ReviewCurrent oncology reports2023
Direct Oral Anticoagulants for Cancer-Associated Venous Thromboembolism.
Review in Current oncology reports, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 14 citations in OpenAlex.
- Efficacy of Factor Xa Inhibitors Versus Placebo in Thromboprophylaxis for Cancer-Associated Thromboembolism: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.Clinical and applied thrombosis/hemostasis : official journal of the International Academy of Clinical and Applied Thrombosis/HemostasisPooled it
- Direct oral anticoagulants in cancer-associated venous thromboembolism: trial robustness and clinical trade-offs.Research and practice in thrombosis and haemostasis · 2026Article
- Insights on management of recurrence of Cancer-associated isolated distal deep vein thrombosis.Journal of thrombosis and thrombolysis · 2026Review
- Safety and Efficacy of Direct Oral Anticoagulants Versus Standard Therapy for Venous Thromboembolism in Cancer Patients: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis of Randomized Clinical Trials.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Review
- Practical considerations about management of pulmonary embolism in patients with cancer.Journal of thrombosis and thrombolysis · 2026Review
- 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
- Multifunctional applications and research advances of low-molecular-weight heparin.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2025Review
- Life expectancy in cancer patients with pulmonary thromboembolism: From clinical prognostic biomarkers and paraclinical investigations to therapeutic approaches (Review).Experimental and therapeutic medicine · 2024Review
- Hypersensitivity reaction to rivaroxaban with a successful switch to apixaban: A case report.Clinical case reports · 2024Article
- Left Ventricular Thrombus in Oncology Patients and Beyond: Imaging, Treatment Choices, and Duration.Clinical and applied thrombosis/hemostasis : official journal of the International Academy of Clinical and Applied Thrombosis/HemostasisReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purpose of reviewTo present the randomized controlled trial (RCT) evidence and highlight the areas of uncertainty regarding direct oral anticoagulants (DOAC) for cancer-associated venous thromboembolism (CAT). RECENT
findingsIn the last years, four RCTs have shown that rivaroxaban, edoxaban, and apixaban are at least as effective as low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) for the treatment of both incidental and symptomatic CAT. On the other hand, these drugs increase the risk of major gastrointestinal bleeding in patients with cancer at this site. Another two RCTs have demonstrated that apixaban and rivaroxaban also prevent CAT in subjects at intermediate-to-high risk commencing chemotherapy, albeit at the price of higher likelihood of bleeding. By contrast, data are limited about the use DOAC in individuals with intracranial tumors or concomitant thrombocytopenia. It is also possible that some anticancer agents heighten the effects of DOAC via pharmacokinetic interactions, up to making their effectiveness-safety profile unfavorable. Leveraging the results of the aforementioned RCTS, current guidelines recommend DOAC as the anticoagulants of choice for CAT treatment and, in selected cases, prevention. However, the benefit of DOAC is less defined in specific patient subgroups, in which the choice of DOAC over LMWH should be carefully pondered.
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.