Related Experiment Video
Updated: Apr 30, 2026

Author Spotlight: Advancing Cancer Associated Thrombosis Research in Rodent Models
Published on: January 5, 2024
New oral anticoagulants in patients with cancer: current state of evidence
Partha Sardar1, Saurav Chatterjee, Eyal Herzog
11Department of Medicine, New York Medical College, New York, NY; 2Department of Cardiology, St Luke's-Roosevelt Hospital of the Mount Sinai Health System, New York, NY; 3Department of Medicine, New York Medical College-Metropolitan Hospital Center, New York, NY; and 4Department of Medicine, Cardiology Division, New York Medical College, Valhalla, NY.
Abstract:
Effectiveness of new oral anticoagulants (NOAC) in patients with cancer is not clearly defined. There remain concerns of doubtful benefit and chances of potential harm with newer agents. In this meta-analysis, we evaluated the efficacy and safety of NOAC in patients with cancer. PubMed, Cochrane Library, EMBASE, Web of Science, and CINAHL databases were searched from January 01, 2001 through February 28, 2013. Randomized controlled trials reporting efficacy and safety data of NOACs (rivaroxaban, dabigatran, and apixaban) with control (low-molecular-weight heparin/vitamin K antagonists/placebo) for patients with cancer were included. Primary efficacy outcome was venous thromboembolism (VTE) or VTE-related death, and primary safety outcome was clinically relevant bleeding. We used random-effects models. Six trials randomized 19,832 patients, and 1197 patients had cancer. Risk of VTE or VTE-related death was not significantly different with NOAC versus control [odds ratio (OR), 0.80; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.39-1.65] in patients with cancer. Separate analysis for individual effects showed similar results for rivaroxaban (OR, 1.08; 95% CI, 0.60-1.94) and dabigatran (OR, 0.91; 95% CI, 0.21-3.91). Clinically relevant bleeding was not higher with NOAC compared with control (OR, 1.49; 95% CI, 0.82-2.71); individual effect of rivaroxaban showed similar results. No statistically significant difference of efficacy and safety with NOAC was found between patients with and without cancer. Rivaroxaban might be equally effective and safe as vitamin K antagonist in patients with cancer. Dabigatran is as effective as comparator; however, safety profile of dabigatran is unknown. Randomized trials of new anticoagulants specific to the cancer population are necessary, and NOAC also need to be evaluated against low-molecular-weight heparin.
Insights
Newer oral anticoagulants (NOAC) show similar efficacy and safety for preventing venous thromboembolism (VTE) in cancer patients compared to traditional treatments. Further research is needed to confirm these findings and evaluate specific agents against low-molecular-weight heparin.
Area of Science:
- Pharmacology and Therapeutics
- Oncology
- Cardiovascular Medicine
Background:
- The effectiveness and safety of novel oral anticoagulants (NOACs) in cancer patients remain unclear.
- Concerns exist regarding the potential benefits and harms of newer anticoagulant agents in this population.
- Existing evidence is insufficient to guide the use of NOACs for cancer-associated thrombosis.
Purpose of the Study:
- To evaluate the efficacy and safety of NOACs (rivaroxaban, dabigatran, apixaban) in patients with cancer.
- To compare the risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE) or VTE-related death with NOACs versus control treatments.
- To assess the incidence of clinically relevant bleeding associated with NOAC use in cancer patients.
Main Methods:
- A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) was conducted.
- Databases searched included PubMed, Cochrane Library, EMBASE, Web of Science, and CINAHL (January 2001 - February 2013).
- Included RCTs compared NOACs against low-molecular-weight heparin, vitamin K antagonists, or placebo in cancer patients.
Main Results:
- No significant difference in the risk of VTE or VTE-related death was observed between NOACs and control groups in cancer patients (OR, 0.80; 95% CI, 0.39-1.65).
- Individual analyses for rivaroxaban and dabigatran showed similar efficacy outcomes.
- Clinically relevant bleeding rates were not significantly higher with NOACs compared to controls (OR, 1.49; 95% CI, 0.82-2.71).
Conclusions:
- NOACs demonstrated comparable efficacy and safety to conventional anticoagulants for VTE prevention in cancer patients.
- Rivaroxaban may be as effective and safe as vitamin K antagonists in this population; dabigatran's safety profile requires further investigation.
- Dedicated RCTs for NOACs in cancer patients and comparative studies against low-molecular-weight heparin are warranted.
Related Concept Videos
Anticoagulant Drugs: Vitamin K Antagonists and Direct Oral Anticoagulants
Warfarin, a prominent vitamin K antagonist family member, exerts its effect by inhibiting the enzyme VKORC1 (vitamin K epoxide reductase complex 1). By hindering this enzyme, warfarin...
Anticoagulant Drugs: Low-Molecular-Weight Heparins
Venous Thrombosis III: Interprofessional Care
Venous Thrombosis IV: Nursing Management
Antiplatelet Drugs: Prostaglandin Synthesis, P2Y12 and Glycoprotein IIb/IIIa Inhibitors
Prostaglandin synthesis inhibitors, exemplified by the widely known aspirin, wield their power by irreversibly acetylating...
Pulmonary Embolism II: Diagnostic Studies and Interprofessional Care

