Sebastian Schellong

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.).

Dabigatran versus Warfarin in the Treatment of Acute Venous Thromboembolism

BACKGROUND The direct oral thrombin inhibitor dabigatran has a predictable anticoagulant effect and may be an alternative therapy to warfarin for patients who have acute venous thromboembolism. METHODS In a randomized, double-blind, noninferiority trial involving patients with acute venous thromboembolism who were initially given parenteral anticoagulation therapy for a median of 9 days (interquartile range, 8 to 11), we compared oral dabigatran, administered at a dose of 150 mg twice daily, with warfarin that was dose-adjusted to achieve an international normalized ratio of 2.0 to 3.0. The primary outcome was the 6-month incidence of recurrent symptomatic, objectively confirmed venous thromboembolism and related deaths. Safety end points included bleeding events, acute coronary syndromes, other adverse events, and results of liver-function tests. RESULTS A total of 30 of the 1274 patients randomly assigned to receive dabigatran (2.4%), as compared with 27 of the 1265 patients randomly assigned to warfarin (2.1%), had recurrent venous thromboembolism; the difference in risk was 0.4 percentage points (95% confidence interval [CI], -0.8 to 1.5; P<0.001 for the prespecified noninferiority margin). The hazard ratio with dabigatran was 1.10 (95% CI, 0.65 to 1.84). Major bleeding episodes occurred in 20 patients assigned to dabigatran (1.6%) and in 24 patients assigned to warfarin (1.9%) (hazard ratio with dabigatran, 0.82; 95% CI, 0.45 to 1.48), and episodes of any bleeding were observed in 205 patients assigned to dabigatran (16.1%) and 277 patients assigned to warfarin (21.9%; hazard ratio with dabigatran, 0.71; 95% CI, 0.59 to 0.85). The numbers of deaths, acute coronary syndromes, and abnormal liver-function tests were similar in the two groups. Adverse events leading to discontinuation of the study drug occurred in 9.0% of patients assigned to dabigatran and in 6.8% of patients assigned to warfarin (P=0.05). CONCLUSIONS For the treatment of acute venous thromboembolism, a fixed dose of dabigatran is as effective as warfarin, has a safety profile that is similar to that of warfarin, and does not require laboratory monitoring. (ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00291330.)

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.).

Extended Use of Da bi gat ran, Warfarin, or Placebo in Venous Thromboembolism

BACKGROUND Dabigatran, which is administered in a fixed dose and does not require laboratory monitoring, may be suitable for extended treatment of venous thromboembolism. METHODS In two double-blind, randomized trials, we compared dabigatran at a dose of 150 mg twice daily with warfarin (active-control study) or with placebo (placebo-control study) in patients with venous thromboembolism who had completed at least 3 initial months of therapy. RESULTS In the active-control study, recurrent venous thromboembolism occurred in 26 of 1430 patients in the dabigatran group (1.8%) and 18 of 1426 patients in the warfarin group (1.3%) (hazard ratio with dabigatran, 1.44; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.78 to 2.64; P=0.01 for noninferiority). Major bleeding occurred in 13 patients in the dabigatran group (0.9%) and 25 patients in the warfarin group (1.8%) (hazard ratio, 0.52; 95% CI, 0.27 to 1.02). Major or clinically relevant bleeding was less frequent with dabigatran (hazard ratio, 0.54; 95% CI, 0.41 to 0.71). Acute coronary syndromes occurred in 13 patients in the dabigatran group (0.9%) and 3 patients in the warfarin group (0.2%) (P=0.02). In the placebo-control study, recurrent venous thromboembolism occurred in 3 of 681 patients in the dabigatran group (0.4%) and 37 of 662 patients in the placebo group (5.6%) (hazard ratio, 0.08; 95% CI, 0.02 to 0.25; P<0.001). Major bleeding occurred in 2 patients in the dabigatran group (0.3%) and 0 patients in the placebo group. Major or clinically relevant bleeding occurred in 36 patients in the dabigatran group (5.3%) and 12 patients in the placebo group (1.8%) (hazard ratio, 2.92; 95% CI, 1.52 to 5.60). Acute coronary syndromes occurred in 1 patient each in the dabigatran and placebo groups. CONCLUSIONS Dabigatran was effective in the extended treatment of venous thromboembolism and carried a lower risk of major or clinically relevant bleeding than warfarin but a higher risk than placebo. (Funded by Boehringer Ingelheim; RE-MEDY and RE-SONATE ClinicalTrials.gov numbers, NCT00329238 and NCT00558259, respectively.).

Fibrinolysis for patients with intermediate-risk pulmonary embolism

BACKGROUND The role of fibrinolytic therapy in patients with intermediate-risk pulmonary embolism is controversial. METHODS In a randomized, double-blind trial, we compared tenecteplase plus heparin with placebo plus heparin in normotensive patients with intermediate-risk pulmonary embolism. Eligible patients had right ventricular dysfunction on echocardiography or computed tomography, as well as myocardial injury as indicated by a positive test for cardiac troponin I or troponin T. The primary outcome was death or hemodynamic decompensation (or collapse) within 7 days after randomization. The main safety outcomes were major extracranial bleeding and ischemic or hemorrhagic stroke within 7 days after randomization. RESULTS Of 1006 patients who underwent randomization, 1005 were included in the intention-to-treat analysis. Death or hemodynamic decompensation occurred in 13 of 506 patients (2.6%) in the tenecteplase group as compared with 28 of 499 (5.6%) in the placebo group (odds ratio, 0.44; 95% confidence interval, 0.23 to 0.87; P=0.02). Between randomization and day 7, a total of 6 patients (1.2%) in the tenecteplase group and 9 (1.8%) in the placebo group died (P=0.42). Extracranial bleeding occurred in 32 patients (6.3%) in the tenecteplase group and 6 patients (1.2%) in the placebo group (P<0.001). Stroke occurred in 12 patients (2.4%) in the tenecteplase group and was hemorrhagic in 10 patients; 1 patient (0.2%) in the placebo group had a stroke, which was hemorrhagic (P=0.003). By day 30, a total of 12 patients (2.4%) in the tenecteplase group and 16 patients (3.2%) in the placebo group had died (P=0.42). CONCLUSIONS In patients with intermediate-risk pulmonary embolism, fibrinolytic therapy prevented hemodynamic decompensation but increased the risk of major hemorrhage and stroke. (Funded by the Programme Hospitalier de Recherche Clinique in France and others; PEITHO EudraCT number, 2006-005328-18; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00639743.).

Treatment of Acute Venous Thromboembolism With Dabigatran or Warfarin and Pooled Analysis

Background— Dabigatran and warfarin have been compared for the treatment of acute venous thromboembolism (VTE) in a previous trial. We undertook this study to extend those findings. Methods and Results— In a randomized, double-blind, double-dummy trial of 2589 patients with acute VTE treated with low-molecular-weight or unfractionated heparin for 5 to 11 days, we compared dabigatran 150 mg twice daily with warfarin. The primary outcome, recurrent symptomatic, objectively confirmed VTE and related deaths during 6 months of treatment occurred in 30 of the 1279 dabigatran patients (2.3%) compared with 28 of the 1289 warfarin patients (2.2%; hazard ratio, 1.08; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.64–1.80; absolute risk difference, 0.2%; 95% CI, −1.0 to 1.3; P<0.001 for the prespecified noninferiority margin for both criteria). The safety end point, major bleeding, occurred in 15 patients receiving dabigatran (1.2%) and in 22 receiving warfarin (1.7%; hazard ratio, 0.69; 95% CI, 0.36–1.32). Any bleeding occurred in 200 dabigatran (15.6%) and 285 warfarin (22.1%; hazard ratio, 0.67; 95% CI, 0.56–0.81) patients. Deaths, adverse events, and acute coronary syndromes were similar in both groups. Pooled analysis of this study RE-COVER II and the RE-COVER trial gave hazard ratios for recurrent VTE of 1.09 (95% CI, 0.76–1.57), for major bleeding of 0.73 (95% CI, 0.48–1.11), and for any bleeding of 0.70 (95% CI, 0.61–0.79). Conclusion— Dabigatran has similar effects on VTE recurrence and a lower risk of bleeding compared with warfarin for the treatment of acute VTE. Clinical Trial Registration— URL: www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifiers: NCT00680186 and NCT00291330.

Treatment of Proximal Deep-Vein Thrombosis with the Oral Direct Factor Xa Inhibitor Rivaroxaban (BAY 59-7939): The ODIXa-DVT (Oral Direct Factor Xa Inhibitor BAY 59-7939 in Patients with Acute Symptomatic Deep-Vein Thrombosis) Study

Background— An effective and safe oral anticoagulant that needs no monitoring for dose adjustment is urgently needed for the treatment of diseases that require long-term anticoagulation. Rivaroxaban (BAY 59-7939) is an oral direct factor Xa inhibitor currently under clinical development. Methods and Results— This randomized, parallel-group phase II trial in patients with proximal deep-vein thrombosis explored the efficacy and safety of rivaroxaban 10, 20, or 30 mg BID or 40 mg once daily compared with enoxaparin 1 mg/kg BID followed by vitamin K antagonist. Each treatment was administered for 12 weeks. The primary efficacy end point was an improvement in thrombotic burden at day 21 (assessed by quantitative compression ultrasonography; ≥4-point improvement in thrombus score) without recurrent symptomatic venous thromboembolism or venous thromboembolism–related death. The primary safety end point was major bleeding during 12 weeks of treatment. Outcomes were adjudicated centrally without knowledge of treatment allocation. The primary efficacy end point was achieved in 53 (53.0%) of 100, 58 (59.2%) of 98, 62 (56.9%) of 109, and 49 (43.8%) of 112 patients receiving rivaroxaban 10, 20, or 30 mg BID or 40 mg once daily, respectively, compared with 50 (45.9%) of 109 patients treated with enoxaparin/vitamin K antagonist. There was no significant trend in the dose–response relationship between rivaroxaban BID and the primary efficacy end point (P=0.67). Major bleeding was observed in 1.7%, 1.7%, 3.3%, and 1.7% of patients receiving rivaroxaban 10, 20, or 30 mg BID or 40 mg once daily, respectively. There were no major bleeding events with enoxaparin/vitamin K antagonist. Conclusions— Results of this proof-of-concept and dose-finding study support phase III evaluation of the orally active direct factor Xa inhibitor rivaroxaban, because efficacy and safety were apparent in the treatment of proximal deep-vein thrombosis across a 3-fold range of fixed daily dosing.

Rivaroxaban for thromboprophylaxis in acutely ill medical patients.

BACKGROUND The clinically appropriate duration of thromboprophylaxis in hospitalized patients with acute medical illnesses is unknown. In this multicenter, randomized, double-blind trial, we evaluated the efficacy and safety of oral rivaroxaban administered for an extended period, as compared with subcutaneous enoxaparin administered for a standard period, followed by placebo. METHODS We randomly assigned patients 40 years of age or older who were hospitalized for an acute medical illness to receive subcutaneous enoxaparin, 40 mg once daily, for 10±4 days and oral placebo for 35±4 days or to receive subcutaneous placebo for 10±4 days and oral rivaroxaban, 10 mg once daily, for 35±4 days. The primary efficacy outcomes were the composite of asymptomatic proximal or symptomatic venous thromboembolism up to day 10 (noninferiority test) and up to day 35 (superiority test). The principal safety outcome was the composite of major or clinically relevant nonmajor bleeding. RESULTS A total of 8101 patients underwent randomization. A primary efficacy outcome event occurred in 78 of 2938 patients (2.7%) receiving rivaroxaban and 82 of 2993 patients (2.7%) receiving enoxaparin at day 10 (relative risk with rivaroxaban, 0.97; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.71 to 1.31; P=0.003 for noninferiority) and in 131 of 2967 patients (4.4%) who received rivaroxaban and 175 of 3057 patients (5.7%) who received enoxaparin followed by placebo at day 35 (relative risk, 0.77; 95% CI, 0.62 to 0.96; P=0.02). A principal safety outcome event occurred in 111 of 3997 patients (2.8%) in the rivaroxaban group and 49 of 4001 patients (1.2%) in the enoxaparin group at day 10 (P<0.001) and in 164 patients (4.1%) and 67 patients (1.7%) in the respective groups at day 35 (P<0.001). CONCLUSIONS In acutely ill medical patients, rivaroxaban was noninferior to enoxaparin for standard-duration thromboprophylaxis. Extended-duration rivaroxaban reduced the risk of venous thromboembolism. Rivaroxaban was associated with an increased risk of bleeding. (Funded by Bayer HealthCare Pharmaceuticals and Janssen Research and Development; MAGELLAN ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00571649.).

A dose-ranging study evaluating once-daily oral administration of the factor Xa inhibitor rivaroxaban in the treatment of patients with acute symptomatic deep vein thrombosis: the Einstein–DVT Dose-Ranging Study

We performed a randomized dose-ranging study, double-blind for rivaroxaban doses and open-label for the comparator (low-molecular-weight heparin followed by vitamin K antagonists) to assess the optimal dose of rivaroxaban for the treatment of deep vein thrombosis. A total of 543 patients with acute deep-venous thrombosis received rivaroxaban 20, 30, or 40 mg once daily or comparator. Treatment lasted for 84 days. The primary efficacy outcome was the 3-month incidence of the composite of symptomatic venous thromboembolic complications and asymptomatic deterioration in thrombotic burden as assessed by comparison of ultrasound and perfusion lung scanning at day 84 with baseline. The main safety outcome was the composite of major bleeding and clinically relevant nonmajor bleeding. A total of 449 (83%) of the 543 patients could be included in the per-protocol population. The primary efficacy outcome occurred in 6.1%, 5.4%, and 6.6% of the rivaroxaban 20-, 30-, and 40-mg treatment groups, respectively, and in 9.9% of those receiving standard therapy. The main safety outcome occurred in 5.9%, 6.0%, and 2.2% of the rivaroxaban 20-, 30-, and 40-mg treatment groups, respectively, and in 8.8% of those receiving standard therapy. These results with simple fixed-dose oral regimens justify phase 3 evaluations (www.ClinicalTrials.gov no.NCT00395772).

Extended-Duration Venous Thromboembolism Prophylaxis in Acutely Ill Medical Patients With Recently Reduced Mobility: A Randomized Trial

BACKGROUND Extended-duration low-molecular-weight heparin has been shown to prevent venous thromboembolism (VTE) in high-risk surgical patients. OBJECTIVE To evaluate the efficacy and safety of extended-duration enoxaparin thromboprophylaxis in acutely ill medical patients. DESIGN Randomized, parallel, placebo-controlled trial. Randomization was computer-generated. Allocation was centralized. Patients, caregivers, and outcome assessors were blinded to group assignment. (ClinicalTrials.gov registration number: NCT00077753) SETTING: 370 sites in 20 countries across North and South America, Europe, and Asia. PATIENTS Acutely ill medical patients 40 years or older with recently reduced mobility (bed rest or sedentary without [level 1] or with [level 2] bathroom privileges). Eligibility criteria for patients with level 2 immobility were amended to include only those who had additional VTE risk factors (age >75 years, history of VTE, or active or previous cancer) after interim analyses suggested lower-than-expected VTE rates. INTERVENTION Enoxaparin, 40 mg/d subcutaneously (2975 patients), or placebo (2988 patients), for 28 +/- 4 days after receiving open-label enoxaparin for an initial 10 +/- 4 days. MEASUREMENTS Incidence of VTE up to day 28 and of major bleeding events up to 48 hours after the last study treatment dose. RESULTS Extended-duration enoxaparin reduced VTE incidence compared with placebo (2.5% vs. 4%; absolute risk difference favoring enoxaparin, -1.53% [95.8% CI, -2.54% to -0.52%]). Enoxaparin increased major bleeding events (0.8% vs. 0.3%; absolute risk difference favoring placebo, 0.51% [95% CI, 0.12% to 0.89%]). The benefits of extended-duration enoxaparin seemed to be restricted to women, patients older than 75 years, and those with level 1 immobility. LIMITATION Estimates of efficacy and safety for the overall trial population are difficult to interpret because of the change in eligibility criteria during the trial. CONCLUSION Use of extended-duration enoxaparin reduces VTE more than it increases major bleeding events in acutely ill medical patients with level 1 immobility, those older than 75 years, and women. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE Sanofi-aventis.