Direct Oral Anticoagulants Versus Low-Molecular-Weight Heparin in Patients With Cancer-Associated Thrombosis: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.
Review published in The American journal of cardiology (2025)
Abstract
Cancer-associated thrombosis (CAT) is a significant cause of morbidity and mortality in patients with cancer. Determining the optimal anticoagulant remains a clinical challenge. This meta-analysis aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) and low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) for CAT treatment. We systematically searched databases for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing DOACs and LMWH in patients diagnosed with CAT. Efficacy outcomes were recurrent venous thromboembolism (VTE), deep vein thrombosis (DVT), and pulmonary embolism (PE). Safety outcomes comprised total bleeding, major bleeding, clinically relevant nonmajor bleeding (CRNMB), and all-cause mortality. We calculated incidence risk ratios (IRRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) using a random-effects model. Subgroup analyses were conducted based on administered DOAC type. We identified 10 RCTs with 4713 participants (mean age 64.63 years, 50.58% male), including 2390 receiving DOACs and 2323 receiving LMWH. Compared to LMWH, the DOACs group demonstrated a statistically significant reduction in the incidence of VTE (IRR = 0.66, 95% CI 0.56 to 0.79). Total bleeding (IRR = 1.10, 95% CI 0.80;1.50) and mortality (IRR = 1.00, 95% CI, 0.89-1.12) did not differ significantly. Sensitivity analyses of studies with >100 participants and 6-month follow-up were consistent with overall results. In conclusion, DOACs were more effective than LMWH in reducing the risk of recurrent VTE and DVT in patients with CAT, with comparable safety profiles. The improved efficacy of DOACs positions them as a potentially advantageous therapeutic option for this patient population. Further research is warranted to optimize DOAC use in different cancer types and patient subgroups.
Abstract sourced from PubMed (NCBI) for the cited record. See the original publication for the authoritative version.
Zusammenfassung
Cancer-associated thrombosis (CAT) is a significant cause of morbidity and mortality in patients with cancer. Determining the optimal anticoagulant remains a clinical challenge.
Warum dies für die Hirudotherapie relevant ist
Diese Metaanalyse von 10 randomisierten kontrollierten Studien (4.713 Teilnehmer) verglich direkte orale Antikoagulanzien mit niedermolekularem Heparin bei krebsassoziierter Thrombose und berichtete über eine reduzierte rezidivierende VTE unter DOAKs (IRR 0,66; 95-%-KI 0,56–0,79) sowie keine signifikanten Unterschiede bei Gesamtblutungen (IRR 1,10; 95-%-KI 0,80–1,50) oder Mortalität (IRR 1,00; 95-%-KI 0,89–1,12). Der Abstract ist relevant für die Auswahl der Antikoagulation bei krebsassoziierter Thrombose, einem hämatoonkologischen Thema, diskutiert jedoch ausschließlich pharmazeutische Antikoagulanzien und erwähnt weder Blutegel, Hirudin noch Hirudotherapie. Er liefert keine direkten Belege zur Blutegeltherapie oder zum Blutegel-Sekretom. Daher wäre jede Verbindung zur Hirudotherapie durch diese Quelle nicht belegt.
Zitation
Direct Oral Anticoagulants Versus Low-Molecular-Weight Heparin in Patients With Cancer-Associated Thrombosis: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.
Mousavi et al. · The American journal of cardiology, 2025
Verwandter klinischer Kontext
Erfahren Sie, wie diese Forschung mit der klinischen Praxis verknüpft ist
Zur ASH-Bibliothek hinzugefügt: May 28, 2026 · Letzte Aktualisierung der Website: 18. Juni 2026