PubMed Health⌕ Search

Biomedical subjects

Michael J Kovacs

Publications and source records attributed to Michael J Kovacs.

At least 19 recordsLinked to original sources
PubMed2006

The prevalence of antibodies to the platelet factor 4 -heparin complex and association with access thrombosis in patients on chronic hemodialysis.

INTRODUCTION: Heparin-induced thrombocytopenia is a serious complication that can lead to thrombocytopenia, venous and arterial thrombosis. Patients with this disorder develop antibodies to the platelet factor 4-heparin (PF4-H) complex. Hemodialysis patients are repeatedly exposed to heparin and are at risk for developing PF4-H antibodies. We sought to determine the prevalence of PF4-H antibodies in a large cohort of patients on chronic hemodialysis and to evaluate the relationship between PF4-H antibodies and hemodialysis vascular access thrombosis in a case-control study. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Pre-dialysis blood samples were drawn on 419 patients; 107 cases with access thrombosis and 312 controls that never had access thrombosis. All samples were screened for PF4-H antibodies using an ELISA assay (GTI PF4 Enhanced, GTI Diagnostics). All positive and indeterminate samples were then tested using an IgG-specific PF4-H ELISA assay and a platelet serotonin-release assay. RESULTS: Antibodies to PF4-H were positive in 54 (12.9%) patients using the screening ELISA assay. Nine (2.1%) patients had IgG-specific PF4-H antibodies. None of the patient's had a positive platelet serotonin-release assay. No relationship between hemodialysis access thrombosis and PF4-H antibodies was noted using the screening ELISA assay (unadjusted odds ratio 0.63; 95% CI 0.30-1.30; P = 0.21), the IgG-specific ELISA assay (unadjusted odds ratio 0.83; 95% CI 0.17-4.06; P = 0.82) or indeterminate platelet serotonin-release assay results (unadjusted odds ratio 0.97;95% CI 0.10-9.44;P = 0.98). CONCLUSIONS: Hemodialysis with repeated exposure to unfractionated heparin was associated with a moderately elevated prevalence of PF4-H antibodies. However, our results do not support a relationship between PF4-H antibodies and hemodialysis vascular access thrombosis.

Adult↗
PubMed2006

An evaluation of D-dimer in the diagnosis of pulmonary embolism: a randomized trial.

BACKGROUND: It may be safe to omit additional diagnostic testing in selected patients with suspected pulmonary embolism (PE) who have a negative D-dimer test, but this approach has never been evaluated in a randomized, controlled trial. OBJECTIVE: To determine if additional diagnostic testing can be safely withheld in patients with suspected PE who have negative erythrocyte agglutination D-dimer test results. DESIGN: Randomized comparisons in 2 subgroups of a prospective multicenter study. SETTING: 7 university hospitals. PATIENTS: 1126 outpatients or inpatients with suspected PE; of these, 456 patients with negative erythrocyte agglutination D-dimer test results were randomly assigned to the intervention groups. Patients were classified into 2 clinical probability groups: those with a low clinical probability of PE (low-probability group) and those with a moderate or high clinical probability of PE, a nondiagnostic ventilation-perfusion lung scan, and no evidence of proximal deep venous thrombosis on bilateral ultrasonography (moderate- or high-probability group). INTERVENTIONS: The experimental intervention for both probability groups was no further diagnostic testing for PE. The control intervention for the low-probability group was a ventilation-perfusion lung scan followed by ultrasonography of the proximal deep veins of the legs on the same day. If the lung scan was nondiagnostic, ultrasonography of the legs was repeated 7 and 14 days later. The control intervention for the moderate- or high-probability group was ultrasonography of the proximal deep veins of the legs after 7 and 14 days. In the control and experimental groups, anticoagulation was withheld or withdrawn if PE was not diagnosed. MEASUREMENTS: Symptomatic venous thromboembolism (VTE) during 6 months of follow-up. RESULTS: Prevalence of VTE was 15.2% in the 1126 enrolled patients. In the low-probability group, VTE occurred during follow-up in 0 of 182 patients who had no additional diagnostic testing and in 1 of 185 patients who had additional testing (difference, -0.5 percentage point [95% CI, -3.0 to 1.6 percentage points]). In the moderate- or high-probability group, VTE occurred during follow-up in 1 of 41 patients who had no additional diagnostic testing and in 0 of 41 patients who had additional testing (difference, 2.4 percentage points [CI, -6.4 to 12.6 percentage points]). LIMITATIONS: The authors could not enroll 2000 patients as originally planned; 3 randomly assigned patients did not receive the allocated intervention, and 7 received inadequate follow-up. Personnel who performed follow-up evaluations were not blinded to the results of diagnostic testing at enrollment or to allocation group assignments. CONCLUSION: In patients with a low probability of PE who have negative D-dimer results, additional diagnostic testing can be withheld without increasing the frequency of VTE during follow-up. Low clinical probability and negative D-dimer results occur in 50% of outpatients and in 20% of inpatients with suspected PE.

Fibrin Fibrinogen Degradation Products↗
PubMed2006

A phase II study of ZD6474 (Zactima, a selective inhibitor of VEGFR and EGFR tyrosine kinase in patients with relapsed multiple myeloma--NCIC CTG IND.145.

Multiple myeloma is a disease in which angiogenesis is postulated to be a target for therapy. Based on this hypothesis, we conducted a phase II trial of ZD6474 (Zactima; a VEGFR inhibitor) 100 mg p.o. daily in patients with relapsed multiple myeloma. The primary efficacy endpoint was objective response as assessed by reduction in M protein. There were 18 patients with a mean age of 64 years. One patient was ineligible and one was not evaluable. Overall, ZD6474 was well tolerated and pharmacokinetic testing demonstrated that adequate drug levels were achieved. The most common drug-related adverse events were nausea, vomiting, fatigue, rash, pruritus, headache, diarrhea, dizziness, and sensory neuropathy, all of which were Grade I-II in severity. There were no drug-related serious adverse events. Laboratory adverse events were infrequent: one patient had Grade III anemia, and there were no Grade III changes in biochemistry. No significant QTc interval changes were seen. There were no responses in M protein levels. In conclusion, ZD6474 was well tolerated at a dose of 100 mg per day and achieved plasma levels predicted to inhibit VEGF signaling. However, this was not reflected in clinical benefit since none of the patients had a reduction in M protein.

Administration, Oral↗
PubMed2006

The standard is still the standard or why an INR of 2-3 is still the optimal intensity for secondary prevention of venous thromboembolism.

The optimal intensity of warfarin anticoagulation for secondary prevention of venous thromboembolism is debatable. Recent studies have shed light on the issue. The two pivotal studies, ELATE and PREVENT, are reviewed and discussed. Although the ELATE and PREVENT studies offer different conclusions, the results of the two studies are consistent with each other. Low intensity warfarin is more efficacious than placebo, although it is less efficacious than standard intensity and offers no safety advantage. For long term secondary prophylaxis of spontaneous venous thromboembolism, the optimal INR intensity of warfarin remains 2.0-3.0.

Anticoagulants↗
PubMed2005

A randomized trial comparing 2 low-molecular-weight heparins for the outpatient treatment of deep vein thrombosis and pulmonary embolism.

BACKGROUND: Low-molecular-weight heparins (LMWHs) are now standard therapy for the treatment of deep vein thrombosis (DVT) and pulmonary embolism (PE). No published trials have compared LMWHs, and few studies have examined outpatient therapy for PE. Only tinzaparin sodium has demonstrated superiority to unfractionated heparin in a clinical trial. METHODS: We compared 2 LMWH products, tinzaparin and dalteparin sodium, for the treatment of acute DVT and PE in a randomized, controlled clinical trial of consecutive outpatients presenting to a venous thromboembolism service at 4 tertiary-care hospitals. Patients were treated with subcutaneous tinzaparin sodium, 175 IU/kg every 24 hours, or subcutaneous dalteparin sodium, 200 IU/kg every 24 hours, for at least 5 days. Warfarin sodium therapy was started simultaneously and continued for 90 days. The primary end point was efficacy (recurrence of venous thromboembolism); safety (bleeding) was a composite end point. RESULTS: Two hundred fifty-four patients received tinzaparin (39 with PE and 215 with DVT) and 251 received dalteparin (51 with PE and 200 with DVT). Most patients had an active malignancy or idiopathic DVT/PE. The outcome events occurred in 11 (4.4%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.2%-7.7%) and 15 patients (5.9%; 95% CI, 3.3%-9.5%) in the dalteparin and tinzaparin groups, respectively, including 9 and 10 recurrences, respectively, and 2 and 5 major hemorrhages, respectively (P = .44). The 95% CI on the difference of -1.5% was -5.3% to 2.4%. CONCLUSIONS: Tinzaparin and dalteparin are safe and effective for the outpatient treatment of DVT or PE. Our finding of no differences between the LMWHs based on major clinical end points means that practical issues can be the deciding factor on which drug to use.

Acute Disease↗
PubMed2005

Influence of warfarin on symptoms of fatigue: findings of a randomized trial.

BACKGROUND: Some patients develop fatigue while taking warfarin, but causality is uncertain. OBJECTIVE: To assess whether warfarin use is associated with fatigue. METHODS: This investigation was a substudy of a randomized double-blind trial in 13 outpatient thromboembolism clinics. Subjects who had received one month of open-label warfarin therapy for venous thromboembolism due to a transient risk factor were randomly assigned to receive warfarin or placebo for 2 months and followed for another 9 months after stopping the study drug. Fatigue was measured using a Likert scale, and change of fatigue was measured by the patient's global rating. RESULTS: In 87 subjects, the overall ratings of fatigue were 0.1 unit lower (95% CI 0.6 units lower to 0.4 units higher) while taking warfarin. Global rating for change in fatigue intensity showed no increase of fatigue with warfarin use. CONCLUSIONS: The short-term use of warfarin was not associated with symptoms of fatigue.

Analysis of Variance↗
PubMed2005

Use of spiral computed tomography contrast angiography and ultrasonography to exclude the diagnosis of pulmonary embolism in the emergency department.

Spiral computed tomography (CT) contrast angiography is a promising imaging modality for the diagnosis of pulmonary embolism but the negative predictive value of this test remains controversial. We performed a multi-center prospective cohort study to determine the safety of relying on a negative spiral CT contrast angiography scan to exclude pulmonary embolism. Patients presenting to the Emergency Departments of three tertiary care institutions with clinically suspected pulmonary embolism were potentially eligible for the study. Patients underwent a clinical evaluation to categorize pretest probability into low, moderate, and high categories, and had D-dimer testing performed. Patients at low pretest probability with normal D-dimer were considered to have pulmonary embolism excluded. The remaining patients underwent spiral CT contrast angiography scan of the pulmonary arterial circulation and bilateral venous ultrasound of the proximal leg veins. Patients who were confirmed to have pulmonary embolism or deep vein thrombosis were treated with anticoagulant therapy. Patients in whom the diagnosis of pulmonary embolism was excluded did not receive anticoagulant therapy and were followed for a 3-month period for the development of venous thromboembolic complications. Eight hundred fifty-eight (858) patients were enrolled in this study. Three-hundred sixty-nine (369) patients had low pretest probability and negative D-dimer results and no further diagnostic tests were performed. None of these patients subsequently developed venous thromboembolic complications (0%, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0% to 1.0%). The remaining 489 were referred for spiral CT contrast angiography scan and ultrasound. Sixty-seven patients were confirmed to have pulmonary embolism and an additional 15 patients with negative CT scans had proximal deep vein thrombosis (DVT) on ultrasound for a total prevalence of venous thromboembolism of 82/489 (16.8%). Two of 409 patients who had pulmonary embolism excluded in the initial evaluation phase developed proximal venous thromboembolism (0.5%; 95% CI 0% to 1.8%) in the 3-month follow-up period. These findings suggest that the combination of a negative spiral CT contrast angiography scan and normal venous ultrasound imaging safely excludes the diagnosis of pulmonary embolism in the Emergency Department setting.

Contrast Media↗
PubMed2005

Anti-Xa effect of a low molecular weight heparin (dalteparin) does not accumulate in extended duration therapy for venous thromboembolism in cancer patients.

Many patients with venous thromboembolism are being treated with low molecular weight heparin for extended periods of time. It is not certain if it is necessary to assess anti-Xa levels for extended treatment periods. This study is a prospective assessment of anti-Xa levels in patients on long-term therapy for acute venous thromboembolism who have active cancer. Consecutive consenting patients from one center in a multicenter trial that compared 6 months of low molecular weight heparin with oral anticoagulant therapy were treated with therapeutic doses of dalteparin (200 IU per kilogram) subcutaneously daily. Anti-Xa levels were assessed at the end of weeks 1 and 4,4-6 hours after injection of dalteparin. Patients were followed for bleeding and recurrent venous thromboembolism. There were 24 patients who had anti-Xa levels measured at weeks 1 and 4. Two other patients had week 1 measurements performed but died before the week 4 sample was collected due to their underlying cancer. The mean anti-Xa levels at weeks 1 and 4 were 1.11 and 1.03 anti-Xa units/ml respectively (P=0.13). These results suggest that for patients with active cancer receiving extended duration therapy with low molecular weight heparin (dalteparin) there is no accumulation of anti-Xa effect over the first month of therapy. Monitoring of anti-Xa levels in this situation is usually not required.

Adult↗
PubMed2004

Results of a multicenter randomized phase II trial of thalidomide and prednisone maintenance therapy for multiple myeloma after autologous stem cell transplant.

We report a multicenter, randomized phase II trial conducted to assess the tolerability of combined thalidomide and prednisone maintenance in multiple myeloma. Eligibility required administration of melphalan (200 mg/m2) with blood stem cell support within 1 year of treatment onset and initiation of maintenance within 60 to 100 days after stem cell infusion. All patients received 50 mg of prednisone by mouth on alternate days and thalidomide at a starting dose of either 200 or 400 mg daily by mouth. The primary end point was the incidence of dropout or dose reduction due to treatment toxicity within 6 months. Sixty-seven patients were enrolled. Median follow-up is 36.8 months. The primary end point was reached by 31% of patients on the 200 mg of thalidomide arm and 64% of patients on the 400 mg of thalidomide arm. Allowing for dose reduction, 76% of patients assigned to the 200 mg of thalidomide arm and 41% of patients assigned to the 400 mg of thalidomide arm remained on any maintenance therapy 18 months after registration. Eighty-eight percent of all patients dose-reduced thalidomide and 72% of all patients dose-reduced prednisone within 2 years of beginning maintenance. The median progression-free survival post-transplant is 32.3 months, or 42.2 months from diagnosis. Only the 200 mg of thalidomide arm of this trial met our definition of a tolerable maintenance therapy, defined as no dose reductions or discontinuation due to toxicity in at least 65% of patients for a minimum of 6 months, thus establishing a dosing schedule for phase III trials.

Aged↗
PubMed2004

Imatinib mesylate treatment in two patients with idiopathic hypereosinophilic syndrome.

OBJECTIVE: To report 2 clinical cases of hypereosinophilic syndrome (HES) refractory to standard therapy and the variable responses to imatinib mesylate, and to review previously reported cases of imatinib mesylate use in the treatment of hypereosinophilia. case summaries: Two male patients were diagnosed with idiopathic HES complicated with organ involvement. Both were treated with imatinib mesylate after failing to respond to or being unable to tolerate standard therapy. In one patient, treatment with imatinib mesylate 100 mg/day produced resolution of symptoms and peripheral blood cell counts within 6 days. The patient has successfully maintained normal blood cell counts and has been without symptoms for more than one year after starting imatinib mesylate. The other patient failed to respond to imatinib mesylate even at the maximum dose (up to 400 mg/day). DISCUSSION: Imatinib mesylate was considered an appropriate alternative for standard therapy of HES based on the evidence that other treatments used for chronic myelogenous leukemia have also been successful in treating HES. Three small studies have supported this hypothesis. However, not all patients with HES respond to imatinib mesylate therapy. The cases presented here illustrate the marked difference. CONCLUSIONS: Imatinib mesylate has shown some promise in the treatment of HES. However, until the etiology of idiopathic hypereosinophilia and the role of imatinib mesylate in the resolution of this disease are determined, it will continue to be difficult to predict the responsiveness of a patient to imatinib mesylate therapy.

Adult↗
PubMed2003

Evaluation of D-dimer in the diagnosis of suspected deep-vein thrombosis.

BACKGROUND: Several diagnostic strategies using ultrasound imaging, measurement of D-dimer, and assessment of clinical probability of disease have proved safe in patients with suspected deep-vein thrombosis, but they have not been compared in randomized trials. METHODS: Outpatients presenting with suspected lower-extremity deep-vein thrombosis were potentially eligible. Using a clinical model, physicians evaluated the patients and categorized them as likely or unlikely to have deep-vein thrombosis. The patients were then randomly assigned to undergo ultrasound imaging alone (control group) or to undergo D-dimer testing (D-dimer group) followed by ultrasound imaging unless the D-dimer test was negative and the patient was considered clinically unlikely to have deep-vein thrombosis, in which case ultrasound imaging was not performed. RESULTS: Five hundred thirty patients were randomly assigned to the control group, and 566 to the D-dimer group. The overall prevalence of deep-vein thrombosis or pulmonary embolism was 15.7 percent. Among patients for whom deep-vein thrombosis had been ruled out by the initial diagnostic strategy, there were two confirmed venous thromboembolic events in the D-dimer group (0.4 percent; 95 percent confidence interval, 0.05 to 1.5 percent) and six events in the control group (1.4 percent; 95 percent confidence interval, 0.5 to 2.9 percent; P=0.16) during three months of follow-up. The use of D-dimer testing resulted in a significant reduction in the use of ultrasonography, from a mean of 1.34 tests per patient in the control group to 0.78 in the D-dimer group (P=0.008). Two hundred eighteen patients (39 percent) in the D-dimer group did not require ultrasound imaging. CONCLUSIONS: Deep-vein thrombosis can be ruled out in a patient who is judged clinically unlikely to have deep-vein thrombosis and who has a negative D-dimer test. Ultrasound testing can be safely omitted in such patients.

Agglutination Tests↗
PubMed2003

A comparison of two intensities of warfarin for the prevention of recurrent thrombosis in patients with the antiphospholipid antibody syndrome.

BACKGROUND: Many patients with the antiphospholipid antibody syndrome and recurrent thrombosis receive doses of warfarin adjusted to achieve an international normalized ratio (INR) of more than 3.0. However, there are no prospective data to support this approach to thromboprophylaxis. METHODS: We performed a randomized, double-blind trial in which patients with antiphospholipid antibodies and previous thrombosis were assigned to receive enough warfarin to achieve an INR of 2.0 to 3.0 (moderate intensity) or 3.1 to 4.0 (high intensity). Our objective was to show that high-intensity warfarin was more effective in preventing thrombosis than moderate-intensity warfarin. RESULTS: A total of 114 patients were enrolled in the study and followed for a mean of 2.7 years. Recurrent thrombosis occurred in 6 of 56 patients (10.7 percent) assigned to receive high-intensity warfarin and in 2 of 58 patients (3.4 percent) assigned to receive moderate-intensity warfarin (hazard ratio for the high-intensity group, 3.1; 95 percent confidence interval, 0.6 to 15.0). Major bleeding occurred in three patients assigned to receive high-intensity warfarin and four patients assigned to receive moderate-intensity warfarin (hazard ratio, 1.0; 95 percent confidence interval, 0.2 to 4.8). CONCLUSIONS: High-intensity warfarin was not superior to moderate-intensity warfarin for thromboprophylaxis in patients with antiphospholipid antibodies and previous thrombosis. The low rate of recurrent thrombosis among patients in whom the target INR was 2.0 to 3.0 suggests that moderate-intensity warfarin is appropriate for patients with the antiphospholipid antibody syndrome.

Adult↗
PubMed2003

Comparing the quality of oral anticoagulant management by anticoagulation clinics and by family physicians: a randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: There is growing evidence that better outcomes are achieved when anticoagulation is managed by anticoagulation clinics rather than by family physicians. We carried out a randomized controlled trial to evaluate these 2 models of anticoagulant care. METHODS: We randomly allocated patients who were expected to require warfarin sodium for 3 months either to anticoagulation clinics located in 3 Canadian tertiary hospitals or to their family physician practices. We evaluated the quality of oral anticoagulant management by comparing the proportion of time that the international normalized ratio (INR) of patients receiving warfarin sodium was within the target therapeutic range +/- 0.2 INR units (expanded therapeutic range) while they were managed in anticoagulation clinics as opposed to family physicians' care over 3 months. We measured the rates of thromboembolic and major hemorrhagic events and patient satisfaction in the 2 groups. RESULTS: Of the 221 patients enrolled, 112 were randomly assigned to anticoagulation clinics and 109 to family physicians. The INR values of patients who were managed by anticoagulation clinics were within the expanded therapeutic range 82% of the time versus 76% of the time for those managed by family physicians (p = 0.034). High-risk INR values (defined as being < 1.5 or > 5.0) were more commonly observed in patients managed by family physicians (40%) than in patients managed by anticoagulation clinics (30%, p = 0.005). More INR measurements were performed by family physicians than by anticoagulation clinics (13 v. 11, p = 0.001). Major bleeding events (2 [2%] v. 1 [1%]), thromboembolic events (1 [1%] v. 2 [2%]) and deaths (5 [4%] v. 6 [6%]) occurred at a similar frequency in the anticoagulation clinic and family physician groups respectively. Of the 170 (77%) patients who completed the patient satisfaction questionnaire, more were satisfied when their anticoagulant management was managed through anticoagulation clinics than by their family physicians (p = 0.001). INTERPRETATION: Anticoagulation clinics provided better oral anticoagulant management than family physicians, but the differences were relatively modest.

Ambulatory Care Facilities↗
PubMed2003

Comparison of low-intensity warfarin therapy with conventional-intensity warfarin therapy for long-term prevention of recurrent venous thromboembolism.

BACKGROUND: Warfarin is very effective in preventing recurrent venous thromboembolism but is also associated with a substantial risk of bleeding. After three months of conventional warfarin therapy, a lower dose of anticoagulant medication may result in less bleeding and still prevent recurrent venous thromboembolism. METHODS: We conducted a randomized, double-blind study, in which 738 patients who had completed three or more months of warfarin therapy for unprovoked venous thromboembolism were randomly assigned to continue warfarin therapy with a target international normalized ratio (INR) of 2.0 to 3.0 (conventional intensity) or a target INR of 1.5 to 1.9 (low intensity). Patients were followed for an average of 2.4 years. RESULTS: Of 369 patients assigned to low-intensity therapy, 16 had recurrent venous thromboembolism (1.9 per 100 person-years), as compared with 6 of 369 assigned to conventional-intensity therapy (0.7 per 100 person-years; hazard ratio, 2.8; 95 percent confidence interval, 1.1 to 7.0). A major bleeding episode occurred in nine patients assigned to low-intensity therapy (1.1 events per 100 person-years) and eight patients assigned to conventional-intensity therapy (0.9 event per 100 person-years; hazard ratio, 1.2; 95 percent confidence interval, 0.4 to 3.0). There was no significant difference in the frequency of overall bleeding between the two groups (hazard ratio, 1.3; 95 percent confidence interval, 0.8 to 2.1). CONCLUSIONS: Conventional-intensity warfarin therapy is more effective than low-intensity warfarin therapy for the long-term prevention of recurrent venous thromboembolism. The low-intensity warfarin regimen does not reduce the risk of clinically important bleeding.

Age Factors↗
PubMed2003

Low-molecular-weight heparin versus a coumarin for the prevention of recurrent venous thromboembolism in patients with cancer.

BACKGROUND: Patients with cancer have a substantial risk of recurrent thrombosis despite the use of oral anticoagulant therapy. We compared the efficacy of a low-molecular-weight heparin with that of an oral anticoagulant agent in preventing recurrent thrombosis in patients with cancer. METHODS: Patients with cancer who had acute, symptomatic proximal deep-vein thrombosis, pulmonary embolism, or both were randomly assigned to receive low-molecular-weight heparin (dalteparin) at a dose of 200 IU per kilogram of body weight subcutaneously once daily for five to seven days and a coumarin derivative for six months (target international normalized ratio, 2.5) or dalteparin alone for six months (200 IU per kilogram once daily for one month, followed by a daily dose of approximately 150 IU per kilogram for five months). RESULTS: During the six-month study period, 27 of 336 patients in the dalteparin group had recurrent venous thromboembolism, as compared with 53 of 336 patients in the oral-anticoagulant group (hazard ratio, 0.48; P=0.002). The probability of recurrent thromboembolism at six months was 17 percent in the oral-anticoagulant group and 9 percent in the dalteparin group. No significant difference between the dalteparin group and the oral-anticoagulant group was detected in the rate of major bleeding (6 percent and 4 percent, respectively) or any bleeding (14 percent and 19 percent, respectively). The mortality rate at six months was 39 percent in the dalteparin group and 41 percent in the oral-anticoagulant group. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with cancer and acute venous thromboembolism, dalteparin was more effective than an oral anticoagulant in reducing the risk of recurrent thromboembolism without increasing the risk of bleeding.

Acenocoumarol↗
PubMed2003

Comparison of 10-mg and 5-mg warfarin initiation nomograms together with low-molecular-weight heparin for outpatient treatment of acute venous thromboembolism. A randomized, double-blind, controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: The optimal means of achieving therapeutic oral anticoagulation in the outpatient setting has not been determined. OBJECTIVE: To compare a 10-mg dosing nomogram with a 5-mg nomogram that has been suggested to be sufficient for warfarin initiation. DESIGN: Randomized, controlled clinical trial. SETTING: Outpatient venous thromboembolism services of four tertiary care hospitals. PATIENTS: 201 of 210 consecutive patients with objectively confirmed diagnoses of acute venous thromboembolism. INTERVENTION: All patients were treated with subcutaneous low-molecular-weight heparin for a minimum of 5 days until a therapeutic international normalized ratio (INR) was achieved. Patients were randomly assigned to initially receive a 10-mg or 5-mg dose of warfarin. MEASUREMENTS: The primary end point was time in days to therapeutic INR. Secondary end points were the proportion of patients who had achieved a therapeutic INR by day 5, the total number of INR assessments, the number of INR measurements greater than 5.0, incidence of recurrent venous thromboembolism and major bleeding, and survival. RESULTS: 210 consecutive patients met the inclusion criteria. Of these, 9 were excluded and 201 were randomly assigned to study groups (104 to the 10-mg group and 97 to the 5-mg group). Demographic characteristics of both groups were similar. Patients in the 10-mg group achieved therapeutic INR 1.4 days earlier than patients in the 5-mg group (P < 0.001). Eighty-three percent of patients in the 10-mg group achieved a therapeutic INR by day 5 versus 46% in the 5-mg group (P < 0.001). Fewer INR assessments were performed in the 10-mg group than in the 5-mg group (8.1 vs. 9.1; P = 0.04). There were no significant differences between the two groups in recurrent events, major bleeding, survival, and number of INR measurements greater than 5.0. CONCLUSION: The 10-mg warfarin initiation nomogram is superior to the 5-mg nomogram because it allows more rapid achievement of a therapeutic INR.

Acute Disease↗