Table 3.
Summary of findings: Oral anticoagulation versus no oral anticoagulation be used in patients with cancer who have no other therapeutic or prophylactic indication for anticoagulation.
| Patient or population: Patients with cancer who have no therapeutic or prophylactic indication for anticoagulation Settings: Outpatient Intervention: Oral anticoagulationa | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Outcomes | Illustrative comparative risksb (95% CI) | Relative effect (95% CI) | No. of participants (studies) | Quality of the evidence (GRADE) | |
| Assumed risk Control |
Corresponding risk Oral anticoagulation |
||||
|
| |||||
| Death Follow-up: median 1 y |
Moderate | RR 0.94 (0.87–1.03) | 1604 (5 studies) | Moderate | |
| 649 per 1000 | 610 per 1000 (565–668) | ||||
| Symptomatic VTE Follow-up: 1 y |
Moderate | RR 0.15 (0.02–1.2) | 315 (1 study) | Moderate | |
| 29 per 1000 | 4 per 1000 (1–35) | ||||
| Major bleeding Follow-up: median 1 y |
Moderate | RR 4.24 (1.85–9.68) | 1282 (4 studies) | Moderate | |
| 7 per 1000 | 30 per 1000 (13–68) | ||||
| Minor bleeding Follow-up: 1 y |
Moderate | RR 3.34 (1.66–6.74) | 851 (3 studies) | Moderate | |
| 27 per 1000 | 90 per 1000 (45–182) | ||||
CI, Confidence interval; INR, international normalized ratio; RR, risk ratio; VTE, venous thromboembolism; GRADE, Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation.
a
All studies used warfarin at a dose to increase prothrombin time 1.5 to 2 times (4 studies) or to keep INR between 1.3 and 1.9.
b
The corresponding risk (and its 95% CI) is based on the assumed risk in the comparison group and the relative effect of the intervention (and its 95% CI).