Gary E. Raskob

Oral rivaroxaban for symptomatic venous thromboembolism.

BACKGROUND Rivaroxaban, an oral factor Xa inhibitor, may provide a simple, fixed-dose regimen for treating acute deep-vein thrombosis (DVT) and for continued treatment, without the need for laboratory monitoring. METHODS We conducted an open-label, randomized, event-driven, noninferiority study that compared oral rivaroxaban alone (15 mg twice daily for 3 weeks, followed by 20 mg once daily) with subcutaneous enoxaparin followed by a vitamin K antagonist (either warfarin or acenocoumarol) for 3, 6, or 12 months in patients with acute, symptomatic DVT. In parallel, we carried out a double-blind, randomized, event-driven superiority study that compared rivaroxaban alone (20 mg once daily) with placebo for an additional 6 or 12 months in patients who had completed 6 to 12 months of treatment for venous thromboembolism. The primary efficacy outcome for both studies was recurrent venous thromboembolism. The principal safety outcome was major bleeding or clinically relevant nonmajor bleeding in the initial-treatment study and major bleeding in the continued-treatment study. RESULTS The study of rivaroxaban for acute DVT included 3449 patients: 1731 given rivaroxaban and 1718 given enoxaparin plus a vitamin K antagonist. Rivaroxaban had noninferior efficacy with respect to the primary outcome (36 events [2.1%], vs. 51 events with enoxaparin-vitamin K antagonist [3.0%]; hazard ratio, 0.68; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.44 to 1.04; P<0.001). The principal safety outcome occurred in 8.1% of the patients in each group. In the continued-treatment study, which included 602 patients in the rivaroxaban group and 594 in the placebo group, rivaroxaban had superior efficacy (8 events [1.3%], vs. 42 with placebo [7.1%]; hazard ratio, 0.18; 95% CI, 0.09 to 0.39; P<0.001). Four patients in the rivaroxaban group had nonfatal major bleeding (0.7%), versus none in the placebo group (P=0.11). CONCLUSIONS Rivaroxaban offers a simple, single-drug approach to the short-term and continued treatment of venous thrombosis that may improve the benefit-to-risk profile of anticoagulation. (Funded by Bayer Schering Pharma and Ortho-McNeil; ClinicalTrials.gov numbers, NCT00440193 and NCT00439725.).

Oral rivaroxaban for the treatment of symptomatic pulmonary embolism

BACKGROUND A fixed-dose regimen of rivaroxaban, an oral factor Xa inhibitor, has been shown to be as effective as standard anticoagulant therapy for the treatment of deep-vein thrombosis, without the need for laboratory monitoring. This approach may also simplify the treatment of pulmonary embolism. METHODS In a randomized, open-label, event-driven, noninferiority trial involving 4832 patients who had acute symptomatic pulmonary embolism with or without deep-vein thrombosis, we compared rivaroxaban (15 mg twice daily for 3 weeks, followed by 20 mg once daily) with standard therapy with enoxaparin followed by an adjusted-dose vitamin K antagonist for 3, 6, or 12 months. The primary efficacy outcome was symptomatic recurrent venous thromboembolism. The principal safety outcome was major or clinically relevant nonmajor bleeding. RESULTS Rivaroxaban was noninferior to standard therapy (noninferiority margin, 2.0; P=0.003) for the primary efficacy outcome, with 50 events in the rivaroxaban group (2.1%) versus 44 events in the standard-therapy group (1.8%) (hazard ratio, 1.12; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.75 to 1.68). The principal safety outcome occurred in 10.3% of patients in the rivaroxaban group and 11.4% of those in the standard-therapy group (hazard ratio, 0.90; 95% CI, 0.76 to 1.07; P=0.23). Major bleeding was observed in 26 patients (1.1%) in the rivaroxaban group and 52 patients (2.2%) in the standard-therapy group (hazard ratio, 0.49; 95% CI, 0.31 to 0.79; P=0.003). Rates of other adverse events were similar in the two groups. CONCLUSIONS A fixed-dose regimen of rivaroxaban alone was noninferior to standard therapy for the initial and long-term treatment of pulmonary embolism and had a potentially improved benefit-risk profile. (Funded by Bayer HealthCare and Janssen Pharmaceuticals; EINSTEIN-PE ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00439777.).

Oral apixaban for the treatment of acute venous thromboembolism

BACKGROUND Apixaban, an oral factor Xa inhibitor administered in fixed doses, may simplify the treatment of venous thromboembolism. METHODS In this randomized, double-blind study, we compared apixaban (at a dose of 10 mg twice daily for 7 days, followed by 5 mg twice daily for 6 months) with conventional therapy (subcutaneous enoxaparin, followed by warfarin) in 5395 patients with acute venous thromboembolism. The primary efficacy outcome was recurrent symptomatic venous thromboembolism or death related to venous thromboembolism. The principal safety outcomes were major bleeding alone and major bleeding plus clinically relevant nonmajor bleeding. RESULTS The primary efficacy outcome occurred in 59 of 2609 patients (2.3%) in the apixaban group, as compared with 71 of 2635 (2.7%) in the conventional-therapy group (relative risk, 0.84; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.60 to 1.18; difference in risk [apixaban minus conventional therapy], -0.4 percentage points; 95% CI, -1.3 to 0.4). Apixaban was noninferior to conventional therapy (P<0.001) for predefined upper limits of the 95% confidence intervals for both relative risk (<1.80) and difference in risk (<3.5 percentage points). Major bleeding occurred in 0.6% of patients who received apixaban and in 1.8% of those who received conventional therapy (relative risk, 0.31; 95% CI, 0.17 to 0.55; P<0.001 for superiority). The composite outcome of major bleeding and clinically relevant nonmajor bleeding occurred in 4.3% of the patients in the apixaban group, as compared with 9.7% of those in the conventional-therapy group (relative risk, 0.44; 95% CI, 0.36 to 0.55; P<0.001). Rates of other adverse events were similar in the two groups. CONCLUSIONS A fixed-dose regimen of apixaban alone was noninferior to conventional therapy for the treatment of acute venous thromboembolism and was associated with significantly less bleeding (Funded by Pfizer and Bristol-Myers Squibb; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00643201).

Edoxaban versus Warfarin for the Treatment of Symptomatic Venous Thromboembolism

BACKGROUND Whether the oral factor Xa inhibitor edoxaban can be an alternative to warfarin in patients with venous thromboembolism is unclear. METHODS In a randomized, double-blind, noninferiority study, we randomly assigned patients with acute venous thromboembolism, who had initially received heparin, to receive edoxaban at a dose of 60 mg once daily, or 30 mg once daily (e.g., in the case of patients with creatinine clearance of 30 to 50 ml per minute or a body weight below 60 kg), or to receive warfarin. Patients received the study drug for 3 to 12 months. The primary efficacy outcome was recurrent symptomatic venous thromboembolism. The principal safety outcome was major or clinically relevant nonmajor bleeding. RESULTS A total of 4921 patients presented with deep-vein thrombosis, and 3319 with a pulmonary embolism. Among patients receiving warfarin, the time in the therapeutic range was 63.5%. Edoxaban was noninferior to warfarin with respect to the primary efficacy outcome, which occurred in 130 patients in the edoxaban group (3.2%) and 146 patients in the warfarin group (3.5%) (hazard ratio, 0.89; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.70 to 1.13; P<0.001 for noninferiority). The safety outcome occurred in 349 patients (8.5%) in the edoxaban group and 423 patients (10.3%) in the warfarin group (hazard ratio, 0.81; 95% CI, 0.71 to 0.94; P=0.004 for superiority). The rates of other adverse events were similar in the two groups. A total of 938 patients with pulmonary embolism had right ventricular dysfunction, as assessed by measurement of N-terminal pro-brain natriuretic peptide levels; the rate of recurrent venous thromboembolism in this subgroup was 3.3% in the edoxaban group and 6.2% in the warfarin group (hazard ratio, 0.52; 95% CI, 0.28 to 0.98). CONCLUSIONS Edoxaban administered once daily after initial treatment with heparin was noninferior to high-quality standard therapy and caused significantly less bleeding in a broad spectrum of patients with venous thromboembolism, including those with severe pulmonary embolism. (Funded by Daiichi-Sankyo; Hokusai-VTE ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00986154.).

American Society of Clinical Oncology Guideline: Recommendations for Venous Thromboembolism Prophylaxis and Treatment in Patients With Cancer

PURPOSE To develop guideline recommendations for the use of anticoagulation in the prevention and treatment of venous thromboembolism (VTE) in patients with cancer. METHODS A comprehensive systematic review of the medical literature on the prevention and treatment of VTE in cancer patients was conducted and reviewed by a panel of content and methodology experts. Following discussion of the results, the panel drafted recommendations for the use of anticoagulation in patients with malignant disease. RESULTS The results of randomized controlled trials of primary and secondary VTE medical prophylaxis, surgical prophylaxis, VTE treatment, and the impact of anticoagulation on survival of patients with cancer were reviewed. Recommendations were developed on the prevention of VTE in hospitalized, ambulatory, and surgical cancer patients as well as patients with established VTE, and for use of anticoagulants in cancer patients without VTE to improve survival. CONCLUSION Recommendations of the American Society of Clinical Oncology VTE Guideline Panel include (1) all hospitalized cancer patients should be considered for VTE prophylaxis with anticoagulants in the absence of bleeding or other contraindications; (2) routine prophylaxis of ambulatory cancer patients with anticoagulation is not recommended, with the exception of patients receiving thalidomide or lenalidomide; (3) patients undergoing major surgery for malignant disease should be considered for pharmacologic thromboprophylaxis; (4) low molecular weight heparin represents the preferred agent for both the initial and continuing treatment of cancer patients with established VTE; and (5) the impact of anticoagulants on cancer patient survival requires additional study and cannot be recommended at present.

Apixaban for Extended Treatment of Venous Thromboembolism

BACKGROUND Apixaban, an oral factor Xa inhibitor that can be administered in a simple, fixed-dose regimen, may be an option for the extended treatment of venous thromboembolism. METHODS In this randomized, double-blind study, we compared two doses of apixaban (2.5 mg and 5 mg, twice daily) with placebo in patients with venous thromboembolism who had completed 6 to 12 months of anticoagulation therapy and for whom there was clinical equipoise regarding the continuation or cessation of anticoagulation therapy. The study drugs were administered for 12 months. RESULTS A total of 2486 patients underwent randomization, of whom 2482 were included in the intention-to-treat analyses. Symptomatic recurrent venous thromboembolism or death from venous thromboembolism occurred in 73 of the 829 patients (8.8%) who were receiving placebo, as compared with 14 of the 840 patients (1.7%) who were receiving 2.5 mg of apixaban (a difference of 7.2 percentage points; 95% confidence interval [CI], 5.0 to 9.3) and 14 of the 813 patients (1.7%) who were receiving 5 mg of apixaban (a difference of 7.0 percentage points; 95% CI, 4.9 to 9.1) (P<0.001 for both comparisons). The rates of major bleeding were 0.5% in the placebo group, 0.2% in the 2.5-mg apixaban group, and 0.1% in the 5-mg apixaban group. The rates of clinically relevant nonmajor bleeding were 2.3% in the placebo group, 3.0% in the 2.5-mg apixaban group, and 4.2% in the 5-mg apixaban group. The rate of death from any cause was 1.7% in the placebo group, as compared with 0.8% in the 2.5-mg apixaban group and 0.5% in the 5-mg apixaban group. CONCLUSIONS Extended anticoagulation with apixaban at either a treatment dose (5 mg) or a thromboprophylactic dose (2.5 mg) reduced the risk of recurrent venous thromboembolism without increasing the rate of major bleeding. (Funded by Bristol-Myers Squibb and Pfizer; AMPLIFY-EXT ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00633893.).

Subcutaneous Low-Molecular-Weight Heparin Compared with Continuous Intravenous Heparin in the Treatment of Proximal-Vein Thrombosis

Abstract Background. Low-molecular-weight heparin has a high bioavailability and a prolonged half-life in comparison with conventional unfractionated heparin. Limited data are available for low-molecular-weight heparin as compared with unfractionated heparin for the treatment of deep-vein thrombosis. Methods. In a multicenter, double-blind clinical trial, we compared fixed-dose subcutaneous low-molecular-weight heparin given once daily with adjusted-dose intravenous heparin given by continuous infusion for the initial treatment of patients with proximal-vein thrombosis, using objective documentation of clinical outcomes. Results. Six of 213 patients who received low-molecular-weight heparin (2.8 percent) and 15 of 219 patients who received intravenous heparin (6.9 percent) had new episodes of venous thromboembolism (P = 0.07; 95 percent confidence interval for the difference, 0.02 percent to 8.1 percent). Major bleeding associated with initial therapy occurred in 1 patient receiving low-molecular-weight h...

Different Intensities of Oral Anticoagulant Therapy in the Treatment of Proximal-Vein Thrombosis

We have previously reported that long-term therapy with warfarin is effective for preventing recurrent venous thromboembolism in patients with proximal-vein thrombosis but that there is an appreciable risk of hemorrhage. To determine whether that risk could be reduced without a loss of effectiveness, we randomly allocated 96 patients with proximal-vein thrombosis to a group receiving less intense anticoagulant therapy, with a mean prothrombin time of 26.9 seconds using the Manchester comparative reagent (corresponding Simplastin time, 15 seconds), or a group given more intense therapy, with a mean Simplastin time of 19.4 seconds (corresponding prothrombin time 41 seconds with the Manchester comparative reagent) (P less than 0.001). Two of 47 patients (4 per cent) in the less intensely treated group had hemorrhagic complications, as compared with 11 of 49 patients (22 per cent) in the more intensely anticoagulated group (P = 0.015 by the two-tailed test). This difference was due to minor bleeding episodes. The frequency of recurrent venous thromboembolism was low in both groups (2 per cent). Our findings indicate that less intense anticoagulant therapy is associated with a low frequency of recurrent venous thromboembolism (2 per cent) and a reduced risk of hemorrhage.

Continuous intravenous heparin compared with intermittent subcutaneous heparin in the initial treatment of proximal-vein thrombosis.

We performed a randomized double-blind trial comparing continuous intravenous heparin with intermittent subcutaneous heparin in the initial treatment of 115 patients with acute proximal deep-vein thrombosis. Intermittent subcutaneous heparin as administered in this trial was inferior to continuous intravenous heparin in preventing recurrent venous thromboembolism. The subcutaneous heparin regimen induced an initial anticoagulant response below the target therapeutic range in the majority of patients and resulted in a high frequency of recurrent venous thromboembolism (11 of 57 patients, 19.3 percent), which was virtually confined to patients with a subtherapeutic anticoagulant response. In contrast, continuous intravenous heparin induced a therapeutic anticoagulant response in the majority of patients and a low frequency of recurrent events (3 of 58 patients, 5.2 percent; P = 0.024); the recurrences were limited to patients with an initial subtherapeutic anticoagulant response. The results of this trial establish the efficacy of intravenous heparin in the treatment of proximal venous thrombosis and suggest a relation between the effectiveness of heparin and the levels of anticoagulation achieved; such a relation could explain the observed failure of the subcutaneous regimen.

Pulmonary Arterial Hypertension : Baseline Characteristics From the REVEAL Registry

BACKGROUND The Registry to EValuate Early And Long-term pulmonary arterial hypertension disease management (REVEAL Registry) was established to provide updated characteristics of patients with pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH) and to improve diagnosis, treatment, and management. METHODS Fifty-four US centers enrolled consecutively screened patients with World Health Organization group I PAH who met expanded hemodynamic criteria of mean pulmonary arterial pressure (PAP) > 25 mm Hg at rest (30 mm Hg with exercise), pulmonary capillary wedge pressure (PCWP) <or= 18 mm Hg, and pulmonary vascular resistance >or= 240 dynes x s x cm(-5). Patients meeting the traditional hemodynamic definition (PCWP <or= 15 mm Hg) were compared with those with a PCWP of 16 to 18 mm Hg. RESULTS Between March 2006 and September 2007, 2,967 patients enrolled. Among 2,525 adults meeting traditional hemodynamic criteria, the mean age was 53 +/- 14 years, and 2,007 (79.5%) were women. The mean duration between symptom onset and diagnostic catheterization was 2.8 years, and 1,008 (41.3%) patients were treated with more than one pulmonary vascular-targeted medication. Compared with patients meeting the traditional hemodynamic definition of PAH, patients with a PCWP of 16 to 18 mm Hg were older, more obese, had a lower 6-min walk distance, and had a higher incidence of systemic hypertension, sleep apnea, renal insufficiency, and diabetes. CONCLUSIONS Patients in the REVEAL Registry are older and more often female than in previous descriptions. Delays between symptom onset and diagnostic catheterization persist. Many treatment regimens are fundamentally empirical, and data will be required to determine outcomes, improve risk stratification, and develop and validate more precise prognostic tools. Patients with PCWP of 16 to 18 mm Hg differ in a number of important respects from those meeting the traditional hemodynamic definition of PAH.