Related trials
Lopaciuk, 3000 - subcutaneous heparin vs intravenous heparin
RE-COVER, 2009 - dabigatran vs vitamin K antagonists
Romera, 2009 - Tinzaparin vs acenocoumarol
Gonz�lez-Fajardo, 2008 - Enoxaparin vs coumarin
Botticelli DVT, 2008 - apixaban vs heparin/VKA
Einstein-DVT Dose-Ranging Study, 2008 - rivaroxaban vs heparin/VKA
VanGogh DVT, 2007 - idraparinux vs heparin/VKA
VanGogh PE, 2007 - idraparinux vs heparin/VKA
Daskalopoulos, 2005 - LMWH at home vs UFH in hospital
Fiessinger , 2005 - ximelagatran vs vitamin K antagonists
Chong, 2005 - LMWH at home vs UFH in hospital
Kearon, 2004 - 4 months vs 3 months
Ramacciotti, 2004 - LMWH at home vs UFH in hospital
MATISSE, 2004 - fondaparinux vs enoxaparin
Lee, 2003 - Dalteparin vs warfarin
Agnelli, 2003 - 6-12 months vs 3 months
Kakkar, 2003 - Bemiparin vs warfarin
Deitcher, 2003 - Enoxaparin vs warfarin
MATISSE PE, 2003 - fondaparinux vs heparin/VKA
Hull, 2002 - Tinzaparin vs warfarin
Meyer, 2002 - Enoxaparin vs warfarin
Agnelli, 2001 - 12 months vs 3 months
Merli (once daily vs UFH), 2001 - once daily enoxaparin vs UFH
Lopez-Beret, 2001 - Nadroparin vs acenocoumarol
Merli, 2001 - once daily enoxaparin vs twice daily enoxaparin
See also:
All venous thrombosis clinical trials
|
|
Treatments
Studied treatment |
LMWH, 1.5 mg/kg qd followed by Enoxaparin 1.5 mg/Kg qd
|
Control treatment |
LMWH, 1.5 mg/kg qd followed by Warfarin target INR 2-3
|
Patients
Patients |
patients with cancer and objective diagnosis of DVT by Venography/compression ultrasonography |
Baseline characteristics |
objective DVT diagnosis |
Venography/CUS |
objective PR diagnosis |
PA/VPLS |
cancer (%) |
100% |
Outcome assessment blinded |
Yes |
|
Method and design
Randomized effectives |
71 / 58 (studied vs. control) |
Blinding |
open |
Follow-up duration |
3 mo |
Number of centre |
multicenter |
Primary endpoint |
major bleeding or recurrent venous thromboembolism |
Results
Endpoint
Studied treat. n/N
Control treat. n/N
Graph
RR [95% CI]
VTE during follow-up after active anticoagulant treatment
3 / 63
0 / 58
classic
11,97 [0,21;688,54]
0
2
1.0
Relative risks
|
Endpoint |
Events (%) |
Relative Risk |
95% CI |
Endpoint definition in the trial |
Studied treat. |
Control treat. |
VTE during follow-up after active anticoagulant treatment
|
3 / 63 (4,8%) |
0 / 58 (0,9%) |
5,52 |
[0,28;107,95] |
|
The primary endpoint (if exists) appears in blod characters
|
Endpoint |
studied treat. |
control treat. |
mean diff |
Absolute risk reduction
|
Endpoint |
Events rate |
Absolute risk reduction (ARR) |
Studied treat. |
Control treat. |
Reference(s)
-
Meyer G, Marjanovic Z, Valcke J, Lorcerie B, Gruel Y, Solal-Celigny P, Le Maignan C, Extra JM, Cottu P, Farge D.
Comparison of low-molecular-weight heparin and warfarin for the secondary prevention of venous thromboembolism in patients with cancer: a randomized controlled study..
Arch Intern Med 2002;162:1729-35
Pubmed
|
Hubmed
| Fulltext
|