UNASSIGNED: Direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) have demonstrated clinical benefits and better patient adherence over low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) in treating patients with cancer-associated venous thrombosis (CAT). We aimed to compare the cost-effectiveness of DOACs against LMWH in patients with CAT from the perspective of the Hong Kong healthcare system.
UNASSIGNED: A Markov state-transition model was performed to estimate the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) per quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) for DOACs and LMWH in a hypothetical cohort of 10,000 patients with CAT over a 5-year lifetime horizon. The model was primarily based on the health states of no event, recurrent venous thromboembolism, bleeding, and death. Transition probabilities, relative risks, and utilities were derived from the literature. Resource cost data were obtained from the Hong Kong Hospital Authority. Deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses tested the robustness of the results.
UNASSIGNED: Relative to LMWH, DOACs were associated with increased QALYs (1.52 versus 1.50) at a lower medical cost of USD 2,232 versus 8,224 in five years. The cost of LMWH was the main contributor to the outcome. Out of 10,000 simulated cases, DOACs were dominant in 15.8% and cost-effective in 42.1%, at the willingness-to-pay threshold of USD 148,392 per additional QALY.
UNASSIGNED: DOACs were associated with greater QALY improvements and lower overall costs compared to LMWH. Accounting for uncertainty, DOACs were between cost-effective and dominant in 57.9% of cases. DOACs are a cost-effective alternative to LMWH in the management of CAT in Hong Kong.

BACKGROUND: Direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) are increasingly recommended over warfarin in stroke prevention for patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation (AF). However, there is an important evidence gap in choosing the most appropriate DOAC for Chinese patients in clinical practice.
METHODS: A multi-criteria decision analysis (MCDA) was adopted to build a scoring framework. Attributes and criteria were identified and determined by a scoping literature review, two rounds of Delphi surveys, and a consensus meeting. Weights of each attribute and criterion in the framework were determined using analytic hierarchy process (AHP). Evidence was collected based on the domestic or at least Asian data. Scoring methods for each criterion were developed depended on their characteristics and determined with an expert consensus meeting. Comprehensive scores of each DOAC were calculated based on the utility scores of each criterion and their corresponding weights.
RESULTS: A total of 5 attributes, including safety, efficacy, costs/cost-effectiveness, suitability, and accessibility, were determined, and 16 criteria were under the 5 attributes. The safety and efficacy were ranked as the top two important attributes with the weights of 38.8% and 35.9%, respectively, while the suitability received the lowest weight of 7.9%. The comprehensive score for edoxaban was the highest (72.3), followed by dabigatran (49.7), rivaroxaban (37.9), and apixaban (35.8).
CONCLUSIONS: This study provided a scoring framework developed for comprehensive evaluation of DOACs in China. The ranking of DOACs could help to support the decision-making in clinical practice. The framework could provide a reference for comprehensive evaluation of other drugs.

BACKGROUND: A retrospective cohort study was conducted to compare the efficacy and safety of direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) and vitamin K antagonists (VKAs) in the treatment of patients with left ventricular thrombus (LVT).
METHODS: Consecutive patients admitted to our institution with LVT between February 2009 and December 2020 and treated with either DOACs or VKAs were considered for inclusion in this study. The outcomes included stroke or systemic embolism (SSE), thrombus resolution, and bleeding events.
RESULTS: Eighty-seven patients with LVT were identified. Of these, 25 patients were treated with DOACs and 62 patients were treated with VKA. The average follow-up period was 2.37±2.1 years. DOACs were associated with similar incidences of stroke (4.0% vs. 4.8%; P=0.158), systemic embolism (0% vs. 1.6%; P=0.906), SSE (4.0% vs. 6.5%; P=0.657), thrombus resolution (76.0% vs. 74.2%; P=0.057), and blooding events (4.0% vs. 3.2%; P=0.858) as compared to VKAs. In the univariate logistic regression analysis, there was a significant difference between the DOAC and VKA groups in the incidence of SSE when antiplatelets were controlled [odds ratio (OR) =0.34, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.21, 0.98; P=0.027]. However, in the multivariate analysis, antiplatelets had no significant effect on the outcome (OR =0.41, 95% CI: 0.36, 1.54; P=0.366).
CONCLUSIONS: DOACs had similar efficacy and safety to VKAs in the treatment of patients with LVT. Randomized controlled trials should be conducted to verify our findings.

Background: Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is highly prevalent in cancer patients. Recent guidelines recommend considering direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) for the treatment of cancer-associated thrombosis (CAT). However, direct head-to-head comparisons among DOACs are lacking, and almost no net clinical benefit (NCB) analysis has been performed in patients with CAT. Methods: We systematically searched PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, and ClinicalTrials.gov for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) reporting on recurrent VTE, major bleeding, or clinically relevant bleeding events in patients with CAT who received DOACs and low-molecular-weight heparins. Relative risks (RRs) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CIs) were calculated using a random-effect model. Surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) values were calculated, and a trade-off analysis was performed to estimate the NCB. Results: Overall, four RCTs involving 2,894 patients were enrolled. DOACs were more effective than dalteparin in reducing the risk of recurrent VTE (RR: 0.62, 95% CI: 0.44-0.87), with a comparative risk of major bleeding (RR: 1.33, 95% CI: 0.84-2.11) and an increased risk of clinically relevant bleeding (RR: 1.45, 95% CI: 1.05-1.99). No significant difference was observed among individual anticoagulants in terms of recurrent VTE and major bleeding. With respect to the ranking of each anticoagulant for the primary outcome, edoxaban (SUCRA: 69.2) was more effective than dalteparin (SUCRA: 60.7), rivaroxaban (SUCRA: 60.7), and apixaban (SUCRA: 25.5) in reducing VTE recurrence. For major bleeding, apixaban (SUCRA: 76.3) had the highest cumulative ranking probability, followed by edoxaban (SUCRA: 66.4), dalteparin (SUCRA: 28.8), and rivaroxaban (SUCRA: 28.5). Similar results were observed for clinically relevant bleeding. In terms of both benefit and safety outcomes, DOACs, especially edoxaban, seemed to confer a better NCB profile than dalteparin. Conclusions: DOACs are a safe and effective alternative therapy to dalteparin in patients with CAT. Among them, edoxaban might provide a good risk-to-benefit balance. However, because of the lack of head-to-head studies, further investigations are needed to confirm our findings.

UNASSIGNED: The data of anti-FXa-IIa activity detection in Asian population is insufficient, and its potential role for drug adherence evaluation in patients with direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) remains unclear. This study carried out multi-center anti-FXa-IIa activity detection in Asian, aiming to explore its applicability in Asian population and find its role in adherence evaluation.
UNASSIGNED: We assessed patients\' self-reported adherence using the Morisky, Green, and Levine Adherence Scale (MGLS) from six hospitals. Plasma samples were collected for peak and trough concentration determination, and anti-FXa-IIa chromogenic assay was conducted using rivaroxaban/dabigatran calibrators and controls. Multivariate logistic regression models, covariate adjustment and spearman\'s two-tailed test were conducted in the data analysis. This study had been registered in clinical trials (NCT03666962).
UNASSIGNED: In total, 271 patients taking rivaroxaban (n=149) or dabigatran (n=122) were enrolled. Among the 271 patients assessed by MGLS questionnaire, 188 persons (69.4%) showed high adherence, 77 persons (28.4%) was in intermediate adherence group, and only 6 patients (2.2%) had low adherence. Patients are more adherent dosed once daily of rivaroxaban compared to twice daily of dabigatran: 75.6% vs. 63.6%. Anti-FXa-IIa activity had good linear correlation with routine coagulation indexes (P<0.001), but no significant association was found between drug adherence and anti-FXa-IIa activity (P>0.05).
UNASSIGNED: This study confirms that anti-FXa-IIa activity detection based on target drug calibrations can be used as an effective index for pharmacodynamic evaluation in Asian population, but had limited value in drug adherence evaluation for DOACs. As the limited samples, these findings could serve as a hypothesis-generating effort, and should be validated in further studies with larger sample sizes.

BACKGROUND: There are emerging observational studies (OSs) to assess real-world comparative effectiveness and safety of direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) in cancer associated thrombosis (CAT). We conducted a pooled and interaction analysis to compare the treatment effect estimates of DOACs between OSs and randomized controlled trials (RCTs).
METHODS: We systematically searched PUBMED, EMBASE and Cochrane Library for OSs and RCTs that reported recurrent venous thromboembolism (VTE) and/or major bleeding events in CAT patients receiving DOACs and conventional anticoagulants [warfarin or low molecular-weight heparins (LMWHs)]. Relative risks (RRs) for OSs and RCTs were calculated using random-effects models separately, and interaction analyses were afterward applied to assess the comparability between OSs and RCTs.
RESULTS: Baseline characteristic was comparable between identified 10 OSs (35,142 patients) and 8 RCTs (2,602 patients). Overall, no significant difference of treatment effect estimates between OSs and RCTs was detected (Pinteraction: 0.42 for recurrent VTE; Pinteraction: 0.38 for major bleeding). DOACs significantly decreased the risk of recurrent VTE compared with conventional anticoagulants in CAT patients (RR: 0.74, 95% CI: 0.63-0.86, I2: 0% for OSs; RR: 0.65, 95% CI: 0.49-0.86; I2: 0% for RCTs), without increasing major bleeding risk (RR: 0.90, 95% CI: 0.76-1.07, I2: 24.0% for OSs; RR: 1.17, 95% CI: 0.72-1.88, I2: 26.2% for RCTs). Whereas, increased risk of gastrointestinal bleeding (GIB) was found with DOACs versus conventional anticoagulants in CAT patients (RR: 2.77, 95% CI: 1.35-5.68, I2: 0% for RCTs). Analyses of subgroups, based on comparators and follow-up duration, did not significantly affect results.
CONCLUSIONS: In this study, effectiveness and safety of DOACs versus conventional anticoagulants in CAT from OSs are in agreement with those from RCTs, confirming a low risk of recurrent VTE and similar risk of major bleeding in CAT patients receiving DOACs.

Background: Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is a common complication in patients with cancer. Direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) have been proved to be effective on anticoagulation therapy in many diseases. However, the efficacy and the safety of DOACs in the secondary prevention of cancer-associated thrombosis (CAT) remain unclear. To assess the value of DOACs in patients with CAT, we performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials and prospective cohort studies. Methods: Medline, Embase, and the Cochrane Library were searched from their earliest date through to June 2018. Two investigators independently assessed eligibility. Data were extracted by one investigator and verified by the second investigator. The efficacy outcome of this study was recurrent VTE, whereas the safety outcome was major and clinically relevant nonmajor bleeding. Relative risks (RRs) and their corresponding 95% confidence interval (CI) were determined. To pool the results, the Mantel-Haenszel fixed-effects or random-effects models were used. Results: A total of nine articles (six randomized controlled trials and three prospective studies) involving 2,697 patients with CAT who were prescribed DOACs (apixaban, edoxaban, rivaroxaban, or dabigatran) and 2,852 patients who were prescribed traditional anticoagulants [vitamin K antagonists (VKAs), low molecular weight heparin (LMWH), dalteparin, or enoxaparin] were compared. VTE recurrence in the DOAC group was significantly lower than that observed in the traditional anticoagulant group (RR: 0.60; 95%CI: 0.49-0.75; I 2: 0%; p < 0.00001). No significant difference in bleeding risk between both groups was found (RR: 0.95; 95%CI: 0.67-1.36; I 2: 75%; p = 0.79). Conclusions: Our findings showed that anticoagulant therapy with DOACs may be more effective than traditional anticoagulants to prevent recurrent VTE in patients with CAT, while the safety of DOACs may be equal to that of traditional anticoagulants. These findings support the use of DOACs as the first-line therapy for secondary prevention of CAT in most cancer patients.

Direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) have gained momentum in recent years in patients requiring anticoagulation for the prevention and management of venous thromboembolism and thromboembolic events caused by atrial fibrillation. The use of these agents involves potential bleeding complications, particularly during invasive procedures. With increasing use of DOACs, adequate knowledge regarding the perioperative management of patients on DOACs has become indispensable.
This review covers the indications, mechanism of action, and pharmacokinetics of DOACs and their management in different perioperative settings based on various current guidelines and practices. The role of bridging therapy with heparin and the recently developed reversal agents are also discussed.
The perioperative management of DOACs is influenced by drug pharmacokinetics, potential comorbidities of the patient and perioperative thrombotic and bleeding risk. In low bleeding risk and minor procedures, continuing DOACs seems to be safe. Interrupting DOACs in high-risk procedures might be necessary and should be based on the elimination half-life of the drug and renal function of the patient. Further research is needed to better clarify the role of recently developed reversal agents in the perioperative setting and to identify specific laboratory tests to guide the perioperative management of DOACs.