ArticleCancer medicine2025
Comparative Effectiveness of Direct Oral Anticoagulants and Warfarin on Venous Thromboembolism in Cancer Patients.
Article in Cancer medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Comparative Effectiveness of Direct Oral Anticoagulants and Warfarin on Venous Thromboembolism in Cancer Patients.Cancer medicine · 2025Article
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
Abstract
introductionVenous thromboembolism (VTE) is a leading cause of mortality in cancer patients, and a substantial number of patients are being treated with oral anticoagulants. We aim to assess the comparative effectiveness of direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) compared to warfarin for VTE treatment in cancer patients.
methodsIn this retrospective cohort study, we included 2,367 cancer patients who are new users of oral anticoagulants (OACs) for VTE treatment from 2009 to 2021 in NHS Scotland. Patients were grouped by OAC type, DOACs or warfarin. To adjust for confounding, inverse probability treatment weighting was applied. Outcomes included mortality, VTE recurrence, and major bleeding. We calculated Hazard Ratio (HR) using Cox regression and sub-distribution HR (sHR) using a competing risk framework (Fine and Gray method) for VTE recurrence and major bleeding. Subgroup analyses were conducted for individual DOACs.
resultsPatients on DOACs had lower risks of VTE recurrence (sHR 0.73 95% CI 0.59-0.90) and major bleeding (sHR 0.68, 95% CI 0.53-0.88) compared to patients on warfarin. Patients on rivaroxaban (HR 1.21, 95% CI 1.04-1.39) and edoxaban (HR 1.59, 95% CI 1.15-2.22) had a significantly higher risk of mortality, while a comparable risk of mortality was observed (HR 0.91, 95% CI 0.76-1.08) for patients on apixaban compared to patients on warfarin.
conclusionThis study provides insight into the effectiveness of DOACs compared to warfarin for VTE in cancer patients. Patients on DOACs had lower risks of VTE recurrence and major bleeding. We suggest healthcare professionals consider the potential benefits of individual DOACs when making treatment decisions.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.