ReviewInternal and emergency medicine2018
Has time come for the use of direct oral anticoagulants in the extended prophylaxis of venous thromboembolism in acutely ill medical patients? Yes.
Review in Internal and emergency medicine, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- A focus on direct oral anticoagulants: "old" and possible new indications and efforts for a better clinical management.Internal and emergency medicine · 2018Article
- Has time come for the use of direct oral anticoagulants in the extended prophylaxis of venous thromboembolism in acutely ill medical patients?Internal and emergency medicine · 2018Article
- Prophylaxis of venous thromboembolism in Internal Medicine Units: the RAMs issue.Internal and emergency medicine · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Betrixaban is a direct factor Xa inhibitor with a renal excretion of only approximately 5-7%. On June 23rd 2017, it became the first direct oral anticoagulant to receive Food and Drug Administration approval for the prevention of venous thromboembolism in acutely ill medical patients, and the first anticoagulant agent to be approved for extended-duration thromboprophylaxis after hospital discharge in this setting. Approval followed the results of the APEX trial, a phase III clinical trial comparing betrixaban (80 mg) administered for 35-42 days with enoxaparin (40 mg) administered for 10 ± 4 days. This study for the first time applied a risk assessment model, integrating clinical factors and a laboratory marker to identify high risk patients. To improve safety, a dose reduction was used for patients with creatinine clearance between 15 and 30 mL/min (betrixaban 40 mg and enoxaparin 20 mg) and for patients receiving concomitant treatment with potent P-glycoprotein inhibitors (betrixaban 40 mg). The primary prespecified analysis tested the hypothesis that the benefit of extended thromboprophylaxis with betrixaban was greatest in patients with elevated D-dimer, but the 21% relative risk reduction failed to meet the prespecified threshold for statistical significance. However, the analysis of the overall study population showed a favorable net clinical benefit with betrixaban, with a statistically significant reduction in all efficacy outcomes and no increase in major bleeding rates. An ongoing trial, MARINER, is also assessing a combined approach for risk stratification comparing extended-duration rivaroxaban with standard duration low molecular weight heparin.
Indexed as
Identifiers
28808888What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.