MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Rivaroxaban Compared with Enoxaparin for the Prevention of Venous Thromboembolism In Acutely Ill Medical Patients: MAGELLAN Study Methodology

2010· article· en· W2979321393 on OpenAlexaff
Alexander Thomas Cohen, Theodore E. Spiro, Harry R. Büller, Lloyd Haskell, Dayi Hu, Russell D. Hull, Alexandre Mebazaa, Geno J. Merli, Sebastian Schellong, Alexander C. Spyropoulos, Victor F. Tapson

Bibliographic record

VenueBlood · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicVenous Thromboembolism Diagnosis and Management
Canadian institutionsFoothills Medical Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineRivaroxabanVenous thromboembolismPlaceboClinical trialRandomized controlled trialInternal medicineSurgeryWarfarinThrombosis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Abstract 3331 Background: The results of clinical trials comparing low molecular weight heparins or a pentasaccharide with placebo controls have provided compelling evidence for the benefits of pharmacologic thromboprophylaxis for 10–14 days in acutely ill medical patients (Samama et al. N Engl J Med 1999;341:793–800; Leizorovicz et al. Circulation 2004;110:874–879; Cohen et al. BMJ 2006;332:325–329). Oral rivaroxaban 10 mg once daily (od) has been shown to be effective and well tolerated for the prevention of venous thromboembolism (VTE) for 31–39 days after elective hip replacement (Eriksson et al. N Engl J Med 2008;358:2765–2775; Kakkar et al. Lancet 2008;372:31–39) and for 10–14 days after knee replacement surgery in adult patients (Lassen et al. N Engl J Med 2008;358:2776–2786; Turpie et al. Lancet 2009;373:1673–1680). Aims: To compare the efficacy and safety of thromboprophylaxis with oral rivaroxaban 10 mg od for (1) up to 14 days and (2) up to 39 days with subcutaneous enoxaparin 40 mg od for up to 14 days in patients with acute medical illness requiring hospitalization. Methods: MAGELLAN (Multicenter, rAndomized, parallel Group Efficacy and safety study for the prevention of venous thromboembolism in hospitalized acutely iLL medical patients comparing rivaroxabAN with enoxaparin) was a multinational, multicenter, randomized, double-blind, double-dummy, active comparator controlled study in patients with current reduced mobility that was likely to persist. All enrolled patients received study medication on day 1 (defined as the day of randomization), underwent mandatory bilateral lower limb venous ultrasonography on day 10±4 and on day 35±4, and were followed until day 90±7. Suspected symptomatic VTE was investigated promptly using appropriate vascular and pulmonary imaging procedures. The inclusion criteria were: age ≥40 years; immobilization; heart failure, active cancer, acute ischemic stroke, acute infection, acute inflammatory or rheumatic disorders, or acute respiratory insufficiency. Patients with acute ischemic stroke without leg paresis or paralysis, acute infection, acute inflammatory or rheumatic disorders, or acute respiratory insufficiency required at least 1 additional risk factor for VTE, e.g. age ≥75 years, previous VTE, previous cancer or heart failure, severe venous disease, thrombophilia, recent major surgery or serious trauma, hormone replacement therapy or morbid obesity (body mass index ≥35 kg/m2). The exclusion criteria included an increased risk of bleeding; prohibited drugs or procedures, e.g. anticoagulant therapy; and concomitant conditions or diseases, e.g. allergies, severe renal or liver disease. The primary efficacy outcome was the composite of asymptomatic proximal deep vein thrombosis (DVT) detected by mandatory venous ultrasonography, symptomatic proximal and distal DVT, symptomatic pulmonary embolism, and fatal VTE reported during the treatment phase of the study. There were 2 efficacy analysis populations, pertaining to the 2 primary efficacy endpoints. The study was powered at the 90% level to show non-inferiority at day 10±4 and superiority at day 35±4. The primary safety outcome was the composite of major bleeding events and clinically relevant non-major bleeding events. Sparse pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic sampling was performed by measuring rivaroxaban levels at peak and trough time points in all patients. In selected centers, a full pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic profile was performed. Pharmacogenetic and health economic outcomes were also assessed. Results: The first patient was enrolled in December 2007. As of July 2010, 8,101 subjects have been enrolled in the study from 556 centers in 52 countries. The mean age of patients is approximately 69 years, and around 46% are female. Approximate distributions of the acute medical conditions are as follows: 34% have heart failure, 32% have acute infectious diseases, 24% have acute respiratory insufficiency, 17% have acute ischemic stroke, 8% have active cancer, and 5% have acute inflammatory and rheumatic diseases. Conclusions: MAGELLAN will determine the efficacy and safety of oral rivaroxaban (short- and extended-duration regimens) compared with the current standard of care in a diverse population of acutely ill medical patients with reduced mobility and other risk factors for venous thromboembolic disease. Disclosures: Cohen: Bayer Schering Pharma: Consultancy, Research Funding; Johnson and Johnson: Consultancy, Research Funding. Spiro:Bayer Healthcare Pharmaceuticals Inc.: Employment. Büller:Bayer Schering Pharma: Consultancy, Research Funding. Haskell:Johnson & Johnson Pharmaceutical Research & Development L.L.C.: Employment. Hu:Bayer Schering Pharma: Research Funding. Hull:Bayer Schering Pharma: Research Funding. Mebazaa:Bayer Schering Pharma: Research Funding. Merli:Bayer Schering Pharma: Research Funding. Schellong:Bayer Schering Pharma: Research Funding. Spyropoulos:Bayer Schering Pharma: Research Funding. Tapson:Bayer Schering Pharma: Research Funding.

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)0.010
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.054

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0100.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.006
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.002

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 head0.039
GPT teacher head0.327
Teacher spread0.288 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations6
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBlood→Same topicVenous Thromboembolism Diagnosis and Management→French-language works237,207→