Safety and Efficacy of Direct Oral Anticoagulants Apixaban and Rivaroxaban Versus Standard Therapy for VTE...

Background/Objectives: Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is a major risk for cancer patients undergoing surgery due to hypercoagulability and surgical stress. Traditional low-molecular-weight heparins (LMWHs) are used as the standard of care for VTE prophylaxis, but subcutaneous administration often leads to suboptimal patient adherence. Direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) are being explored as more convenient and effective alternatives. This study employed a network meta-analysis approach to comparatively assess the safety and efficacy of DOACS and LMWH in preventing VTE among cancer patients undergoing oncologic surgery. Methods: A systematic review and network meta-analysis were conducted. The search strategy included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) retrieved from databases such as CLINICALTRIAL.GOV, MEDLINE, and EMBASE. The search encompassed studies published up to October 2023 and compared the efficacy and safety of DOACs with LMWHs in patients undergoing cancer surgery. The primary outcome was the incidence of VTE, and the secondary outcomes included the incidences of major bleeding events (MB) and clinically relevant non-major bleeding (CRNMB). Results: A network meta-analysis of four randomized controlled trials (RCTs) involving 1600 cancer surgery patients was conducted. No statistically significant differences in VTE rates were observed between DOACs and LMWHs. While rivaroxaban 10 mg once daily for 30 days significantly reduced VTE risk compared to placebo (RR: 0.27, 95% CI: 0.08-0.95), no significant differences were found in major or clinically relevant non-major bleeding risks between DOACs and LMWH or placebo. Conclusions: This network meta-analysis provides evidence supporting the use of DOACs, specifically apixaban and rivaroxaban, as safe and efficacious alternatives to LMWHs for VTE prophylaxis in cancer patients undergoing surgery. The oral administration and reduced monitoring requirements associated with DOACs address the limitations inherent to LMWHs, potentially improving patient adherence. These findings emphasize the need for additional head-to-head trials and long-term studies further to solidify their role in this high-risk patient population.