ArticleResearch and practice in thrombosis and haemostasis2021
Venous thrombosis recurrence risk according to warfarin versus direct oral anticoagulants for the secondary prevention of venous thrombosis.
Article in Research and practice in thrombosis and haemostasis, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Safety and Effectiveness of Direct Oral Anticoagulants Versus Warfarin in Patients with Venous Thromboembolism using Real-World Data: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.American journal of cardiovascular drugs : drugs, devices, and other interventions · 2024Pooled it
- Venous thrombosis recurrence risk according to warfarin versus direct oral anticoagulants for the secondary prevention of venous thrombosis.Research and practice in thrombosis and haemostasis · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundVenous thromboembolism (VTE) affects nearly 1 million Americans annually, and many benefit from continued anticoagulation after the initial 3- to 6-month treatment period (secondary prevention).
objectivesTo determine whether warfarin, apixaban, or rivaroxaban is associated with reduced recurrent VTE hospitalization in the secondary prevention of VTE. PATIENTS/
methodsWe performed a retrospective cohort study of participants enrolled in the MarketScan Insurance Database between 2013 and 2017 in those with an incident VTE. In those individuals who continued oral anticoagulation (warfarin, apixaban, or rivaroxaban) beyond 6 months, we determined the relative rate of recurrent VTE hospitalization.
resultsAmong 119 964 individuals with VTE, 25 419 remained on anticoagulation after 6 months and were matched successfully by age, sex, and date. After adjusting for a propensity score, apixaban versus rivaroxaban (hazard ratio [HR], 0.65; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.45-0.94) and apixaban versus warfarin (HR, 0.68; 95% CI, 0.47-1.00) had a reduced risk of recurrent VTE hospitalization, and rivaroxaban versus warfarin (HR, 1.12; 95% CI, 0.94-1.33) had equivalent rates. For the rivaroxaban versus warfarin comparison there was a significant interaction by renal function (
conclusionsThese data suggest that apixaban has a lower recurrent VTE hospitalization rate than rivaroxaban during the secondary prevention of VTE, and further study of diverse patient populations, especially by kidney function, is warranted.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.