MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2133686162 · doi:10.1056/nejmoa1006885

Apixaban versus Enoxaparin for Thromboprophylaxis after Hip Replacement

2010· article· en· W2133686162 on OpenAlexaff
Michael R. Lassen, Alexander Gallus, Gary E. Raskob, Graham F. Pineo, Dalei Chen, Luz M. Ramirez

Bibliographic record

VenueNew England Journal of Medicine · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicVenous Thromboembolism Diagnosis and Management
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineApixabanSurgeryPulmonary embolismDeep veinThrombosisEnoxaparin sodiumAnesthesiaInternal medicineLow molecular weight heparinWarfarinRivaroxabanAtrial fibrillation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: There are various regimens for thromboprophylaxis after hip replacement. Low-molecular-weight heparins such as enoxaparin predominantly inhibit factor Xa but also inhibit thrombin to some degree. Orally active, specific factor Xa inhibitors such as apixaban may provide effective thromboprophylaxis with a lower risk of bleeding and improved ease of use. METHODS: In this double-blind, double-dummy study, we randomly assigned 5407 patients undergoing total hip replacement to receive apixaban at a dose of 2.5 mg orally twice daily or enoxaparin at a dose of 40 mg subcutaneously every 24 hours. Apixaban therapy was initiated 12 to 24 hours after closure of the surgical wound; enoxaparin therapy was initiated 12 hours before surgery. Prophylaxis was continued for 35 days after surgery, followed by bilateral venographic studies. The primary efficacy outcome was the composite of asymptomatic or symptomatic deep-vein thrombosis, nonfatal pulmonary embolism, or death from any cause during the treatment period. Patients were followed for an additional 60 days after the last intended dose of study medication. RESULTS: A total of 1949 patients in the apixaban group (72.0%) and 1917 patients in the enoxaparin group (71.0%) could be evaluated for the primary efficacy analysis. The primary efficacy outcome occurred in 27 patients in the apixaban group (1.4%) and in 74 patients in the enoxaparin group (3.9%) (relative risk with apixaban, 0.36; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.22 to 0.54; P<0.001 for both noninferiority and superiority; absolute risk reduction, 2.5 percentage points; 95% CI, 1.5 to 3.5). The composite outcome of major and clinically relevant nonmajor bleeding occurred in 129 of 2673 patients assigned to apixaban (4.8%) and 134 of 2659 assigned to enoxaparin (5.0%) (absolute difference in risk, -0.2 percentage points; 95% CI, -1.4 to 1.0). CONCLUSIONS: Among patients undergoing hip replacement, thromboprophylaxis with apixaban, as compared with enoxaparin, was associated with lower rates of venous thromboembolism, without increased bleeding. (Funded by Bristol-Myers Squibb and Pfizer; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00423319.).

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.018

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.023
GPT teacher head0.303
Teacher spread0.280 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designRandomized trial
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations775
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNew England Journal of MedicineSame topicVenous Thromboembolism Diagnosis and ManagementFrench-language works237,207