ArticleJournal of cancer research and clinical oncology2023
DOAC in the treatment of cancer-associated venous thromboembolism: a retrospective cohort study beyond the guidelines.
Article in Journal of cancer research and clinical oncology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Comparison of Clinical Outcomes in Patients with Active Cancer Receiving Rivaroxaban or Low-Molecular-Weight Heparin: The OSCAR-UK Study.Thrombosis and haemostasis · 2025Observational
- Real-world data on direct oral anticoagulants in BCR::ABL1-negative myeloproliferative neoplasms (MPNs): a multicenter retrospective study on behalf of scientific subcommittee on MPNs for Turkish society of hematology.Journal of thrombosis and thrombolysis · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe emerging use of direct oral anticoagulants (DOAC) in the management of cancer-associated venous thromboembolism (CAT) is significantly improving therapeutic adherence and quality of life. Despite this, many conditions can restrict the therapeutic index of these drugs. For all these reasons the latest guidelines recommend the use of heparins in the treatment of CAT as the preferred treatment in some clinical settings.
objectivesWe evaluated the efficacy and the safety of DOAC, in terms of recurrent venous thromboembolism (VTE) and major bleeding (MB), as a composite primary outcome. Mortality and clinically relevant non-major bleeding (CRNMB) were evaluated as secondary outcomes.
methodsWe performed a retrospective study on 209 patients to compare the effects of DOAC versus heparins for the treatment of CAT. 127 patients with a high bleeding risk neoplasia were enrolled.
resultsA primary-outcome event occurred in 11.3% of patients treated with heparins and in 10.5% treated with DOAC (Relative Risk 0.92; 95% CI 0.42-2.01, p = 0.84). Recurrent VTE occurred in 6.1% in the heparins group and in 8.4% in the DOAC group (RR 1.37; 95% CI 0.51-3.64, p = 0.52). MB occurred in 5.2% in the heparins group and in 2.1% in the DOAC group (RR 0.40; 95% CI 0.08-1.93, p = 0.25).
conclusionsDOAC seem to be as effective and safe as heparins in the treatment of CAT. Most bleeding events occurred in patients with high-risk bleeding neoplasms regardless of the type of anticoagulant. Considering the characteristics and satisfaction of patients using DOAC in this setting, this approach should be considered as a first choice.
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.