ArticleResearch and practice in thrombosis and haemostasis2025
Evaluation of extended direct oral anticoagulant dosing strategies in patients with and without cancer from a prospective observational registry.
Article in Research and practice in thrombosis and haemostasis, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Efficacy and safety of low-dose versus standard-dose direct oral anticoagulants for secondary prevention of cancer-associated thrombosis: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Proceedings (Baylor University. Medical Center) · 2026Pooled it
- Reduced-Dose vs Full-Dose Direct Oral Anticoagulants for Extended Anticoagulation Therapy in Patients With Venous Thromboembolism: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.Journal of the Society for Cardiovascular Angiography & Interventions · 2026Review
- Venous Thromboembolism Management and Anticoagulation Opportunities in Cancer Patients.European cardiology · 2026Review
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Low-dose direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) have been studied in randomized controlled trials for extended prevention of venous thromboembolism (VTE) after 6 months at therapeutic doses. Objectives: This study examined the effectiveness, safety, and utilization of low-dose DOACs in a real-world cohort with dedicated analysis of cancer patients. Methods: Consecutive patients enrolled in the Mayo Clinic VTE Registry from March 1, 2013, to December 31, 2022, were followed prospectively for VTE recurrence, major bleeding (MB), and clinically relevant non-MB (CRNMB). Patients with events during the first 3 months were excluded. After anticoagulation for 3 months with either rivaroxaban or apixaban, characteristics and outcomes of patients continuing anticoagulation were evaluated by Cox regression and a nested case-control study. Results: In total, 466 patients (71% apixaban and 29% rivaroxaban) were identified on low-dose DOACs and 2273 in the full-dose group. Demographics between groups were mostly similar. Patients with active cancer as a provoking factor were less common in the overall low-dose DOAC group. In Cox regression analysis, VTE recurrence was not different between any groups. In noncancer patients, CRNMB but not MB was decreased in the low-dose group (hazard ratio [HR], 4.97; Conclusion: Dose reduction maintains low recurrence rates but also decreases bleeding, with the most pronounced effect in the cancer population.
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.