ArticleCancer reports (Hoboken, N.J.)2025
Assessing the Comparative Efficacy and Safety of Warfarin and Rivaroxaban for Cancer Associated Thrombosis: Experience From a Resource Limited Setting.
Article in Cancer reports (Hoboken, N.J.), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
17 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThromboembolic events are a common cause of morbidity and mortality in patients with cancer. While direct-acting oral anticoagulants (DOACs) have been established as the preferred agents of anticoagulation in most patients with cancer, data in resource-limited settings is limited.
aimsThe study aims to assess the comparative efficacy and safety of warfarin and rivaroxaban for cancer-associated thrombosis (CAT) in a resource-limited setting. METHODS AND
resultsA single-center retrospective cohort study was conducted on 201 patients who were on follow-up from September 2021 to August 2023. The patients were categorized into two groups (1) warfarin and (2) rivaroxaban. They were then retrospectively followed for 12 months. The primary endpoint was a composite of recurrence of venous thromboembolism (VTE), major bleeding event, or all-cause mortality. The Cox regression model was used to compare the outcome of the two groups. The baseline mean (standard deviation) age of the patients was 48.4 (15.0) and 140 (69.7%) of them were female. 41.3% of the participants had one or more comorbidities, and the most common types of cancer were gynecologic (28.9%), hematologic (21.4%), and intra-abdominal (16.9%). The most common type of thrombosis was deep vein thrombosis (DVT) (77.1%). The primary composite outcome of VTE recurrence, major bleeding event, and all-cause mortality occurred in 25 (24.3%) patients in the warfarin group and 11 (11.2%) in the rivaroxaban group (hazard ratio (HR), 0.48; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.24-0.97; p = 0.041).
conclusionRivaroxaban was found to be more efficacious and safer than warfarin for patients with CAT in a resource-limited setting. This finding is congruent with reports from resource-abundant countries and recommendations from major international societies.
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.