ArticleJAMA network open2023
Comparative Effectiveness of Anticoagulants in Patients With Cancer-Associated Thrombosis.
Article in JAMA network open, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 28 papers, 2 of them syntheses 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
28 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Pooled it
- Advances and Challenges in the Application of Novel Oral Anticoagulants for Venous Thromboembolism Prevention Following Colorectal Cancer Surgery.Journal of gastrointestinal cancer · 2025Pooled it
- A 10-year review of iliofemoral deep vein thrombosis - are they more dangerous than their distal counterparts?Journal of thrombosis and thrombolysis · 2026Article
- Comparison of anticoagulants and risk of ischemic stroke in patients with acute cancer-associated venous thromboembolism.Blood advances · 2026Article
- Proposing an Optimized Prediction Model for Pancreatic Cancer Based on Mendelian Randomization Analysis of Fibrinogen Levels and Urinary Protein Excretion Rate.Clinical Medicine Insights. Oncology · 2026Article
- Venous Thromboembolism Management and Anticoagulation Opportunities in Cancer Patients.European cardiology · 2026Review
- Atrial fibrillation and ischemic stroke in cancer: the latest scientific evidence, current management, and future directions.Journal of thrombosis and thrombolysis · 2025Review
- Management of cancer-associated venous thromboembolism: Perspectives on optimizing current therapeutics with a focus on factor XI inhibition.Journal of thrombosis and thrombolysis · 2025Review
- Anticoagulant Usage and Risk of Thromboembolic Events After Ischemic Stroke in Adults With Cancer.Neurology · 2025Article
- Expert Review of the Strategies to Optimize Long-Term Outcomes After Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting.Reviews in cardiovascular medicine · 2025Review
- Direct oral anticoagulants versus low-molecular-weight heparin for thromboprophylaxis in cancer-related surgeries: A meta-analysis of efficacy and safety outcomes.American heart journal plus : cardiology research and practice · 2025Review
- Comparative Effectiveness of Direct Oral Anticoagulants and Warfarin on Venous Thromboembolism in Cancer Patients.Cancer medicine · 2025Article
- Long-Term Outcomes and Predictors in Cancer-Related Stroke Using the Linked Data Set.Journal of the American Heart Association · 2025Article
- Article
- Evaluation of extended direct oral anticoagulant dosing strategies in patients with and without cancer from a prospective observational registry.Research and practice in thrombosis and haemostasis · 2025Article
- Article
- Factors associated with thrombosis among solid organ cancer patients in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia.Thrombosis journal · 2025Article
- Article
- Direct Oral anticoagulants in pulmonary thromboembolism therapy: the generalization-individualization dilemma and the path to risk stratification-a perspective.Frontiers in medicine · 2025Article
- Assessing the Comparative Efficacy and Safety of Warfarin and Rivaroxaban for Cancer Associated Thrombosis: Experience From a Resource Limited Setting.Cancer reports (Hoboken, N.J.) · 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
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Importance: Patterns of clinical utilization and comparative effectiveness of anticoagulants for cancer-associated thrombosis (CAT) remain largely unexplored. Objectives: To assess patterns of and factors associated with anticoagulant use and to evaluate the comparative effectiveness of contemporary anticoagulants in patients with active cancer in a clinical setting. Design, Setting, and Participants: This retrospective cohort study obtained deidentified OptumLabs electronic health record claims data from January 1, 2012, to September 30, 2019. Adult patients (≥18 years of age) with a primary cancer diagnosis (except skin cancer) during at least 1 inpatient or 2 outpatient visits within 6 months before the venous thromboembolism (VTE) date were included. Data were analyzed from April 2020 to September 2021. Exposures: The patients were grouped according to the anticoagulant prescribed: (1) direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs), (2) low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH), and (3) warfarin. Main Outcomes and Measures: Odds ratios (ORs) were used to present the association between factors of interest and utilization of anticoagulants. Main efficacy outcomes included risk of VTE recurrence and all-cause mortality. Main safety outcomes included the risk of hospitalization due to major bleeding. Relative treatment effect estimates were expressed as hazard ratios (HRs) with 95% CIs. Results: This study included 5100 patients (mean [SD] age, 66.3 [12.3] years; 2670 [52.4%] women; 799 [15.7%] Black, 389 [7.6%] Hispanic, and 3559 [69.8%] White individuals). Overall, 2512 (49.3%), 1488 (29.2%), and 1460 (28.6%) filled prescriptions for DOACs, LMWH, and warfarin, respectively. The median (IQR) treatment duration was 3.2 (1.0-6.5) months for DOACs, 3.1 (1.0-6.8) months for warfarin, and 1.8 (0.9-3.8) months for LWMH. Patients with lung (OR, 2.07; 95% CI, 1.12-3.65), urological (OR, 1.94; 95% CI,1.08-3.49), gynecological (OR, 4.25; 95% CI, 2.31-7.82), and colorectal (OR, 2.26; 95% CI, 1.20-4.32) cancer were associated with increased prescriptions for LMWH compared with DOACs. LMWH (HR, 1.47; 95% CI, 1.14-1.90) and warfarin (HR, 1.46; 95% CI, 1.13-1.87) were associated with an increased risk of VTE recurrences compared with DOACs. LMWH was associated with an increased risk of major bleeding (HR, 2.27; 95% CI, 1.62-3.20) and higher all-cause mortality (HR, 1.61; 95% CI, 1.15-2.25) compared with DOACs. Conclusions and Relevance: In this comparative effectiveness study of claims-based data, patients with CAT received anticoagulation for a remarkably short duration in clinical settings. DOACs was associated with a lower risk of VTE recurrence, major bleeding, and mortality. Warfarin may still be considered for patients with contraindications to DOACs and those with poor persistence on LMWH.
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.