American Society of Hirudotherapy

Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Real-World Studies Evaluating Rivaroxaban for Cancer-Associated Venous Thrombosis

Research article published in Pharmacotherapy (2018)

Last Updated: June 18, 2026Reviewed by: ASH Editorial Board
Research article — evidence reviewArticle reference
Evidence: Meta-analysisDrug DevelopmentMartinez et al. · Pharmacotherapy, 2018

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: While not designated as guideline-recommended first-line anticoagulation therapy, about one in five patients in the United States receive rivaroxaban for the treatment of cancer-associated venous thrombosis (CAT). METHODS: A systematic review and meta-analysis were performed to evaluate the incidences of recurrent venous thromboembolism (VTE), major bleeding, and all-cause mortality in rivaroxaban patients treated for CAT in routine practice. Literature searches of MEDLINE and SCOPUS were performed through September 2017 to identify real-world studies of ≥ 20 patients evaluating the incidence of recurrent VTE, major bleeding, or all-cause mortality in CAT patients anticoagulated with rivaroxaban. Using a Hartung-Knapp random-effects model, the pooled incidence estimates and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated for each end point. RESULTS: Six studies evaluating rivaroxaban for CAT were identified. Of these, three were prospective and three were retrospective. Study sample sizes ranged from 41 to 949 patients, and duration of follow-up ranged from 164 to 496 days. The most frequent active cancer sites reported in studies were gastrointestinal (range: 12.0-56.0%), genitourinary (range: 8.6-26.0%), and breast (range: 9.3-25.5%). The weighted average incidences of recurrent VTE, major bleeding, and all-cause mortality were 4.2% (95% CI = 2.6-6.6%; I2 = 31%), 2.9% (95% CI = 1.6-5.0%; I2 = 59%), and 16.1% (95% CI = 6.0-36.6%; I2 = 96%). CONCLUSIONS: This meta-analysis suggests that incidences of recurrent VTE and major bleeding among rivaroxaban-managed patients are not dissimilar to those seen in recent randomized trials of anticoagulation in CAT. The pooled incidence for mortality was lower than reported in many anticoagulation CAT trials. This may suggest that rivaroxaban is being used in CAT patients who have less severe cancer.

Abstract sourced from PubMed (NCBI) for the cited record. See the original publication for the authoritative version.

Publication typeJournal ArticleMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
Indexed MeSH termsFactor Xa InhibitorsHumansNeoplasmsRivaroxabanVenous Thromboembolism

Summary

Peer-reviewed research on anticoagulant and antithrombotic agents relevant to leech-derived compounds and thrombosis management. Indexed in PubMed and verified against the NCBI record.

Why This Matters for Hirudotherapy

This systematic review and meta-analysis pooled six real-world studies (three prospective, three retrospective) of rivaroxaban (a factor Xa inhibitor) for cancer-associated venous thrombosis, reporting weighted-average incidences of 4.2% for recurrent VTE, 2.9% for major bleeding, and 16.1% for all-cause mortality (with high heterogeneity for mortality, I2=96%), and concluding that recurrence and bleeding rates were not dissimilar to recent randomized anticoagulation trials in this population. Its bearing on hirudotherapy is contextual rather than direct: it maps the contemporary anticoagulation landscape against which leech-derived antithrombotics (hirudin and related secretome molecules) are positioned, here for a factor Xa inhibitor rather than a thrombin inhibitor. Caveat: the analysis aggregates real-world studies (with substantial heterogeneity) of a synthetic drug, concerns no leech-derived compound, and shares no mechanism with hirudin, so it should be cited only as background on the evolving anticoagulation field.

Citation

Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Real-World Studies Evaluating Rivaroxaban for Cancer-Associated Venous Thrombosis.

Martinez et al. · Pharmacotherapy, 2018

Added to ASH library: May 28, 2026 · Site last updated: June 18, 2026

This website provides educational information and does not constitute medical advice, diagnosis, or treatment recommendations. Medicinal leech therapy carries clinically meaningful risks and should be performed only by qualified clinicians under institutionally approved protocols. FDA 510(k) clearance for medicinal leeches is limited to specific indications; investigational and off-label discussions are labeled accordingly. For patient-specific guidance, consult a qualified healthcare provider.