide clarity concerning the appropriate use of rivaroxaban. This article reviews the clinical development program for rivaroxaban and summarizes the evidence for each approved, indication-specific dose regimen.

Results:

Although initially investigated for twice-daily dosing, early observations, including the finding that the pharmacodynamic effects of rivaroxaban last longer than the elimination half-life, suggested that once-daily dosing might be attainable and effective. These observations were evaluated within the extensive phase II program, which, together with pharmacology studies, provides the evidence underpinning the selection of once-daily regimens for most, but not all, of the approved clinical indications for rivaroxaban.

Conclusion:

The evidence for each dosing regimen demonstrates that although pharmacology studies are of paramount importance, dose regimens must be subjected to careful empirical validation. Once-daily dosing was shown to be clinically appropriate for most rivaroxaban indications. Furthermore, a “one size fits all” approach to dosing frequency is unlikely to result in a regimen that yields optimal patient outcomes across different indications.

Early time courses of recurrent thromboembolism and bleeding during apixaban or enoxaparin/warfarin therapy. A sub-analysis of the AMPLIFY trial

Risks of recurrence and bleeding are highest during the first weeks of anticoagulant therapy for venous thromboembolism (VTE). We therefore examined the early time course of recurrence and major bleeding in a pre-specified sub-analysis of the AMPLIFY trial, a randomised, double-blind, six-month comparison of oral apixaban with conventional therapy (enoxaparin followed by warfarin) in 5,395 patients with symptomatic proximal deep-vein thrombosis or pulmonary embolism. Early events were of particular interest because apixaban was given without initial heparin treatment. The primary efficacy and safety outcomes were the incidences of the adjudicated composite of recurrent symptomatic VTE or death related to VTE, and of adjudicated major bleeding, respectively. This analysis reports on recurrence and bleeding after 7, 21, and 90 days of therapy, in addition to the previously reported end-of-study results. These were the times specified before statistical analysis. Recurrent VTE after 7, 21, and 90 days, and six months had occurred in 18 (0.7%), 29 (1.1%), 46 (1.8%), and 59 patients (2.3%), respectively, given apixaban, and in 23 (0.9%), 35 (1.3%), 58 (2.2%), and 71 patients (2.7%), respectively, given conventional therapy. Major bleeding had occurred during these time intervals in 3 (0.1%), 5 (0.2%), 11 (0.4%), and 15 patients (0.6%), respectively, who received apixaban, and in 16 (0.6%), 26 (1.0%), 38 (1.4%), and 49 patients (1.8%), respectively, given conventional therapy. Efficacy of apixaban was non-inferior at each time point, with no excess of early recurrences. The reduced bleeding risk associated with apixaban began early during the course of treatment.

Sulodexide for the Prevention of Recurrent Venous Thromboembolism: The Sulodexide in Secondary Prevention of Recurrent Deep Vein Thrombosis (SURVET) Study: A Multicenter, Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Trial

Supplemental Digital Content is available in the text.

Patients with a first episode of unprovoked venous thromboembolism have a high risk of recurrence after discontinuation of anticoagulant therapy. Extending anticoagulation reduces the risk of recurrence but is associated with increased bleeding. Sulodexide, a glycosaminoglycan, exerts antithrombotic and profibrinolytic actions with a low bleeding risk when administered orally, but its benefit for preventing recurrent venous thromboembolism is not well known.

Dosing of rivaroxaban by indication: getting the right dose for the patient

INTRODUCTION

Vitamin K antagonists were the only oral anticoagulants available for several decades, but they require frequent coagulation monitoring and dose adjustment. The direct oral anticoagulants rivaroxaban , dabigatran, apixaban, and, most recently, edoxaban have been approved for the management of specific thromboembolic indications.

AREAS COVERED

This review will provide a brief overview of the cell-based coagulation model, the main determinants of arterial and venous thrombosis, and the pharmacological rationale and clinical evidence for the different dosing regimens of rivaroxaban. Published articles indexed on PubMed and Medline covering arterial and venous thrombi pathophysiology, pharmacokinetics, and pharmacodynamics of rivaroxaban, and Phase II and Phase III clinical studies with rivaroxaban as well as real-world evidence were analyzed.

EXPERT OPINION

Education on pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic characteristics, as well as how to manage adverse events, is needed to increase physician knowledge and confidence in using direct oral anticoagulants, as specifically discussed for rivaroxaban in this article. The continued uptake of direct oral anticoagulants in clinical practice depends on understanding of the clinical evidence and reassurance provided by emerging real-world data.

New oral anticoagulants for the treatment of venous thromboembolism: understanding differences and similarities

Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is a major cause of morbidity, mortality, and healthcare expenditure. In the United States, approximately 0.1 % of the population experiences an initial VTE event each year. Anticoagulation therapy is the cornerstone of acute VTE treatment and for prevention of recurrent VTE events. Conventional anticoagulants, including heparin, low-molecular-weight heparins, fondaparinux, and vitamin K antagonists are widely used but have limitations. Newer oral anticoagulant agents, including direct thrombin inhibitors (e.g., dabigatran etexilate) and direct factor Xa inhibitors (e.g., rivaroxaban, apixaban, and edoxaban) have been developed to attempt to overcome some of the limitations of conventional anticoagulant therapy. These new oral agents have been evaluated for safety and efficacy in large, randomized clinical trials in the treatment and secondary prevention of VTE with results that are comparable to conventional therapy. Dabigatran, rivaroxaban, apixaban, and edoxaban are important new treatment options for patients with VTE. In this review, we compare these new agents and their associated clinical trials in VTE treatment.

Sample Size Estimation for Non-Inferiority Trials: Frequentist Approach versus Decision Theory Approach

BACKGROUND

Non-inferiority trials are performed when the main therapeutic effect of the new therapy is expected to be not unacceptably worse than that of the standard therapy, and the new therapy is expected to have advantages over the standard therapy in costs or other (health) consequences. These advantages however are not included in the classic frequentist approach of sample size calculation for non-inferiority trials. In contrast, the decision theory approach of sample size calculation does include these factors. The objective of this study is to compare the conceptual and practical aspects of the frequentist approach and decision theory approach of sample size calculation for non-inferiority trials, thereby demonstrating that the decision theory approach is more appropriate for sample size calculation of non-inferiority trials.

METHODS

The frequentist approach and decision theory approach of sample size calculation for non-inferiority trials are compared and applied to a case of a non-inferiority trial on individually tailored duration of elastic compression stocking therapy compared to two years elastic compression stocking therapy for the prevention of post thrombotic syndrome after deep vein thrombosis.

RESULTS

The two approaches differ substantially in conceptual background, analytical approach, and input requirements. The sample size calculated according to the frequentist approach yielded 788 patients, using a power of 80% and a one-sided significance level of 5%. The decision theory approach indicated that the optimal sample size was 500 patients, with a net value of €92 million.

CONCLUSIONS

This study demonstrates and explains the differences between the classic frequentist approach and the decision theory approach of sample size calculation for non-inferiority trials. We argue that the decision theory approach of sample size estimation is most suitable for sample size calculation of non-inferiority trials.

Index clinical manifestation of venous thromboembolism predicts early recurrence type and frequency: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND

Observational studies suggest index clinical manifestation of venous thromboembolism (VTE) predicts recurrence type. Data regarding the association between index manifestation and recurrence rates are conflicting.

OBJECTIVES

To perform a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to determine the type and frequency of recurrent VTE (rVTE) in persons after an index deep vein thrombosis (DVT) or pulmonary embolism (PE).

PATIENTS/METHODS

We searched bibliographic databases for RCTs of acute (early) treatment of rVTE in persons with an index DVT or PE (±DVT), enrolling ≥ 50 subjects anticoagulated ≥ 3-months and reporting types of rVTE. We pooled (random-effects) the proportion of rVTEs that were DVTs, PEs, and fatal PEs, the proportion of recurrent PEs that were fatal, and absolute rVTE rates.

RESULTS

In nine RCTs (N = 13 640; 413 rVTEs) evaluating persons with an index PE; 66% (95% CI, 60-72%) of rVTEs were PE and 27% (95% CI, 22-33%) were fatal PE. Among 25 RCTs (N = 17 340; 692 rVTEs) evaluating persons with an index DVT, 36% (95% CI, 29-44%) experienced a recurrent PE and 10% (95% CI, 7-13%) a fatal PE. Recurrent PEs following an index PE had a higher fatality rate than after an index DVT (41%; 95% CI, 33-48% vs. 25%; 95% CI, 18-33%; P = 0.007). The rVTE rate was higher following an index DVT compared with a PE (2.6%; 95% CI, 1.6-3.8% vs. 4.9%; 95% CI, 4.0-6.0%; P = 0.002).

CONCLUSIONS

Our meta-analysis suggests most rVTEs will be the same type as the index event. While index DVTs are associated with a higher rVTE rate than index PEs; recurrent PEs are associated with high fatality.

Inverse relationship of bleeding risk with clot burden during pulmonary embolism treatment with LMW heparin

INTRODUCTION

Clinically relevant bleeding occurs three times as frequently as recurrent venous thromboembolism in the modern early treatment of pulmonary embolism (PE) with fixed-dose, unmonitored anticoagulants. Unfractionated heparin (UFH) is monitored and adjusted to assure efficacy and minimize bleeding risk, but low molecular weight heparin (LMWH) is not. PE requires more anticoagulant than isolated deep venous thrombosis. Speculating that PE with low clot burden could lead to excess bleeding with unadjusted LMWH treatment but not with UFH, we compared PE patients receiving either UFH or LMWH with high and low clot burden for clinically significant bleeding in an observational study.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Patients with acute PE at multiple Chinese teaching hospitals had been randomized to UFH or LMWH for initial treatment. These treatment cohorts had baseline measurement of pulmonary artery obstruction (PAO) score, which was prospectively separated into quartiles, lowest to highest PAO. All patients were followed for bleeding episodes, which were subsequently analyzed by quartile of PAO.

RESULTS

Two hundred seventy-four patients divided between the two groups had similar efficacy and safety outcomes (12 clinically significant bleeds in the UFH group vs 15 in the LMWH group). LMWH recipients with the smallest clot burdens (lowest PAO quartiles) had highest bleeding rates (Cochran-Armitage trend test, P trend = 0.048), but there was no such trend for UFH recipients.

CONCLUSIONS

For UFH, excess anticoagulant pro-hemorrhagic potential is down-adjusted via activated partial thromboplastin time monitoring, but for LMWH it is not. For PE patients at high bleeding risk, UFH may be safer if the clot burden is small.

A Review of Antithrombotic Therapy and the Rationale and Design of the Randomized Edoxaban in Patients With Peripheral Artery Disease (ePAD) Trial Adding Edoxaban or Clopidogrel to Aspirin After Femoropopliteal Endovascular Intervention

Compared with the coronary setting, knowledge about antithrombotic therapies after endovascular treatment (EVT) is inadequate in patients with peripheral artery disease (PAD). Based on a review of trials and guidelines, which is summarized in this article, there is scant evidence that antithrombotic drugs improve outcome after peripheral EVT. To address this knowledge gap, the randomized, open-label, multinational edoxaban in patients with Peripheral Artery Disease (ePAD) study ( ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT01802775) was designed to explore the safety and efficacy of a combined regimen of antiplatelet therapy with clopidogrel and anticoagulation with edoxaban, a selective and direct factor Xa inhibitor, both combined with aspirin. As of July 2014, 203 patients (144 men; mean age 67 years) from 7 countries have been enrolled. These patients have been allocated to once-daily edoxaban [60 mg for 3 months (or 30 mg in the presence of factors associated with increased exposure)] or clopidogrel (75 mg/d for 3 months). All patients received aspirin (100 mg/d) for the 6-month duration of the study. The primary safety endpoint is major or clinically relevant nonmajor bleeding; the primary efficacy endpoint is restenosis or reocclusion at the treated segment(s) measured at 1, 3, and 6 months using duplex ultrasound scanning. All outcomes will be assessed and adjudicated centrally in a masked fashion. The ePAD study is the first of its kind to investigate a combined regimen of antiplatelet therapy and anticoagulation through factor Xa inhibition with edoxaban.

Anticoagulant treatment for acute pulmonary embolism: a pathophysiology-based clinical approach

The management of patients with acute pulmonary embolism is made challenging by its wide spectrum of clinical presentation and outcome, which is mainly related to patient haemodynamic status and right ventricular overload. Mechanical embolic obstruction and neurohumorally mediated pulmonary vasoconstriction are responsible for right ventricular overload. The pathophysiology of acute pulmonary embolism is the basis for risk stratification of patients as being at high, intermediate and low risk of adverse outcomes. This risk stratification has been advocated to tailor clinical management according to the severity of pulmonary embolism. Anticoagulation is the mainstay of the treatment of acute pulmonary embolism. New direct oral anticoagulants, which are easier to use than conventional anticoagulants, have been compared with conventional anticoagulation in five randomised clinical trials including >11 000 patients with pulmonary embolism. Patients at high risk of pulmonary embolism (those with haemodynamic compromise) were excluded from these studies. Direct oral anticoagulants have been shown to be as effective and at least as safe as conventional anticoagulation in patients with pulmonary embolism without haemodynamic compromise, who are the majority of patients with this disease. Whether these agents are appropriate for the acute-phase treatment of patients at intermediate-high risk pulmonary embolism (those with both right ventricle dysfunction and injury) regardless of any risk stratification remains undefined.

Factor XI antisense oligonucleotide for prevention of venous thrombosis

BACKGROUND

Experimental data indicate that reducing factor XI levels attenuates thrombosis without causing bleeding, but the role of factor XI in the prevention of postoperative venous thrombosis in humans is unknown. FXI-ASO (ISIS 416858) is a second-generation antisense oligonucleotide that specifically reduces factor XI levels. We compared the efficacy and safety of FXI-ASO with those of enoxaparin in patients undergoing total knee arthroplasty.

METHODS

In this open-label, parallel-group study, we randomly assigned 300 patients who were undergoing elective primary unilateral total knee arthroplasty to receive one of two doses of FXI-ASO (200 mg or 300 mg) or 40 mg of enoxaparin once daily. The primary efficacy outcome was the incidence of venous thromboembolism (assessed by mandatory bilateral venography or report of symptomatic events). The principal safety outcome was major or clinically relevant nonmajor bleeding.

RESULTS

Around the time of surgery, the mean (±SE) factor XI levels were 0.38±0.01 units per milliliter in the 200-mg FXI-ASO group, 0.20±0.01 units per milliliter in the 300-mg FXI-ASO group, and 0.93±0.02 units per milliliter in the enoxaparin group. The primary efficacy outcome occurred in 36 of 134 patients (27%) who received the 200-mg dose of FXI-ASO and in 3 of 71 patients (4%) who received the 300-mg dose of FXI-ASO, as compared with 21 of 69 patients (30%) who received enoxaparin. The 200-mg regimen was noninferior, and the 300-mg regimen was superior, to enoxaparin (P<0.001). Bleeding occurred in 3%, 3%, and 8% of the patients in the three study groups, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

This study showed that factor XI contributes to postoperative venous thromboembolism; reducing factor XI levels in patients undergoing elective primary unilateral total knee arthroplasty was an effective method for its prevention and appeared to be safe with respect to the risk of bleeding. (Funded by Isis Pharmaceuticals; FXI-ASO TKA ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01713361.).

Rivaroxaban versus enoxaparin/vitamin K antagonist therapy in patients with venous thromboembolism and renal impairment

Background

Patients with renal impairment receiving classical anticoagulation for venous thromboembolism (VTE) are at increased risk of bleeding and possibly pulmonary embolism. We examined the efficacy and safety of oral rivaroxaban in patients with VTE with and without renal impairment.

Methods

Prespecified subgroup analysis of the EINSTEIN DVT and EINSTEIN PE studies comparing fixed-dose rivaroxaban with enoxaparin/a vitamin K antagonist (VKA), performed in 8246 patients enrolled from 2007 to 2011 in 314 hospitals.

Results

Outcomes were recurrent VTE and major or clinically relevant nonmajor bleeding in patients with normal renal function (n = 5569; 67.3%) or mild (n = 2037; 24.6%), moderate (n = 636; 7.7%), or severe (n = 21; 0.3%) renal impairment. Rates of recurrent VTE were 1.8%, 2.8%, 3.3%, and 4.8% in patients with normal renal function and mild, moderate, and severe renal impairment, respectively (p_trend = 0.001). Hazard ratios for recurrent VTE were similar between treatment groups across renal function categories (p_interaction = 0.72). Major bleeding in rivaroxaban recipients occurred in 0.8%, 1.4%, 0.9%, and 0%, respectively (p_trend = 0.50). Respective rates in enoxaparin/VKA recipients were 1.0%, 3.0%, 3.9%, and 9.1% (p_trend < 0.001). Rivaroxaban–enoxaparin/VKA hazard ratios were 0.79 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.46–1.36) for normal renal function, 0.44 (95% CI 0.24–0.84) for mild renal impairment, and 0.23 (95% CI 0.06–0.81) for moderate renal impairment (p_interaction = 0.034).

Conclusions

Patients with symptomatic VTE and renal impairment are at increased risk of recurrent VTE. Renal impairment increased the risk of major bleeding in enoxaparin/VKA-treated patients but not in rivaroxaban-treated patients.

Trial registration

NCT00440193 and NCT00439777.

Clinical trials in peripheral vascular disease: pipeline and trial designs: an evaluation of the ClinicalTrials.gov database

BACKGROUND

Tremendous advances have occurred in therapies for peripheral vascular disease (PVD); until recently, however, it has not been possible to examine the entire clinical trial portfolio of studies for the treatment of PVD (both arterial and venous disease).

METHODS AND RESULTS

We examined interventional trials registered in ClinicalTrials.gov from October 2007 through September 2010 (n=40,970) and identified 676 (1.7%) PVD trials (n=493 arterial only, n=170 venous only, n=13 both arterial and venous). Most arterial studies investigated lower-extremity peripheral artery disease and acute stroke (35% and 24%, respectively), whereas most venous studies examined deep vein thrombosis/pulmonary embolus prevention (42%) or venous ulceration (25%). A placebo-controlled trial design was used in 27% of the PVD trials, and 4% of the PVD trials excluded patients >65 years of age. Enrollment in at least 1 US site decreased from 51% of trials in 2007 to 41% in 2010. Compared with noncardiology disciplines, PVD trials were more likely to be double-blinded, to investigate the use of devices and procedures, and to have industry sponsorship and assumed funding source, and they were less likely to investigate drug and behavioral therapies. Geographic access to PVD clinical trials within the United States is limited to primarily large metropolitan areas.

CONCLUSIONS

PVD studies represent a small group of trials registered in ClinicalTrials.gov, despite the high prevalence of vascular disease in the general population. This low number, compounded by the decreasing number of PVD trials in the United States, is concerning and may limit the ability to inform current clinical practice of patients with PVD.

Direct oral anticoagulants in the treatment of venous thromboembolism, with a focus on patients with pulmonary embolism: an evidence-based review

Pulmonary embolism (PE) is a relatively common cardiovascular emergency. PE and deep vein thrombosis (DVT) are considered expressions of the same disease, termed as venous thromboembolism (VTE). In the present review, we describe and meta-analyze the efficacy and safety data available with the direct oral anticoagulants (DOAC; dabigatran, rivaroxaban, apixaban, edoxaban) in clinical trials testing these new compounds in the acute/long-term and extended therapy of VTE, providing subgroup analyses in patients with index PE. We analyzed ten studies in 35,019 randomized patients. A total of 14,364 patients (41%) had index PE. In the acute/long-term treatment of VTE, the DOAC showed comparable efficacy in preventing recurrent VTE to standard treatment in patients with index PE (risk ratio [RR]: 0.88; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.70–1.11) and index DVT (RR: 0.93; 95% CI: 0.75–1.16) (P for subgroup differences =0.76). VTE recurrence depending on PE anatomical extension and presence/absence of right ventricular dysfunction was only reported in two trials, with results being consistent with those obtained in the overall study populations. In the single trial comparing extended therapy of VTE with DOAC versus warfarin, the point estimate for recurrent VTE tended to disfavor the DOAC in patients with index PE (RR: 2.05; 95% CI: 0.83–5.03) and in patients with index DVT (RR: 1.11; 95% CI: 0.49–2.50) (P for subgroup differences =0.32). In trials that compared DOAC versus placebo for extended therapy, the reduction in recurrent VTE was consistent in patients with PE (RR: 0.15; 95% CI: 0.01–1.82) and in patients with DVT (RR: 0.25; 95% CI: 0.10–0.61) (P for subgroup differences =0.71). The DOAC were associated with a consistently lower risk of clinically relevant bleeding (CRB) than standard treatment of acute VTE and higher risk of CRB than placebo for extended therapy of VTE regardless of index event. In summary, the DOAC were as effective as, and safer than, standard treatment of (hemodynamically stable) PE. Their efficacy in preventing recurrent VTE seemed consistent regardless of anatomical extension of PE (extensive, intermediate, or limit) or presence/absence of right ventricular dysfunction although the data are limited. For extended therapy, the DOAC were more effective than placebo in preventing recurrent VTE but were associated with an increase in CRB regardless of index event.

Pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic evaluation of rivaroxaban: considerations for the treatment of venous thromboembolism

Patients with deep vein thrombosis or pulmonary embolism are recommended to receive anticoagulation for acute treatment and secondary prevention of venous thromboembolism (VTE). Fast-acting direct oral anticoagulants, with or without parenteral heparin, have the potential to replace vitamin K antagonists in this setting. Rivaroxaban, a direct Factor Xa inhibitor, is approved in the European Union and the United States for the single-drug treatment of deep vein thrombosis and pulmonary embolism and the secondary prevention of recurrent VTE in adults. The approved rivaroxaban dose schedule (15 mg twice daily for 3 weeks followed by 20 mg once daily) was derived based on pharmacological data from the clinical development programme to achieve a strong antithrombotic effect in the acute treatment phase and address the need to balance efficacy and bleeding risk for long-term treatment with a once-daily dose in the maintenance phase. Data from dose-ranging studies, pharmacokinetic modelling and randomised phase III trials support the use of this regimen. Other direct oral anticoagulants have also shown favourable efficacy and safety compared with standard treatment, and apixaban (European Union) and dabigatran (European Union and United States) have been approved in this indication. There are practical aspects to rivaroxaban use that must be considered, such as treatment of patients with renal and hepatic impairment, drug–drug interactions, monitoring of effect and management of bleeding. This review discusses the derivation of the VTE treatment regimen for rivaroxaban, summarises the clinical data for rivaroxaban and other direct oral anticoagulants in VTE treatment, and considers the practical aspects of rivaroxaban use in this setting.

Oral rivaroxaban versus enoxaparin with vitamin K antagonist for the treatment of symptomatic venous thromboembolism in patients with cancer (EINSTEIN-DVT and EINSTEIN-PE): a pooled subgroup analysis of two randomised controlled trials

BACKGROUND

Patients with venous thromboembolism and cancer have a substantial risk of recurrent venous thromboembolism and bleeding during anticoagulant therapy. Although monotherapy with low-molecular-weight heparin is recommended in these patients, in clinical practice many patients with venous thromboembolism and cancer do not receive this treatment. We aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of a single-drug regimen with oral rivaroxaban compared with enoxaparin followed by vitamin K antagonists, in the subgroup of patients with cancer enrolled in the EINSTEIN-DVT and EINSTEIN-PE randomised controlled trials.

METHODS

We did a subgroup analysis of patients with active cancer (either at baseline or diagnosed during the study), a history of cancer, or no cancer who were enrolled in the EINSTEIN-DVT and EINSTEIN-PE trials. Eligible patients with deep-vein thrombosis (EINSTEIN-DVT) or pulmonary embolism (EINSTEIN-PE) were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive rivaroxaban (15 mg twice daily for 21 days, followed by 20 mg once daily) or standard therapy (enoxaparin 1·0 mg/kg twice daily and warfarin or acenocoumarol; international normalised ratio 2·0-3·0). Randomisation with a computerised voice-response system was stratified according to country and intended treatment duration (3, 6, or 12 months). The prespecified primary efficacy and safety outcomes of both the trials and this subanalysis were symptomatic recurrent venous thromboembolism and clinically relevant bleeding, respectively. We did efficacy and mortality analyses in the intention-to-treat population, and bleeding analyses for time spent receiving treatment plus 2 days in the safety population (all patients who received at least one dose of study drug). The EINSTEIN-DVT and EINSTEIN-PE studies are registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, numbers NCT00440193 and NCT00439777.

FINDINGS

In patients with active cancer (diagnosed at baseline or during treatment), recurrent venous thromboembolism occurred in 16 (5%) of 354 patients allocated to rivaroxaban and 20 (7%) of 301 patients allocated to enoxaparin and vitamin K antagonist (hazard ratio [HR] 0·67, 95% CI 0·35 to 1·30). Clinically relevant bleeding occurred in 48 (14%) of 353 patients receiving rivaroxaban and in 49 (16%) of 298 patients receiving standard therapy (HR 0·80, 95% CI 0·54 to 1·20). Major bleeding occurred in eight (2%) of 353 patients receiving rivaroxaban and in 15 (5%) of 298 patients receiving standard therapy (HR 0·42, 95% CI 0·18 to 0·99). The overall frequency of recurrent venous thromboembolism in patients with only a history of cancer (five [2%] of 233 patients in the rivaroxaban group vs five [2%] of 236 in the standard therapy group; HR 0·98, 95% CI 0·28-3·43) was similar to that of patients without cancer (65 [2%] of 3563 vs 70 [2%] of 3594, respectively; HR 0·93, 95% CI 0·66-1·30), but the frequency was increased in patients with active cancer at baseline (six [2%] of 258 vs eight [4%] of 204, respectively; HR 0·62, 95% CI 0·21-1·79) and most markedly increased in patients whose diagnosis of cancer was made during the study (ten [10%] of 96 vs 12 [12%] of 97, respectively; HR 0·80, 95% CI 0·34-1·88). The overall frequency of major bleeding in patients with only a history of cancer (one [<1%] patient in the rivaroxaban group vs four [2%] patients in the standard therapy group; HR 0·23, 95% CI 0·03-2·06) was similar to that of patients without cancer (31 [1%] vs 53 [1%], respectively; HR 0·58, 95% CI 0·37-0·91), but was increased in patients with active cancer at baseline (five [2%] vs eight [4%], respectively; HR 0·47, 95% CI 0·15-1·45) and was highest in those with cancer diagnosed during the study (three [3%] vs seven [7%], respectively; HR 0·33, 95% CI 0·08-1·31).

INTERPRETATION

In patients with active cancer and venous thromboembolism, rivaroxaban had similar efficacy to prevent recurrence of venous thromboembolism and reduced the number major bleeding events compared with treatment with enoxaparin and a vitamin K antagonist, although there was no difference between groups for clinically relevant bleeding. Based on these results, a head-to-head comparison of rivaroxaban with long-term low-molecular-weight heparin in patients with cancer is warranted.

FUNDING

Bayer HealthCare Pharmaceuticals and Janssen Research & Development.

Clinical use of rivaroxaban: pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic rationale for dosing regimens in different indications

Target-specific oral anticoagulants have become increasingly available as alternatives to traditional agents for the management of a number of thromboembolic disorders. To date, the direct Factor Xa inhibitor rivaroxaban is the most widely approved of the new agents. The dosing of rivaroxaban varies and adheres to specific schedules in each of the clinical settings in which it has been investigated. These regimens were devised based on the results of phase II dose-finding studies and/or pharmacokinetic modeling, and were demonstrated to be successful in randomized, phase III studies. In most cases, the pharmacodynamic profile of rivaroxaban permits once-daily dosing. A once-daily dose is indicated for the prevention of venous thromboembolism (VTE) in patients undergoing hip or knee replacement surgery, the long-term prevention of stroke in patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation, and the long-term secondary prevention of recurrent VTE. Twice-daily dosing is required in the acute phase of treatment in patients with VTE and in the combination of rivaroxaban with standard single or dual antiplatelet therapy for secondary prevention after acute coronary syndrome events. This article reviews the empirical and clinical rationale supporting the dose regimens of rivaroxaban in each clinical setting.

The value of inhibitors of factor Xa for the treatment of pulmonary embolism

The introduction of factor Xa inhibitors advocated the initiation of clinical trials that addressed the value of anticoagulation in patients with hemodynamically stable primary pulmonary embolism (PE). In the Matisse trial in patients with PE, fondaparinux administered at therapeutic doses followed by vitamin K antagonists (VKA) has shown a comparable efficacy and safety profile to that seen with intravenous adjusted-dose unfractionated heparin/VKA. A long-acting derivative of fondaparinux, idraparinux, failed to achieve similar results. On the other hand, the Cassiopea study revealed that once weekly injections of idrabiotaparinux, a slightly modified form of idraparinux, have similar efficacy and better safety profile compared to VKAs in the long-term treatment of patients with PE. However, the inconvenient parenteral administration of both fondaparinux and idrabiotaparinux limits their routine clinical use. The availability of antithrombotic compounds that can be administered orally in fixed dose, owing to their predictable pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics, and have a lower potential for drug and food interactions has opened new horizons for the treatment of patients with PE. The Einstein PE, Amplify and Hokusai studies, conducted with rivaroxaban, apixaban and edoxaban, respectively, showed that for the treatment of PE they possess a more favorable benefit-to-risk profile than the conventional antithrombotic drugs. In addition, rivaroxaban and apixaban make it possible to treat uncomplicated PE patients from the beginning, without the need for the parenteral administration of heparins or fondaparinux, and edoxaban allows the treatment of fragile patients with lower doses. All of them cover a wide spectrum of clinical presentations, including PE patients at intermediate risk.

Effective diagnosis and treatment of pulmonary embolism: Improving patient outcomes

Pulmonary embolism can be life threatening and difficult to diagnose as signs and symptoms are not specific. European guidelines recommend stratification of pulmonary embolism by risk of early mortality. Patients with suspected pulmonary embolism should be assessed for clinical probability of pulmonary embolism using a validated risk score. A low or intermediate clinical probability plus a negative high-sensitivity D-dimer test excludes pulmonary embolism. Anticoagulation is indicated in patients with a positive multidetector computed tomography or high-probability lung scan. An important part of the management of patients with pulmonary embolism has traditionally been anticoagulant treatment with parenteral heparins and oral vitamin K antagonists. Although effective, this dual-drug approach is associated with limitations. Direct oral anticoagulants that may overcome some of these problems have been tested in phase III clinical trials for the treatment of venous thromboembolism. Of these, rivaroxaban and apixaban have demonstrated non-inferiority to standard therapy when given as single-drug approaches for venous thromboembolism treatment, and provided significant reductions in major bleeding rates. Dabigatran and edoxaban were non-inferior to standard therapy when given as part of a dual-drug approach after initial parenteral anticoagulation, and reduced clinically relevant bleeding rates. There may be a benefit to extended anticoagulation with direct oral anticoagulants for the prevention of recurrent venous thromboembolism. Registry studies will provide more information on the use of these agents in real-world populations. Accurate diagnosis and risk stratification of patients with pulmonary embolism, together with simplified anticoagulation therapy, is likely to improve outcomes.

Direct oral anticoagulants in the treatment of acute venous thromboembolism: a systematic review and meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

Acute venous thromboembolism (VTE) is a common disease associated to significant morbidity and mortality.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We systematically reviewed and meta-analysed clinical outcomes with direct oral anticoagulants (DOAC: dabigatran, rivaroxaban, apixaban or edoxaban) for treatment of acute VTE. We used MEDLINE and CENTRAL, clinical trials registers, conference proceedings, and websites of regulatory agencies to identify randomised clinical trials of DOAC compared with conventional treatment [parenteral anticoagulant followed by a vitamin K antagonist (VKA)] for acute VTE. Two investigators independently extracted data. Relative risk of recurrent VTE, bleeding events, deaths and a net clinical endpoint (composite of recurrent VTE, major bleeding, and death) were estimated using a random effect meta-analysis (RevMan software).

RESULTS

Six trials including 27,127 patients were selected. The risk of recurrent VTE was similar with the DOAC and standard treatment (relative risk 0.91, 95% confidence interval 0.79 to 1.06). The DOAC reduced the risk of major bleeding in comparison with standard treatment (0.62, 0.45 to 0.85) (absolute risk difference, -0.6%; 95% confidence interval -1.0% to -0.3%), but there was heterogeneity across trials in the relative risk of bleeding. No between treatment differences were found in the relative risk of all-cause mortality (0.98, 0.84 to 1.14). The DOAC and conventional treatment differed on the net clinical endpoint (0.85, 0.75 to 0.97). Subgroup analyses in relevant subgroups (index pulmonary embolism, heparin lead-in, age, gender, renal function, presence of cancer), as well as sensitivity analyses, were consistent with the main analysis.

CONCLUSIONS

The DOAC seem as effective as, and probably safer than standard treatment of acute VTE. The relative efficacy and safety of the DOAC was consistent across a wide range of patients.

Measures of vitamin K antagonist control reported in atrial fibrillation and venous thromboembolism studies: a systematic review

OBJECTIVE

To aid trialists, systematic reviewers and others, we evaluated the degree of standardisation of control measure reporting that has occurred in atrial fibrillation (AF) and venous thromboembolism (VTE) studies since 2000; and attempted to determine whether the prior recommendation of reporting ≥2 measures per study has been employed.

DESIGN

Systematic review.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched bibliographic databases (2000 to June 2013) to identify AF and VTE studies evaluating dose-adjusted vitamin K antagonists (VKAs) and reporting ≥1 control measure. The types of measures reported, proportion of studies reporting ≥2 measures and mean (±SD) number of measures per study were determined for all studies and compared between subgroups.

DATA EXTRACTION

Through the use of a standardised data extraction tool, we independently extracted all data, with disagreements resolved by a separate investigator.

RESULTS

148 studies were included, 57% of which reported ≥2 control measures (mean/study=2.13±1.36). The proportion of time spent in the target international normalised ratio range (TTR) was most commonly reported (79%), and was frequently accompanied by time above/below range (52%). AF studies more frequently reported ≥2 control measures compared with VTE studies (63% vs 37%; p=0.004), and reported a greater number of measures per study (mean=2.36 vs 1.53; p<0.001). Observational studies were more likely to provide ≥2 measures compared with randomised trials (76% vs 33%; p<0.001) and report a greater number of measures (mean=2.58 vs 1.63; p<0.001). More recent studies (2004-2013) reported ≥2 measures more often than older (2000-2003) studies (59% vs 35%; p=0.05) and reported more measures per study (mean=2.23 vs 1.48; p=0.02).

CONCLUSIONS

While TTR was often utilised, studies reported ≥2 measures of VKA control only about half of the time and lacked consistency in the types of measures reported. A trend towards studies reporting greater numbers of VKA control measures over time was observed over our review time horizon, particularly, with AF and observational studies.

Treatment of patients with acute deep vein thrombosis and/or pulmonary embolism: efficacy and safety of non-VKA oral anticoagulants in selected populations

Venous thromboembolism (VTE), comprising deep vein thrombosis (DVT) and pulmonary embolism (PE), presents a large clinical burden. Prompt, effective and sustained anticoagulation is vital because of the risk of recurrent events, including life-threatening PE, and complications such as post-thrombotic syndrome and chronic thromboembolic pulmonary hypertension. Dual-drug standard therapy is effective; however, parenteral low molecular weight heparin, coupled with routine coagulation monitoring and dose adjustment of vitamin K antagonists (VKAs), presents challenges for patients and healthcare providers. Non-VKA oral anticoagulants provide a simplified option for VTE treatment. Phase III studies have investigated rivaroxaban and apixaban as single-drug approaches, and edoxaban and dabigatran in conjunction with initial heparin therapy. These agents demonstrated non-inferiority to standard therapy, and most showed significant reductions in major bleeding. However, clinical information is limited in patient subgroups, e.g. fragile patients or patients with renal impairment or cancer, who may be at higher risk of bleeding and/or VTE. A prespecified pooled analysis of the EINSTEIN DVT and EINSTEIN PE studies (8281 patients), undertaken to evaluate clinical outcomes with rivaroxaban versus standard therapy, confirmed the non-inferiority of rivaroxaban, with significant reductions in major bleeding and fewer intracranial and retroperitoneal bleeding events. Consistent efficacy and safety were observed with rivaroxaban, irrespective of fragility, cancer or clot severity. The introduction of the non-VKA oral anticoagulants and approval of rivaroxaban in the EU, US and Canada for the treatment and secondary prevention of DVT and PE offer the potential for improvements in effective care across a broad spectrum of patients with VTE.

Rivaroxaban for the Long-term Treatment of Spontaneous Ovarian Vein Thrombosis Caused by Factor V Leiden Homozygosity

OBJECTIVE

To report a case where rivaroxaban was used in the management of an ovarian vein thrombosis and to briefly review the literature, pathophysiology, and clinical implications therein.

CASE SUMMARY

A 30-year-old previously healthy woman was diagnosed with acute, spontaneous, left-ovarian vein thrombosis (OVT) with proximal extension into the renal vein. After initial catheter-directed thrombolysis with tPA, angioplasty of the left renal vein, and heparinoid treatment, rivaroxaban was begun for long-term anticoagulation. Three months after her index event she was symptom free, with complete resolution of her thrombosis and no adverse effects or bleeding complications from rivaroxaban. To our knowledge, this is the first report of OVT successfully treated with rivaroxaban.

DISCUSSION

OVT is a rare but potentially fatal cause of abdominal pain that may pose diagnostic and therapeutic dilemmas. Factor V Leiden (FVL) homozygosity, an uncommon but severe inherited thrombophilia, increases the risk of thrombosis by approximately 50- to 80-fold. This case report and accompanying literature review highlight important clinical pearls related to the diagnosis and management of OVT and inherited thrombophilias.

CONCLUSIONS

This clinical vignette adds to the published literature suggesting that novel oral anticoagulants, such as rivaroxaban, may eventually emerge as an alternative to vitamin K antagonists for the treatment of extra-axial thromboses. Reporting these cases is important because their prevalence is low outside of specialized referral centers, and thus, dissemination of these experiences may help other providers in treating their patients.

Phase III trials of new oral anticoagulants in the acute treatment and secondary prevention of VTE: comparison and critique of study methodology and results

The traditional treatment of venous thromboembolism (VTE) has been use of heparin and vitamin K antagonists (VKA), and although shown to be effective, they have numerous limitations. New oral anticoagulants (NOACs) including direct thrombin (factor IIa) inhibitors (dabigatran) and selective factor Xa inhibitors (rivaroxaban, apixaban and edoxaban) have emerged as promising alternatives with the potential to overcome the limitations of traditional treatments. Clinical trials have been performed with a view to making significant changes to the acute, long-term and extended treatment of VTE. Data are now available on the efficacy and safety, including bleeding rates, of the NOACs in comparison with VKA in the acute treatment and secondary prevention of VTE as well as in comparison with placebo extended VTE treatment. This review compares and contrasts the design and results of the Phase III trials of NOACs in VTE and discusses the implications of the NOACs in terms of treatment strategies in VTE patients.