Direct oral anticoagulant versus low molecular weight heparin for the treatment of cancer-associated venous thromboembolism: 2022 updated systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

International clinical practice guidelines have progressively endorsed direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) as an alternative to low-molecular-weight heparins (LMWHs) monotherapy for the initial and long-term treatment of cancer-associated thrombosis (CAT). Several new randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have recently reported additional results on the safety and efficacy of DOACs in this setting. We performed an updated meta-analysis of all publicly available data from RCTs comparing DOACs with LMWHs for the treatment of CAT. Six RCTs enrolling 3690 patients with CAT were included. Compared with LMWHs, DOACs significantly decreased the risk of CAT recurrence (RR, 0.67; 95%CI, 0.52-0.85), with a non-significant increase in the risk of major bleeding (RR, 1.17; 95%CI, 0.82-1.67), a significant increase in the risk of clinically relevant nonmajor bleeding (RR 1.66; 95%CI, 1.31-2.09) and no difference in all-cause mortality rates. These results increase the level of certainty of available evidence supporting the use of DOACs as an effective and safe option for the treatment of CAT in selected cancer patients.

Automated summary

International clinical practice guidelines are increasingly endorsing direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) as a viable alternative to low-molecular-weight heparins (LMWHs) for the treatment of cancer-associated thrombosis (CAT). A recent meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) found that DOACs significantly reduced the risk of CAT recurrence, with no increase in all-cause mortality rates, but did pose a slight risk of bleeding.