Findings

What do systematic reviews say?

5 questions · 5 findings · 1 reviews

Sort:Best matchNewest Highest certainty Download CSV

No studies found 0 · 0%GRADE not reported 0 · 0%Very low 2 · 40%Low 1 · 20%Moderate 2 · 40%High 0 · 0%

Direct oral anticoagulant secondary prophylaxis vs Low molecular weight heparin secondary prophylaxis

Minor bleeding · patients with cancer with venous thromboembolism

Direct oral anticoagulant secondary prophylaxis probably leads to higher minor bleeding compared with low molecular weight heparin secondary prophylaxis (moderate certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Anticoagulation for the long‐term treatment of venous thromboembolism in people with cancer 2018 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
RR 1.58 [1.15, 2.16]
5 studies · 2854 participants
Moderate

Direct oral anticoagulant secondary prophylaxis vs Low molecular weight heparin secondary prophylaxis

Minor GI bleeding · patients with cancer with venous thromboembolism

It is very uncertain whether direct oral anticoagulant secondary prophylaxis changes minor GI bleeding compared with low molecular weight heparin secondary prophylaxis (very low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Anticoagulation for the long‐term treatment of venous thromboembolism in people with cancer 2018 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
RR 1.37 [0.41, 4.64]
2 studies · 1495 participants
Very low

Direct oral anticoagulant secondary prophylaxis vs Low molecular weight heparin secondary prophylaxis

Minor non‐GI bleeding · patients with cancer with venous thromboembolism

Direct oral anticoagulant secondary prophylaxis probably leads to higher minor non‐GI bleeding compared with low molecular weight heparin secondary prophylaxis (moderate certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Anticoagulation for the long‐term treatment of venous thromboembolism in people with cancer 2018 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
RR 2.37 [1.44, 3.89]
2 studies · 1495 participants
Moderate

Direct oral anticoagulant secondary prophylaxis vs Low molecular weight heparin secondary prophylaxis

Minor upper GI bleeding · patients with cancer with venous thromboembolism

It is very uncertain whether direct oral anticoagulant secondary prophylaxis changes minor upper GI bleeding compared with low molecular weight heparin secondary prophylaxis (very low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Anticoagulation for the long‐term treatment of venous thromboembolism in people with cancer 2018 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
RR 1.03 [0.04, 25.97]
2 studies · 1495 participants
Very low

Direct oral anticoagulant secondary prophylaxis vs Low molecular weight heparin secondary prophylaxis

Minor lower GI bleeding · patients with cancer with venous thromboembolism

Direct oral anticoagulant secondary prophylaxis showed no clear difference in minor lower GI bleeding compared with low molecular weight heparin secondary prophylaxis (low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Anticoagulation for the long‐term treatment of venous thromboembolism in people with cancer 2018 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
RR 1.54 [0.72, 3.27]
2 studies · 1495 participants
Low