Observational studyJournal of thrombosis and thrombolysis2024
Comparison of rivaroxaban and low molecular weight heparin in the treatment of cancer-associated venous thromboembolism: a Swedish national population-based register study.
Observational study in Journal of thrombosis and thrombolysis, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT05150938 (Observational Studies in Cancer Associated Thrombosis for Rivaroxaban in SwEden), which is not on this map. Cited by 4 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.
Observational Studies in Cancer Associated Thrombosis for Rivaroxaban in SwEden (OSCAR-SE)
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Pooled it
- Rivaroxaban versus Low Molecular Weight Heparin for Cancer-Associated Venous 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
- Personalized Anticoagulation in Cancer Patients: Current Evidence and Future Perspectives.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2026Review
- Multifunctional applications and research advances of low-molecular-weight heparin.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
16 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundTreating cancer-associated venous thromboembolism (CAT) with anticoagulation prevents recurrent venous thromboembolism (rVTE), but increases bleeding risk.
objectivesTo compare incidence of rVTE, major bleeding, and all-cause mortality for rivaroxaban versus low molecular weight heparin (LMWH) in patients with CAT.
methodsWe developed a cohort study using Swedish national registers 2013-2019. Patients with CAT (venous thromboembolism within 6 months of cancer diagnosis) were included. Those with other indications or with high bleeding risk cancers were excluded (according to guidelines). Follow-up was from index-CAT until outcome, death, emigration, or end of study. Incidence rates (IR) per 1000 person-years with 95% confidence interval (CI) and propensity score overlap-weighted hazard ratios (HRs) for rivaroxaban versus LMWH were estimated.
resultsWe included 283 patients on rivaroxaban and 5181 on LMWH. The IR for rVTE was 68.7 (95% CI 40.0-109.9) for rivaroxaban, compared with 91.6 (95% CI 81.9-102.0) for LMWH, with adjusted HR 0.77 (95% CI 0.43-1.35). The IR for major bleeding was 23.5 (95% CI 8.6-51.1) for rivaroxaban versus 49.2 (95% CI 42.3-56.9) for LMWH, with adjusted HR 0.62 (95% CI 0.26-1.49). The IR for all-cause mortality was 146.8 (95% CI 103.9-201.5) for rivaroxaban and 565.6 (95% CI 541.8-590.2) for LMWH with adjusted HR 0.48 (95% CI 0.34-0.67).
conclusionsRivaroxaban performed similarly to LMWH for patients with CAT for rVTE and major bleeding. An all-cause mortality benefit was observed for rivaroxaban which potentially may be attributed to residual confounding. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT05150938 (Registered 9 December 2021).
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.