Observational studyThrombosis and haemostasis2022
Effectiveness and Safety of Oral Anticoagulants in the Treatment of Acute Venous Thromboembolism: A Nationwide Comparative Cohort Study in France.
Observational study in Thrombosis and haemostasis, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 22 citations in OpenAlex.
- Comparative safety and effectiveness of direct oral anticoagulants and warfarin in patients with venous thromboembolism in Finland, Norway and Sweden.Journal of comparative effectiveness research · 2025Observational
- Α 6-month, multicenter, observational study investigating the treatment of venous thromboembolism in Greece (VICTORIA study).Thrombosis journal · 2025Article
- Excess risk of bleeding in patients with venous thromboembolism on direct oral anticoagulants during initial and extended treatment versus population controls.Journal of internal medicine · 2025Article
- Occurrence and management of thrombosis recurrence and bleeding in low-molecular-weight heparin-treated patients with cancer-associated thrombosis: a French nationwide cohort study.Research and practice in thrombosis and haemostasis · 2025Article
- Article
- Clinical impact of high platelet reactivity in patients with atrial fibrillation and concomitant percutaneous coronary intervention on dual or triple antithrombotic therapy.Journal of thrombosis and thrombolysis · 2023Observational
- Comparison of Effectiveness and Safety Among 3 Direct Oral Anticoagulants in Patients With Venous Thromboembolism - A Single-Center Retrospective Study.Circulation reports · 2022Article
- Anticoagulants: A Short History, Their Mechanism of Action, Pharmacology, and Indications.Cells · 2022Review
- Comparative Analysis of All-Cause Health Care Resource Utilization and Costs Among Venous Thrombosis Patients Without Cancer Prescribed Apixaban or VKAs in France.Advances in therapy · 2022Article
- Factor XI Inhibition for the Prevention of Venous Thromboembolism: An Update on Current Evidence and Future perspectives.Vascular health and risk management · 2022Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 4 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionData from clinical trials indicate that direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) are noninferior and safer than conventional therapy (low-molecular-weight heparin followed by a vitamin K antagonist [VKA]) for treating venous thromboembolism (VTE), which includes deep vein thrombosis and pulmonary embolism (PE). This study compared the effectiveness and safety of DOACs and conventional therapy in a real-world setting.
methodsThis observational study used French national claims data of adult, treatment-naïve patients diagnosed with VTE (majority PE) who were hospitalized and treated for VTE with a DOAC (apixaban or rivaroxaban) or VKAs during 2013 to 2018. Patients with active cancer were excluded. After propensity score matching for each DOAC-VKA comparison, risks of bleeding, recurrent VTE, and all-cause mortality were compared at 6 months. Cox proportional hazards regression was used to estimate adjusted hazard ratios of the endpoints.
resultsA total of 58,137 patients were included (10,775 VKAs, 10,440 apixaban, 36,922 rivaroxaban). Propensity score-matched cohort sizes were 7,503 for apixaban and 9,179 for rivaroxaban. The hazard ratio (95% confidence interval) was significantly lower for apixaban than VKAs for bleeding requiring hospitalization (0.43 [0.32-0.59]), all-cause death (0.61 [0.51-0.74]), and first recurrent VTE (0.67 [0.52-0.85]). The hazard ratio was also significantly lower for rivaroxaban than VKAs for all-cause death (0.63 [0.53-0.74]) but not for bleeding requiring hospitalization (0.86 [0.69-1.07]) or first recurrent VTE (0.91 [0.74-1.13]).
conclusionApixaban was associated with superior safety and effectiveness than VKAs. All-cause mortality was lower in both DOACs than VKAs. Our results support recommendations to use DOACs over VKAs for the treatment of VTE.
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.