Direct oral anticoagulant secondary prophylaxis vs vitamin K antagonist secondary prophylaxis: Major bleeding
Direct oral anticoagulant secondary prophylaxis showed no clear difference in major bleeding compared with vitamin K antagonist secondary prophylaxis (low certainty).
What each review found
Include earlier review versions| Finding | Effect | Studies | GRADE certainty |
|---|---|---|---|
Direct oral anticoagulant secondary prophylaxis vs Vitamin K antagonist secondary prophylaxis Major bleeding · patients with active cancer with venous thromboembolism Direct oral anticoagulant secondary prophylaxis showed no clear difference in major bleeding compared with vitamin K antagonist secondary prophylaxis (low certainty). Anticoagulation for the long‐term treatment of venous thromboembolism in people with cancer (2018) · Cochrane Headline outcomes only | RR 0.77 [0.39, 1.53] | 4 studies · 1055 participants | Low |
Findings are shown side by side, never pooled across reviews.
The reviews
| Review | Searched up to | Included studies | AMSTAR 2 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Anticoagulation for the long‐term treatment of venous thromboembolism in people with cancer 2018 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only | Not reported | list not extracted yet | Not assessed |
Studies behind the findings
None of these reviews ties its included studies to this outcome in the data here. Cochrane reviews and reviews with headline outcomes only do not list their studies yet.
How reviews are matched to this question
Reviews word the same question differently. Four decision models (TypeSafe's Jev, Liquid AI's d1-ultra, SubQ Snap and Baseten's Elephant) judged each wording of the population, intervention, comparator and outcome against the others; two wordings count as the same when at least three of them agree and none clearly disagrees, and findings count as this question only when all four elements match. Timing, setting and subgroup never split a question: they are shown on each finding.