4.6 Article

Mortality associated with the use of non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants in cancer patients: Dabigatran versus rivaroxaban

Journal

CANCER MEDICINE
Volume 10, Issue 20, Pages 7079-7088

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/cam4.4241

Keywords

atrial fibrillation; cancer; non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants; outcome; venous thromboembolism

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Dabigatran may be associated with a lower risk of cancer-related death and all-cause mortality compared with rivaroxaban, as well as lower risks of major bleeding and GI bleeding.
Objective This study assesses the mortality outcomes of non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants (NOACs) in cancer patients with venous thromboembolism (VTE) and atrial fibrillation (AF). Methods Medical records of cancer patients receiving NOACs for VTE or AF between January 1, 2011, and December 31, 2016, were retrieved from Taiwan's National Health Institute Research Database. NOACs were compared using the inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) method. The primary outcome was cancer-related death. Secondary outcomes were all-cause mortality, major bleeding, and gastrointestinal (GI) bleeding. Results Among 202,754 patients who received anticoagulants, 3591 patients (dabigatran: 907; rivaroxaban: 2684) with active cancers were studied. Patients who received dabigatran were associated with lower risks of cancer-related death at one year (HR = 0.71, 95% CI = 0.54-0.93) and at the end of follow-ups (HR = 0.79, 95% CI = 0.64-0.98) compared with rivaroxaban. Patients who received dabigatran were also associated with lower risks of all-cause mortality (HR = 0.81, 95% CI = 0.67-0.97), major bleeding (HR = 0.64, 95% CI = 0.47-0.88), and GI bleeding (HR = 0.57, 95% CI = 0.39-0.84) at the end of follow-ups compared with rivaroxaban. Conclusion Compared with rivaroxaban, the use of dabigatran may be associated with a lower risk of cancer-related death and all-cause mortality.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available