MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2988863151 · doi:10.1182/blood-2019-128834

Safety and Efficacy of Apixaban Thromboprophylaxis in Cancer Patients with Metastatic Disease: A Subgroup Analysis of the Avert Trial

2019· article· en· W2988863151 on OpenAlexaff
William Knoll, Ranjeeta Mallick, Philip S. Wells, Marc Carrier

Bibliographic record

VenueBlood · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicVenous Thromboembolism Diagnosis and Management
Canadian institutionsUniversity of OttawaOttawa Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineApixabanPulmonary embolismRandomizationPlaceboSurgeryInternal medicinePopulationRandomized controlled trialWarfarinRivaroxaban

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background The risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE) is increased in patients with active cancer, contributing substantially to morbidity and mortality. Further, the VTE risk is even higher for patients with metastatic cancer than those with local disease. In the AVERT trial, apixaban thromboprophylaxis resulted in a significantly lower rate of venous thromboembolism and an increased rate of major bleeding than did placebo among intermediate-to-high-risk ambulatory patients with cancer who were starting chemotherapy. In this prespecified subgroup analysis of AVERT, we evaluated the efficacy and safety of apixaban thromboprophylaxis in patients with and without metastatic disease. Methods Eligible participants were randomized to receive either apixaban (2.5mg twice daily) or placebo (identical tablets twice daily) up to five days before the first administration of chemotherapy. The first dose of apixaban or placebo was given within 24 hours of the first chemotherapy administration, with the treatment period lasting 180 days. Patients were followed for up to 210 days or death, regardless of the duration of the treatment period. The primary efficacy outcome was objectively documented major VTE (proximal deep-vein thrombosis or pulmonary embolism) occurring within 180 days (±3 days ) following randomization. The primary safety outcome was major bleeding, as defined by the International Society on Thrombosis and Hemostasis criteria. For this subgroup analysis, the efficacy and safety of apixaban thromboprophylaxis was evaluated in patients with and without documented metastatic disease. The primary efficacy analysis was performed in the modified intention-to-treat population, which included all the patients who had undergone randomization and received at least one dose of apixaban or placebo on or before day 180 (±3 days). The primary safety analysis was performed in the on-treatment population, in which events were only counted if they occurred during the period the subject was taking the study drug (or up to two days post discontinuation). Results A total of 574 patients underwent randomization, with 563 patients included in the original primary efficacy and safety analysis. A total of 366 patients could be stratified according to the presence or absence of metastatic disease, with 138 having metastatic disease and 228 having non-metastatic disease. The baseline characteristics were balanced between the treatment and placebo arms in both the metastatic and non-metastatic groups (Table 1). In patients with metastatic disease, VTE occurred in 6 of out of 73 in the treatment group and 10 out of 65 in the placebo group [HR 0.55 95% CI 0.32-0.97, p=0.0381]. In patients with metastatic disease, major bleeding occurred in 3 out of 73 in the treatment group and 2 out of 65 in the placebo group [HR 1.47 95% CI 0.29-6.76, p= 0.69]. In patients with non-metastatic disease, VTE occurred in 4 out of 107 in the treatment group, and 14 out of 121 in the placebo group [HR 0.35 95% CI 0.20-0.61, p= 0.0002]. In patients with non-metastatic disease, major bleeding occurred in 1 out of 107 in the treatment group and 1 out of 121 in the placebo group [HR 1.20 95%CI 0.11-13.38, p=0.881]. Conclusions: In patients with and without metastatic disease, apixaban thromboprophylaxis was associated with a significantly lower rate of VTE compared to placebo, with no significant difference in the rate of major bleeding. This subgroup analysis thus suggests that apixaban thromboprophylaxis is both safe and effective in cancer patients regardless of the presence of absence of metastatic disease. Table 1. Disclosures Wells: Daiichi Sankyo: Honoraria; BMS/Pfizer: Honoraria, Research Funding; Bayer: Honoraria; Sanofi: Honoraria. Carrier:Leo Pharma: Honoraria, Research Funding; BMS: Honoraria, Research Funding; Pfizer: Honoraria, Research Funding; Bayer: Honoraria; Servier: Honoraria. OffLabel Disclosure: Apixaban can be used as postoperative prophylaxis of DVT/PE and for treatment of DVT/PE. We looked at using apixaban 2.5mg BID for the primary thromboprophylaxis of ambulatory cancer patients initiating chemotherapy, at intermediate-high risk of venous thromboembolism.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.024

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0050.010
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.249
Teacher spread0.241 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations3
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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