Blood Clot, Cancer, Deep Vein Thrombosis (DVT), Pulmonary Embolism (PE), Venous Thromboembolism
Conditions
Keywords
Rivaroxaban (Xarelto), Apixaban (Eliquis), Edoxaban (Savaysa), Dabigatran (Pradaxa), Warfarin (Coumadin), Low molecular weight heparin (LMWH)
Brief summary
The overarching objective of the study is to determine the effectiveness of LMWH/ warfarin vs. DOAC anticoagulation for preventing recurrent VTE in cancer patients. The intervention strategy is Direct Oral AntiCoagulants (DOAC) therapy with edoxaban, apixaban, rivaroxaban, or dabigatran. The comparator is low molecular weight heparin (LMWH) alone or with warfarin. The information gained will empower cancer patients and physicians to make more informed choices about anticoagulation strategies to manage VTE.
Detailed description
Venous blood clots affect nearly a million Americans each year. Venous clots in the legs are called deep venous thrombosis (DVT) and are dangerous because they travel to the lungs where they cause blockages known as pulmonary emboli (PE). DVT and PE are called venous thromboemboli (VTE). Cancer is a risk factor with nearly 200,000 VTEs in cancer patients each year. The purpose of VTE treatment is to prevent the initial clot from spreading and to prevent new clots from forming. This is accomplished by thinning the blood, or anticoagulation. Without anticoagulation, VTEs recur and are often fatal. Recently, the FDA has approved 4 new Direct Oral AntiCoagulants (DOACs) for preventing VTE recurrence. Few cancer patients were included in the efficacy trials, and practice guidelines fall silent on whether switching to DOAC therapy is advisable. To fill this knowledge gap, the Alliance Foundation Trials LLC, a research network of academic and community practices across the US, is conducting a pragmatic randomized effectiveness trial. The overarching objective of the study is to determine the effectiveness of LMWH/ warfarin vs. DOAC anticoagulation for preventing recurrent VTE in cancer patients. The investigators will conduct a trial of 811 cancer patients followed for 6 months. The intervention strategy is DOAC therapy with edoxaban, apixaban, rivaroxaban, or dabigatran. The comparator is LMWH alone or with warfarin. Within each arm, patients can choose the agent they prefer based on side effects, drug interactions, and practical issues such as co-pays. The trial compares these two strategies in terms of treatment: 1) benefits based on VTE recurrence; 2) harms based on bleeding rates; 3) burdens based on patients' reports of their experiences; and 4) mortality rates. The investigators hypothesize that the benefits, harms and burdens of DOAC treatment will be non-inferior to, or better than, usual care with LMWH/ warfarin among cancer patients. The information gained will empower cancer patients and physicians to make more informed choices about anticoagulation strategies to manage VTE.
Interventions
DRUGEdoxaban
Anticoagulation therapy.
DRUGDabigatran
Anticoagulation therapy.
DRUGWarfarin
Anticoagulation therapy.
DRUGDalteparin
Anticoagulation therapy.
DRUGEnoxaparin
Anticoagulation therapy.
DRUGFondaparinux
Anticoagulation therapy.
DRUGRivaroxaban
Anticoagulation therapy.
DRUGApixaban
Anticoagulation therapy.
Sponsors
Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute
Alliance Foundation Trials, LLC.
Study design
Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Intervention model
PARALLEL
Primary purpose
TREATMENT
Masking
NONE
Eligibility
Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
18 Years to No maximum
Healthy volunteers
No
Inclusion criteria
* Diagnosis of advanced solid tumor cancer, lymphoma, or myeloma (no time restrictions or limitations) -OR- diagnosis of early stage solid tumor cancer, lymphoma, or myeloma \<= 12 months prior to study enrollment * Diagnosis of VTE \<= 30 days prior to study enrollment for which potential benefits of anticoagulation therapy to prevent recurrence of VTE are felt by the treating physician to exceed the potential harms * Any anticoagulation drug/strategy may be used to treat the index VTE; protocol treatment will begin \<= 30days after the index VTE diagnosis date * Treating physician intends to put participant on anticoagulation therapy for at least three months. * Age \>= 18 years * Platelet count is \>= 50,000/mm\^3 (\<= 7 days prior to enrollment) * CrCl (Creatinine Clearance) is \>= 15 ml/min (\<= 7 days prior to enrollment)
Exclusion criteria
* Diagnosis of acute leukemia * Has ever received or is scheduled to receive an Allogeneic Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation (alloHSCT) * Patients who have ever received an Autologous Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation (autoHSCT) ARE eligible. * Patients who are scheduled to receive an Autologous Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation (autoHSCT) are NOT eligible * Ongoing, clinically significant bleeding (CTCAE grade 3 or 4) * Ongoing therapy with a P-gp inhibitor (e.g., nelfinavir, indinavir, or saquinavir-protease inhibitors for HIV) as these drugs interact with the factor Xa inhibitors * Therapy with any azole antifungals (e.g., itraconazole, ketaconazole, voriconazole) at the time of enrollment
Design outcomes
Primary
| Measure | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Cumulative Non-Fatal VTE Recurrence at 6 Months (%) | 6 months | To compare the effectiveness of anticoagulation with a DOAC (intervention) with LMWH/warfarin (comparator) for preventing VTE recurrence in patients with cancer based on cumulative VTE recurrence reported by patients or clinicians at 6 months. Only VTEs that were nonfatal were considered because of the challenges of attributing cause of death in cancer patients to tumor progression vs. VTE. |
Secondary
| Measure | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Health Related Quality of Life Reported by Participants Via the Optum SF-12v2 Health Survey Questionnaire | 3 months | Change in physical health at 3 months. Health-related quality of life was measured using the 12-Item Short Form Health Survey (SF-12) sub-scales for physical and mental health (score range, 0-100; higher scores indicate better physical and mental health functioning). Survey content included minor verbiage changes for clarity. The presented scores in this results section indicate the change (difference) in mean scores between the baseline and 3-month follow-up assessment. |
| Burden of Anticoagulation Therapy Reported by Participants Via the Anti-Clot Treatment Scale (ACTS) Questionnaire | 3 months | To compare the burden of anticoagulation therapy with DOAC vs. with LMWH/warfarin for cancer patients with VTE at 3 months. The burden scale has12 items and patients are asked to rate their experiences on a 5-point scale of intensity (1=not at all, 2=a little, 3=moderately, 4=quite a bit, 5=extremely). The ACTS burden tool is then scored using the totals from each question with a total score from 12 to 60 possible. Higher scores signify greater satisfaction (lower burden). |
| Mortality Reported by Participants' Surrogates (Via Study-specific Questionnaire) or Clinicians (Via Study-specific Case Report Form) | 6 months | To compare the impact of DOAC vs. LMWH/warfarin therapy on mortality in cancer patients with VTE based on survival at 6 months. Mortality was reported by participants' surrogates (via study-specific questionnaire) or clinicians (via study-specific case report form) |
| Cumulative Rates of Major Bleeding | 6 months | To compare the harms of DOAC vs. LMWH/warfarin therapy for cancer patients with VTE based on the cumulative rate of major bleeding at 6 months. d. Major bleeding was defined as Grade \>=3 on the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events from the National Cancer Institute (NCI CTCAE) criteria version 5.0 (i.e., severe or medically significant but not immediately life-threatening; hospitalization or prolongation of hospitalization indicated; disabling; limiting self care activities of daily living). |
| Health Related Quality of Life (Mental Health) Reported by Participants Via the Optum SF-12v2 Health Survey Questionnaire at 3-months | 3-months | Change in mental health at 3 months from baseline. Health-related quality of life was measured using the 12-Item Short Form Health Survey (SF-12) sub-scales for physical and mental health (score range, 0-100; higher scores indicate better physical and mental health functioning). Survey content included minor verbiage changes for clarity. The scores indicate change in score from baseline. |
| Health Related Quality of Life (Mental Health) Reported by Participants Via the Optum SF-12v2 Health Survey Questionnaire at 6-months | 6-months | Change in mental health at 6 months from baseline. Health-related quality of life was measured using the 12-Item Short Form Health Survey (SF-12) sub-scales for physical and mental health (score range, 0-100; higher scores indicate better physical and mental health functioning). Survey content included minor verbiage changes for clarity. The scores indicate change in score from baseline. |
| Benefit of Anticoagulation Therapy Reported by Participants Via the Anti-Clot Treatment Scale (ACTS) Questionnaire | 3-months | To compare the benefit of anticoagulation therapy with DOAC vs. with LMWH/warfarin for cancer patients with VTE at 3 months. The benefits scale has 3 items and patients are asked to rate their experiences on a 5-point scale of intensity (1=not at all, 2=a little, 3=moderately, 4=quite a bit, 5=extremely). The ACTS benefits tool is then scored using the totals from each question with a total score from 3 to 15 possible. Higher scores signify greater satisfaction (greater benefits). |
Countries
United States
Participant flow
Recruitment details
Patients were recruited from 67 US-based healthcare institutions between December 2016 and April 2020.
Participants by arm
| Arm | Count |
|---|---|
| Randomized Arm 1 (DOACs) Randomized Arm 1 will get anticoagulation therapy with a Direct Oral AntiCoagulant (DOAC). There are four FDA-approved DOAC drugs that may be used for this study: Rivaroxaban, Apixaban, Edoxaban, or Dabigatran. The treatment (including dosage form, dosage, frequency and duration) should be administered in accordance with the drug's FDA package insert, and all modifications are at the discretion of the treating investigator.
Rivaroxaban: Anticoagulation therapy.
Apixaban: Anticoagulation therapy.
Edoxaban: Anticoagulation therapy.
Dabigatran: Anticoagulation therapy. | 330 |
| Randomized Arm 2 (LMWH) Randomized Arm 2 will get anticoagulation therapy with low molecular weight heparin (LMWH) with or without a transition to warfarin. There are three FDA-approved LMWH drugs that may be used for this study: Dalteparin, Enoxaparin, or Fondaparinux. The treatment (including dosage form, dosage, frequency and duration) should be administered in accordance with the drug's FDA package insert, and all modifications are at the discretion of the treating investigator.
Dalteparin: Anticoagulation therapy.
Enoxaparin: Anticoagulation therapy.
Fondaparinux: Anticoagulation therapy. | 308 |
| Preference Cohort 1 (DOACs) If an eligible participant is offered randomization and declines randomization, then a limited number of participants (up to N=190) will be allowed to enroll in the Preference Cohort. In this case, the treating physician and patient choose Arm 1 or Arm 2 (non-randomized).
Preference cohort: Non-randomized Arm 1 will get anticoagulation therapy with a Direct Oral AntiCoagulant (DOAC).
Rivaroxaban: Anticoagulation therapy.
Apixaban: Anticoagulation therapy.
Edoxaban: Anticoagulation therapy.
Dabigatran: Anticoagulation therapy. | 107 |
| Preference Cohort 2 (LMWH) If an eligible participant is offered randomization and declines randomization, then a limited number of participants (up to N=190) will be allowed to enroll in the Preference Cohort. In this case, the treating physician and patient choose Arm 1 or Arm 2 (non-randomized).
Preference cohort: Non-randomized Arm 2 will get anticoagulation therapy with Low Molecular Weight Heparin (LMWH) with or without a transition to warfarin.
Dalteparin: Anticoagulation therapy.
Enoxaparin: Anticoagulation therapy.
Fondaparinux: Anticoagulation therapy. | 30 |
| Total | 775 |
Baseline characteristics
| Characteristic | Randomized Arm 1 (DOACs) | Randomized Arm 2 (LMWH) | Preference Cohort 1 (DOACs) | Preference Cohort 2 (LMWH) | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Age, Categorical <=18 years | 0 Participants | 0 Participants | 0 Participants | 0 Participants | 0 Participants |
| Age, Categorical >=65 years | 155 Participants | 111 Participants | 62 Participants | 19 Participants | 347 Participants |
| Age, Categorical Between 18 and 65 years | 175 Participants | 197 Participants | 45 Participants | 11 Participants | 428 Participants |
| Age, Customized Age, median (q1, q3) | 64 years | 62 years | 66 years | 67 years | 64 years |
| Ethnicity (NIH/OMB) Hispanic or Latino | 15 Participants | 15 Participants | 3 Participants | 0 Participants | 33 Participants |
| Ethnicity (NIH/OMB) Not Hispanic or Latino | 306 Participants | 287 Participants | 101 Participants | 28 Participants | 722 Participants |
| Ethnicity (NIH/OMB) Unknown or Not Reported | 9 Participants | 6 Participants | 3 Participants | 2 Participants | 20 Participants |
| Race (NIH/OMB) American Indian or Alaska Native | 3 Participants | 0 Participants | 1 Participants | 1 Participants | 5 Participants |
| Race (NIH/OMB) Asian | 4 Participants | 6 Participants | 2 Participants | 2 Participants | 14 Participants |
| Race (NIH/OMB) Black or African American | 39 Participants | 38 Participants | 12 Participants | 3 Participants | 92 Participants |
| Race (NIH/OMB) More than one race | 0 Participants | 0 Participants | 0 Participants | 0 Participants | 0 Participants |
| Race (NIH/OMB) Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander | 0 Participants | 1 Participants | 0 Participants | 1 Participants | 2 Participants |
| Race (NIH/OMB) Unknown or Not Reported | 7 Participants | 8 Participants | 2 Participants | 0 Participants | 17 Participants |
| Race (NIH/OMB) White | 277 Participants | 255 Participants | 90 Participants | 23 Participants | 645 Participants |
| Sex/Gender, Customized Female | 181 Participants | 172 Participants | 51 Participants | 18 Participants | 422 Participants |
| Sex/Gender, Customized Male | 149 Participants | 136 Participants | 56 Participants | 12 Participants | 353 Participants |
Adverse events
| Event type | EG000 affected / at risk | EG001 affected / at risk | EG002 affected / at risk | EG003 affected / at risk |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| deaths Total, all-cause mortality | 70 / 330 | 56 / 308 | 18 / 107 | 9 / 30 |
| other Total, other adverse events | 6 / 330 | 11 / 308 | 3 / 107 | 2 / 30 |
| serious Total, serious adverse events | 123 / 330 | 114 / 308 | 51 / 107 | 16 / 30 |
Outcome results
Primary
Cumulative Non-Fatal VTE Recurrence at 6 Months (%)
To compare the effectiveness of anticoagulation with a DOAC (intervention) with LMWH/warfarin (comparator) for preventing VTE recurrence in patients with cancer based on cumulative VTE recurrence reported by patients or clinicians at 6 months. Only VTEs that were nonfatal were considered because of the challenges of attributing cause of death in cancer patients to tumor progression vs. VTE.
Time frame: 6 months
Population: Primary analyses were performed on the participants who began protocol-directed therapy, the as treated population.
| Arm | Measure | Value (NUMBER) |
|---|---|---|
| Randomized Arm 1 (DOACs) | Cumulative Non-Fatal VTE Recurrence at 6 Months (%) | 6.1 percentage of patients |
| Randomized Arm 2 (LMWH) | Cumulative Non-Fatal VTE Recurrence at 6 Months (%) | 8.8 percentage of patients |
| Preference Cohort 1 (DOACs) | Cumulative Non-Fatal VTE Recurrence at 6 Months (%) | 7.5 percentage of patients |
| Preference Cohort 2 (LMWH) | Cumulative Non-Fatal VTE Recurrence at 6 Months (%) | 4.1 percentage of patients |
Secondary
Benefit of Anticoagulation Therapy Reported by Participants Via the Anti-Clot Treatment Scale (ACTS) Questionnaire
To compare the benefit of anticoagulation therapy with DOAC vs. with LMWH/warfarin for cancer patients with VTE at 3 months. The benefits scale has 3 items and patients are asked to rate their experiences on a 5-point scale of intensity (1=not at all, 2=a little, 3=moderately, 4=quite a bit, 5=extremely). The ACTS benefits tool is then scored using the totals from each question with a total score from 3 to 15 possible. Higher scores signify greater satisfaction (greater benefits).
Time frame: 3-months
Population: Participants completing the 3-month survey assessment
| Arm | Measure | Value (MEAN) |
|---|---|---|
| Randomized Arm 1 (DOACs) | Benefit of Anticoagulation Therapy Reported by Participants Via the Anti-Clot Treatment Scale (ACTS) Questionnaire | 11.2 score on a scale |
| Randomized Arm 2 (LMWH) | Benefit of Anticoagulation Therapy Reported by Participants Via the Anti-Clot Treatment Scale (ACTS) Questionnaire | 10.7 score on a scale |
| Preference Cohort 1 (DOACs) | Benefit of Anticoagulation Therapy Reported by Participants Via the Anti-Clot Treatment Scale (ACTS) Questionnaire | 10.3 score on a scale |
| Preference Cohort 2 (LMWH) | Benefit of Anticoagulation Therapy Reported by Participants Via the Anti-Clot Treatment Scale (ACTS) Questionnaire | 10.5 score on a scale |
Secondary
Benefit of Anticoagulation Therapy Reported by Participants Via the Anti-Clot Treatment Scale (ACTS) Questionnaire
To compare the benefit of anticoagulation therapy with DOAC vs. with LMWH/warfarin for cancer patients with VTE at 6 months. The benefits scale has 3 items and patients are asked to rate their experiences on a 5-point scale of intensity (1=not at all, 2=a little, 3=moderately, 4=quite a bit, 5=extremely). The ACTS benefits tool is then scored using the totals from each question with a total score from 3 to 15 possible. Higher scores signify greater satisfaction (greater benefits).
Time frame: 6-months
Population: Participants completing the 6-moth survey assessment
| Arm | Measure | Value (MEAN) |
|---|---|---|
| Randomized Arm 1 (DOACs) | Benefit of Anticoagulation Therapy Reported by Participants Via the Anti-Clot Treatment Scale (ACTS) Questionnaire | 11.6 score on a scale |
| Randomized Arm 2 (LMWH) | Benefit of Anticoagulation Therapy Reported by Participants Via the Anti-Clot Treatment Scale (ACTS) Questionnaire | 11.3 score on a scale |
| Preference Cohort 1 (DOACs) | Benefit of Anticoagulation Therapy Reported by Participants Via the Anti-Clot Treatment Scale (ACTS) Questionnaire | 11.5 score on a scale |
| Preference Cohort 2 (LMWH) | Benefit of Anticoagulation Therapy Reported by Participants Via the Anti-Clot Treatment Scale (ACTS) Questionnaire | 10.1 score on a scale |
Secondary
Burden of Anticoagulation Therapy Reported by Participants Via the Anti-Clot Treatment Scale (ACTS) Questionnaire
To compare the burden of anticoagulation therapy with DOAC vs. with LMWH/warfarin for cancer patients with VTE at 3 months. The burden scale has12 items and patients are asked to rate their experiences on a 5-point scale of intensity (1=not at all, 2=a little, 3=moderately, 4=quite a bit, 5=extremely). The ACTS burden tool is then scored using the totals from each question with a total score from 12 to 60 possible. Higher scores signify greater satisfaction (lower burden).
Time frame: 3 months
Population: Participants completing the 3-month survey assessment
| Arm | Measure | Value (MEAN) |
|---|---|---|
| Randomized Arm 1 (DOACs) | Burden of Anticoagulation Therapy Reported by Participants Via the Anti-Clot Treatment Scale (ACTS) Questionnaire | 56.7 score on a scale |
| Randomized Arm 2 (LMWH) | Burden of Anticoagulation Therapy Reported by Participants Via the Anti-Clot Treatment Scale (ACTS) Questionnaire | 53.3 score on a scale |
| Preference Cohort 1 (DOACs) | Burden of Anticoagulation Therapy Reported by Participants Via the Anti-Clot Treatment Scale (ACTS) Questionnaire | 55.8 score on a scale |
| Preference Cohort 2 (LMWH) | Burden of Anticoagulation Therapy Reported by Participants Via the Anti-Clot Treatment Scale (ACTS) Questionnaire | 54.9 score on a scale |
Secondary
Burden of Anticoagulation Therapy Reported by Participants Via the Anti-Clot Treatment Scale (ACTS) Questionnaire
To compare the burden of anticoagulation therapy with DOAC vs. with LMWH/warfarin for cancer patients with VTE at 6 months. The burden scale has12 items and patients are asked to rate their experiences on a 5-point scale of intensity (1=not at all, 2=a little, 3=moderately, 4=quite a bit, 5=extremely). The ACTS burden tool is then scored using the totals from each question with a total score from 12 to 60 possible. Higher scores signify greater satisfaction (lower burden).
Time frame: 6 months
Population: Participants completing the 6-month survey assessment
| Arm | Measure | Value (MEAN) |
|---|---|---|
| Randomized Arm 1 (DOACs) | Burden of Anticoagulation Therapy Reported by Participants Via the Anti-Clot Treatment Scale (ACTS) Questionnaire | 56.5 score on a scale |
| Randomized Arm 2 (LMWH) | Burden of Anticoagulation Therapy Reported by Participants Via the Anti-Clot Treatment Scale (ACTS) Questionnaire | 54.1 score on a scale |
| Preference Cohort 1 (DOACs) | Burden of Anticoagulation Therapy Reported by Participants Via the Anti-Clot Treatment Scale (ACTS) Questionnaire | 54.9 score on a scale |
| Preference Cohort 2 (LMWH) | Burden of Anticoagulation Therapy Reported by Participants Via the Anti-Clot Treatment Scale (ACTS) Questionnaire | 53.1 score on a scale |
Secondary
Cumulative Rates of Major Bleeding
To compare the harms of DOAC vs. LMWH/warfarin therapy for cancer patients with VTE based on the cumulative rate of major bleeding at 6 months. d. Major bleeding was defined as Grade \>=3 on the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events from the National Cancer Institute (NCI CTCAE) criteria version 5.0 (i.e., severe or medically significant but not immediately life-threatening; hospitalization or prolongation of hospitalization indicated; disabling; limiting self care activities of daily living).
Time frame: 6 months
Population: Primary analyses were performed on the participants who began protocol-directed therapy, the as treated population.
| Arm | Measure | Value (NUMBER) |
|---|---|---|
| Randomized Arm 1 (DOACs) | Cumulative Rates of Major Bleeding | 5.2 percentage of patients |
| Randomized Arm 2 (LMWH) | Cumulative Rates of Major Bleeding | 5.6 percentage of patients |
| Preference Cohort 1 (DOACs) | Cumulative Rates of Major Bleeding | 11.5 percentage of patients |
| Preference Cohort 2 (LMWH) | Cumulative Rates of Major Bleeding | 7.6 percentage of patients |
Secondary
Health Related Quality of Life (Mental Health) Reported by Participants Via the Optum SF-12v2 Health Survey Questionnaire at 3-months
Change in mental health at 3 months from baseline. Health-related quality of life was measured using the 12-Item Short Form Health Survey (SF-12) sub-scales for physical and mental health (score range, 0-100; higher scores indicate better physical and mental health functioning). Survey content included minor verbiage changes for clarity. The scores indicate change in score from baseline.
Time frame: 3-months
Population: Participants completing the 3-month survey assessment
| Arm | Measure | Value (MEAN) |
|---|---|---|
| Randomized Arm 1 (DOACs) | Health Related Quality of Life (Mental Health) Reported by Participants Via the Optum SF-12v2 Health Survey Questionnaire at 3-months | -0.3 units on a scale |
| Randomized Arm 2 (LMWH) | Health Related Quality of Life (Mental Health) Reported by Participants Via the Optum SF-12v2 Health Survey Questionnaire at 3-months | 0.7 units on a scale |
| Preference Cohort 1 (DOACs) | Health Related Quality of Life (Mental Health) Reported by Participants Via the Optum SF-12v2 Health Survey Questionnaire at 3-months | 0.3 units on a scale |
| Preference Cohort 2 (LMWH) | Health Related Quality of Life (Mental Health) Reported by Participants Via the Optum SF-12v2 Health Survey Questionnaire at 3-months | 0.4 units on a scale |
Secondary
Health Related Quality of Life (Mental Health) Reported by Participants Via the Optum SF-12v2 Health Survey Questionnaire at 6-months
Change in mental health at 6 months from baseline. Health-related quality of life was measured using the 12-Item Short Form Health Survey (SF-12) sub-scales for physical and mental health (score range, 0-100; higher scores indicate better physical and mental health functioning). Survey content included minor verbiage changes for clarity. The scores indicate change in score from baseline.
Time frame: 6-months
Population: Participants completing the 6-month survey assessment
| Arm | Measure | Value (MEAN) |
|---|---|---|
| Randomized Arm 1 (DOACs) | Health Related Quality of Life (Mental Health) Reported by Participants Via the Optum SF-12v2 Health Survey Questionnaire at 6-months | 0.3 units on a scale |
| Randomized Arm 2 (LMWH) | Health Related Quality of Life (Mental Health) Reported by Participants Via the Optum SF-12v2 Health Survey Questionnaire at 6-months | 0.9 units on a scale |
| Preference Cohort 1 (DOACs) | Health Related Quality of Life (Mental Health) Reported by Participants Via the Optum SF-12v2 Health Survey Questionnaire at 6-months | 1.1 units on a scale |
| Preference Cohort 2 (LMWH) | Health Related Quality of Life (Mental Health) Reported by Participants Via the Optum SF-12v2 Health Survey Questionnaire at 6-months | -1.9 units on a scale |
Secondary
Health Related Quality of Life Reported by Participants Via the Optum SF-12v2 Health Survey Questionnaire
Change in physical health at 6 months. Health-related quality of life was measured using the 12-Item Short Form Health Survey (SF-12) sub-scales for physical and mental health (score range, 0-100; higher scores indicate better physical and mental health functioning). Survey content included minor verbiage changes for clarity. The presented scores in this results section indicate the change (difference) in mean scores between the baseline and 6-month follow-up assessment.
Time frame: 6 months
Population: Participants completing the 6-month survey assessment
| Arm | Measure | Value (MEAN) |
|---|---|---|
| Randomized Arm 1 (DOACs) | Health Related Quality of Life Reported by Participants Via the Optum SF-12v2 Health Survey Questionnaire | 2.4 units on a scale |
| Randomized Arm 2 (LMWH) | Health Related Quality of Life Reported by Participants Via the Optum SF-12v2 Health Survey Questionnaire | 0.7 units on a scale |
| Preference Cohort 1 (DOACs) | Health Related Quality of Life Reported by Participants Via the Optum SF-12v2 Health Survey Questionnaire | 2.1 units on a scale |
| Preference Cohort 2 (LMWH) | Health Related Quality of Life Reported by Participants Via the Optum SF-12v2 Health Survey Questionnaire | -2.8 units on a scale |
Secondary
Health Related Quality of Life Reported by Participants Via the Optum SF-12v2 Health Survey Questionnaire
Change in physical health at 3 months. Health-related quality of life was measured using the 12-Item Short Form Health Survey (SF-12) sub-scales for physical and mental health (score range, 0-100; higher scores indicate better physical and mental health functioning). Survey content included minor verbiage changes for clarity. The presented scores in this results section indicate the change (difference) in mean scores between the baseline and 3-month follow-up assessment.
Time frame: 3 months
Population: Participants completing the 3-month survey assessment
| Arm | Measure | Value (MEAN) |
|---|---|---|
| Randomized Arm 1 (DOACs) | Health Related Quality of Life Reported by Participants Via the Optum SF-12v2 Health Survey Questionnaire | 1.8 units on a scale |
| Randomized Arm 2 (LMWH) | Health Related Quality of Life Reported by Participants Via the Optum SF-12v2 Health Survey Questionnaire | 0.7 units on a scale |
| Preference Cohort 1 (DOACs) | Health Related Quality of Life Reported by Participants Via the Optum SF-12v2 Health Survey Questionnaire | 3.4 units on a scale |
| Preference Cohort 2 (LMWH) | Health Related Quality of Life Reported by Participants Via the Optum SF-12v2 Health Survey Questionnaire | -0.3 units on a scale |
Secondary
Mortality Reported by Participants' Surrogates (Via Study-specific Questionnaire) or Clinicians (Via Study-specific Case Report Form)
To compare the impact of DOAC vs. LMWH/warfarin therapy on mortality in cancer patients with VTE based on survival at 6 months. Mortality was reported by participants' surrogates (via study-specific questionnaire) or clinicians (via study-specific case report form)
Time frame: 6 months
Population: Primary analyses were performed on the participants who began protocol-directed therapy, the as treated population.
| Arm | Measure | Value (NUMBER) |
|---|---|---|
| Randomized Arm 1 (DOACs) | Mortality Reported by Participants' Surrogates (Via Study-specific Questionnaire) or Clinicians (Via Study-specific Case Report Form) | 21.5 percentage of patients |
| Randomized Arm 2 (LMWH) | Mortality Reported by Participants' Surrogates (Via Study-specific Questionnaire) or Clinicians (Via Study-specific Case Report Form) | 18.4 percentage of patients |
| Preference Cohort 1 (DOACs) | Mortality Reported by Participants' Surrogates (Via Study-specific Questionnaire) or Clinicians (Via Study-specific Case Report Form) | 16.3 percentage of patients |
| Preference Cohort 2 (LMWH) | Mortality Reported by Participants' Surrogates (Via Study-specific Questionnaire) or Clinicians (Via Study-specific Case Report Form) | 23.8 percentage of patients |