ArticleThrombosis journal2026
Safety and efficacy of apixaban versus enoxaparin in gynecologic cancer patients undergoing open surgery: an open-label randomized controlled trial.
Article in Thrombosis journal, 2026. 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundWomen undergoing surgery for gynecologic malignancies are at high risk for postoperative venous thromboembolism (VTE). Although subcutaneous enoxaparin is commonly used for prophylaxis, concerns about cost, self-injections, and adherence have prompted investigation of oral alternatives such as apixaban. In this clinical trial, we compared the safety and efficacy of apixaban versus enoxaparin for postoperative VTE prophylaxis in patients undergoing open surgery for gynecologic cancers.
methodsIn this single-center, randomized, open-label trial, 450 patients with confirmed gynecologic malignancies undergoing open abdominal surgery were allocated in a 3.5:1 ratio to receive either apixaban (2.5 mg orally twice daily) or enoxaparin (40 mg subcutaneously once daily) for 14–28 days. The primary outcomes were the incidence of VTE and major bleeding within 30 days post‑surgery, corresponding to the active prophylaxis period. Data were analyzed using intention-to-treat principles.
resultsNo significant difference was observed in the baseline characteristics of the two study groups. Within 30 days, VTE occurred in 2.0% of patients in the apixaban group and 3.0% in the enoxaparin group (p = 0.891), confirming non-inferiority. Major bleeding events were significantly lower in the apixaban group (1.4%) compared to the enoxaparin group (9.0%) (p = 0.001). No other adverse effects were reported in any of the study groups.
conclusionApixaban demonstrated comparable efficacy and superior safety to enoxaparin for postoperative thromboprophylaxis in women undergoing open gynecologic cancer surgery. These findings support apixaban as a viable alternative to enoxaparin in this population. CLINICAL TRIAL NUMBER: IRCT20220211053991N1.
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.