Meta-Analysis of Long-Term Risk of Recurrent Venous Thromboembolism after Stopping Anticoagulation in Men and Women with First Unprovoked Venous Thromboembolism
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Abstract Background: The optimal duration of anticoagulation after a first unprovoked venous thromboembolism (VTE) is uncertain. Anticoagulant therapy is highly effective at reducing the risk of recurrent VTE, but this clinical benefit is not maintained once anticoagulation is stopped. Current guidelines suggest considering indefinite anticoagulation in all patients with unprovoked who have a non-high bleeding risk. However, this is a weak recommendation based on limited evidence. Deciding whether patients with a first unprovoked VTE should be considered for indefinite anticoagulant therapy requires estimation of the long-term risk of recurrent VTE after stopping anticoagulation. This risk however, is poorly established, hindering decision making. Methods: We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials and prospective observational studies to determine the rate of recurrent VTE in the first year, in the second year, between years 2 and 5, and years 5 and 10; and the cumulative incidence for recurrent VTE at 2, 5 and 10 years after stopping anticoagulation in men and women with first unprovoked VTE, who had completed at least 3 months of initial treatment. Studies were identified through a comprehensive literature search using MEDLINE, EMBASE and the Cochrane CENTRAL databases. Data clarifications were requested from authors of eligible studies. Rates of recurrent VTE were calculated for each study from the total number of recurrent VTE events divided by the person-years of follow-up, and then pooled using random-effects meta-analysis. Results: Fourteen studies involving 6, 446 patients were included in the analysis. Among men with a first unprovoked VTE, the pooled rate of recurrent VTE per 100 person-years after stopping anticoagulation was 11.2 events (95% CI, 9.0-13.6) in the first year; 7.4 events (95% CI, 5.5-9.5) in the second year; 4.4 events/year (95% CI, 3.2-5.7) between years 2 and 5, and 3.8 events/year (95% CI, 1.6-6.9) between years 5 and 10 [Table 1]. Among women with a first unprovoked VTE, the pooled rate of recurrent VTE per 100 person-years after stopping anticoagulation was 8.6 events (95% CI, 6.5-11.0) within the first year; 5.2 events (95% CI, 3.5-7.2) in the second year; 3.0 events/year (95% CI, 1.6-4.7) between years 2 and 5, and 2.0 events/year (95% CI, 1.3-2.9) between years 5 and 10 [Table 1]. In men and women respectively, the cumulative incidence for recurrent VTE was 17.8% (95% CI, 14.0%-21.9%) and 13.4% (95% CI, 9.8%-17.4%) at 2 years, 28.2% (95% CI, 22.0%-34.4%) and 20.9% (95% CI, 14.0%-28.5%) at 5 years, and 40.8% (95% CI, 28.0%-53.9%) and 28.5% (95% CI, 19.5%-38.3%) at 10 years after stopping anticoagulant therapy [Table 2]. Conclusions: Among patients with a first unprovoked VTE who have completed at least 3 months of initial treatment, men have a higher long-term risk of recurrent VTE after stopping anticoagulation, and may be given greater consideration for indefinite anticoagulant therapy. Our findings affirm the importance of considering patient's sex in deciding the optimal duration of anticoagulation, and as such, emphasize the need for individualized, patient-centered approach for the long-term management of unprovoked VTE. Disclosures Carrier: BMS: Honoraria, Research Funding; Leo Pharma: Research Funding; Pfizer: Honoraria; Bayer: Honoraria. Weitz:Bristol-Myers Squibb: Honoraria; Daiichi-Sankyo: Honoraria; Ionis: Consultancy, Honoraria; Janssen: Honoraria; Servier: Honoraria; Novartis: Honoraria; Bayer: Honoraria; Boehringer Ingelheim: Honoraria, Research Funding. Schulman:Boehringer-Ingelheim: Honoraria, Research Funding; Daiichi-Sankyo: Honoraria; Sanofi: Honoraria; Bayer: Honoraria. Couturaud:Pfizer: Research Funding; Bayer: Honoraria, Other: Travel Support; AstraZeneca: Honoraria; Actelion: Other: Travel Support; Intermune: Other: Travel Support; Leo Pharma: Other: Travel Support; Daiichi Sankyo: Other: Travel Support. Becattini:Bayer HealthCare: Other: Lecture Fees; Boehringer Ingelheim: Other: Lecture Fees; Bristol Meyer Squibb: Other: Lecture Fees. Agnelli:Daiichi Sankyo: Other: Personal Fees; Boehringer Ingelheim: Other: Personal Fees; Bayer Healthcare: Other: Personal Fees; Pfizer: Other: Personal Fees; Bristol-Myers-Squibb: Other: Personal Fees. Brighton:Glaxo Smith Klein: Other: Personal Fees; Novo Nordisk: Other: Personal Fees; Bayer: Other: Personal Fees. Lensing:Bayer: Employment. Prins:Pfizer: Consultancy; Daiichi Sankyo: Consultancy. Hutton:Cornerstone Research Group: Honoraria. Palareti:Roche: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Werfen: Speakers Bureau; Alfa-Wassermann: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Daiichi-Sankyo: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Pfizer: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Prandoni:Pfizer: Consultancy; Daiichi-Sankyo: Consultancy; Sanofi: Consultancy; Bayer: Consultancy. Büller:Pfizer: Consultancy, Research Funding; Daiichi-Sankyo: Consultancy, Research Funding; Roche: Consultancy, Research Funding; Sanofi-Aventis: Consultancy, Research Funding; BMS: Consultancy, Research Funding; Bayer: Consultancy, Research Funding; Boehringer Ingelheim: Consultancy, Research Funding; Thrombogenics: Consultancy, Research Funding; Isis: Consultancy, Research Funding; GlaxoSmithKline: Consultancy, Research Funding. Rodger:Biomerieux: Research Funding.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,016 | 0,037 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,003 | 0,002 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,020 | 0,068 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,006 | 0,007 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,004 | 0,002 |
| Science ouverte | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,003 | 0,002 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,003 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».