TY - JOUR
T1 - Cancer-associated venous thromboembolism and the non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants
T2 - a review of clinical outcomes and patient perspectives
AU - Overvad, Thure Filskov
AU - Larsen, Torben Bjerregaard
AU - Søgaard, Mette
AU - Albertsen, Ida Ehlers
AU - Ording, Anne Gulbech
AU - Noble, Simon
AU - Højen, Anette Arbjerg
AU - Nielsen, Peter Brønnum
PY - 2020
Y1 - 2020
N2 - Introduction: Cancer-associated venous thromboembolism remains an important but challenging aspect in the treatment of patients with cancer. Recently, alternatives to injection of low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) have been introduced, the non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants (NOACs), which could potentially alleviate patients from burdensome daily injections. Areas covered: This review discusses the available evidence exploring the role of NOACs in the treatment and secondary prevention of cancer-associated venous thromboembolism, from randomized trials, observational data, contemporary guideline recommendations, and patient perspectives. Expert opinion: Edoxaban, rivaroxaban, and apixaban have proven attractive alternatives to LMWH for the treatment of cancer-associated venous thromboembolism. Contemporary guidelines have promptly endorsed the use of NOACs in patients with most cancer types. Nonetheless, issues remain regarding bleeding risk, interactions with medical cancer treatment, and the effectiveness and safety for extended treatment periods. There are head-to-head comparisons of the NOACs, and therefore no data favoring the use of one NOAC over the others. Patient’s preferences are highly diverse and should be part of routine considerations when weighing risks and benefits associated with various available anticoagulant drugs.
AB - Introduction: Cancer-associated venous thromboembolism remains an important but challenging aspect in the treatment of patients with cancer. Recently, alternatives to injection of low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) have been introduced, the non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants (NOACs), which could potentially alleviate patients from burdensome daily injections. Areas covered: This review discusses the available evidence exploring the role of NOACs in the treatment and secondary prevention of cancer-associated venous thromboembolism, from randomized trials, observational data, contemporary guideline recommendations, and patient perspectives. Expert opinion: Edoxaban, rivaroxaban, and apixaban have proven attractive alternatives to LMWH for the treatment of cancer-associated venous thromboembolism. Contemporary guidelines have promptly endorsed the use of NOACs in patients with most cancer types. Nonetheless, issues remain regarding bleeding risk, interactions with medical cancer treatment, and the effectiveness and safety for extended treatment periods. There are head-to-head comparisons of the NOACs, and therefore no data favoring the use of one NOAC over the others. Patient’s preferences are highly diverse and should be part of routine considerations when weighing risks and benefits associated with various available anticoagulant drugs.
KW - anticoagulant treatment
KW - Cancer
KW - non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants
KW - patients’ preferences
KW - venous thromboembolism
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85091373314&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1080/14779072.2020.1822167
DO - 10.1080/14779072.2020.1822167
M3 - Review article
C2 - 32909840
AN - SCOPUS:85091373314
SN - 1477-9072
VL - 18
SP - 791
EP - 800
JO - Expert Review of Cardiovascular Therapy
JF - Expert Review of Cardiovascular Therapy
IS - 11
ER -