Loading…
Ximelagatran vs Low-Molecular-Weight Heparin and Warfarin for the Treatment of Deep Vein Thrombosis: A Randomized Trial
CONTEXT Ximelagatran, an oral direct thrombin inhibitor with a rapid onset of action and predictable antithrombotic effect, has the potential to be a simple therapeutic alternative to current standard treatment of acute venous thromboembolism. OBJECTIVE To compare the efficacy and safety of ximelaga...
Saved in:
Published in: | JAMA : the journal of the American Medical Association 2005-02, Vol.293 (6), p.681-689 |
---|---|
Main Authors: | , , , , , , , , , , , |
Format: | Article |
Language: | English |
Subjects: | |
Online Access: | Get full text |
Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
Summary: | CONTEXT Ximelagatran, an oral direct thrombin inhibitor with a rapid onset of
action and predictable antithrombotic effect, has the potential to be a simple
therapeutic alternative to current standard treatment of acute venous thromboembolism. OBJECTIVE To compare the efficacy and safety of ximelagatran with standard enoxaparin/warfarin
treatment for the prevention of recurrent venous thromboembolism. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PATIENTS Randomized, double-blind, noninferiority trial (Thrombin Inhibitor in
Venous Thromboembolism [THRIVE] Treatment Study) of 2489 patients with acute
deep vein thrombosis, of whom approximately one third had concomitant pulmonary
embolism. The study was conducted at 279 centers in 28 countries from September
2000 through December 2002. INTERVENTIONS Patients were randomized to receive 6 months of treatment with either
oral ximelagatran, 36 mg twice daily, or subcutaneous enoxaparin, 1 mg/kg
twice daily, for 5 to 20 days followed by warfarin adjusted to maintain an
international normalized ratio of 2.0 to 3.0. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES Recurrent venous thromboembolism, bleeding, and mortality. RESULTS Venous thromboembolism recurred in 26 of the 1240 patients assigned
to receive ximelagatran (estimated cumulative risk, 2.1%) and in 24 of the
1249 patients assigned to receive enoxaparin/warfarin (2.0%). The absolute
difference between ximelagatran and enoxaparin/warfarin was 0.2% (95% confidence
interval [CI], –1.0% to 1.3%). This met the prespecified criterion for
noninferiority. Corresponding values for major bleeding were 1.3% and 2.2%
(difference, −1.0%; 95% CI, –2.1% to 0.1%), and for mortality
were 2.3% and 3.4% (difference, –1.1%; 95% CI, –2.4% to 0.2%).
Alanine aminotransferase levels increased to more than 3 times the upper limit
of normal in 119 patients (9.6%) and 25 patients (2.0%) receiving ximelagatran
and enoxaparin/warfarin, respectively. Increased enzyme levels were mainly
asymptomatic. Retrospective analysis of locally reported adverse events showed
a higher rate of serious coronary events with ximelagatran (10/1240 patients)
compared with enoxaparin/warfarin (1/1249 patients). CONCLUSIONS Oral ximelagatran administered in a fixed dose without coagulation monitoring,
was as effective as enoxaparin/warfarin for treatment of deep vein thrombosis
with or without pulmonary embolism and showed similar, low rates of bleeding.
Increased levels of liver enzymes in 9.6% of ximelagatran-treated patients
require regular monitoring; |
---|---|
ISSN: | 0098-7484 1538-3598 1538-3598 |
DOI: | 10.1001/jama.293.6.681 |