| Trial-Results center | |||
| Clinical trial results database |
 Feedback
 Home
|
This trial is included in the following systematic reviews and meta-analyses:
venous thrombosis
-
antithrombotics
-
all type of patients
venous thrombosis
-
heparin (UFH or LMWH)
-
all type of patients
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:
Meyer study, 2002 |
|
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 |
|
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
n/N
n/N
VTE during follow-up after active anticoagulant treatment
| 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 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Absolute risk reduction | ||||
| Endpoint | Events rate | Absolute risk reduction (ARR) |
||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Studied treat. | Control treat. | |||
Reference(s)
| Trials register # | NA |
-
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
(c) 2004-2010 TrialResults-center - All Rights Reserved
Tweet this
notify a friend