Initial therapeutic anticoagulation with rivaroxaban compared to prophylactic therapy with heparins in moderate to severe COVID-19: results of the COVID-PREVENT randomized controlled trial.
Anticoagulation
COVID-19
Rivaroxaban
Thromboprophylaxis
Journal
Clinical research in cardiology : official journal of the German Cardiac Society
ISSN: 1861-0692
Titre abrégé: Clin Res Cardiol
Pays: Germany
ID NLM: 101264123
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Nov 2023
Nov 2023
Historique:
received:
01
04
2023
accepted:
30
05
2023
medline:
23
10
2023
pubmed:
6
7
2023
entrez:
5
7
2023
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
COVID-19 is associated with a prothrombotic state. Current guidelines recommend prophylactic anticoagulation upon hospitalization. COVID-PREVENT, an open-label, multicenter, randomized, clinical trial enrolled patients (≥ 18 years) with moderate to severe COVID-19 and age-adjusted D-dimers > 1.5 upper limit of normal (ULN). The participants were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive either therapeutic anticoagulation with rivaroxaban 20 mg once daily or thromboprophylaxis with a heparin (SOC) for at least 7 days followed by prophylactic anticoagulation with rivaroxaban 10 mg once daily for 28 days or no thromboprophylaxis. The primary efficacy outcome was the D-dimer level and the co-primary efficacy outcome the 7-category ordinal COVID-19 scale by WHO at 7 days post randomization. The secondary outcome was time to the composite event of either venous or arterial thromboembolism, new myocardial infarction, non-hemorrhagic stroke, all-cause death or progression to intubation and invasive ventilation up to 35 days post randomization. The primary efficacy outcome D-dimer at 7 days was not different between patients assigned to therapeutic (n = 55) or prophylactic anticoagulation (n = 56) (1.21 mg/L [0.79, 1.86] vs 1.27 mg/L [0.79, 2.04], p = 0.78). In the whole study population D-dimer was significantly lower at 7 days compared to baseline (1.05 mg/L [0.75, 1.48] vs 1.57 mg/L [1.13, 2.19], p < 0.0001). Therapy with rivaroxaban compared to SOC was not associated an improvement on the WHO 7-category ordinal scale at 7 days (p = 0.085). Rivaroxaban improved the clinical outcome measured by the score in patients with a higher baseline D-dimer > 2.0 ULN (exploratory analysis; 0.632 [0.516, 0.748], p = 0.026). The secondary endpoint occurred in 6 patients (10.9%) in the rivaroxaban group and in 12 (21.4%) in the SOC group (time-to-first occurrence of the components of the secondary outcome: HR 0.5; 95% CI 0.15-1.67; p = 0.264). There was no difference in fatal or non-fatal major or clinically relevant non-major bleeding between the groups. Therapeutic anticoagulation with rivaroxaban compared to prophylactic anticoagulation with a heparin did not improve surrogates of clinical outcome in patients with moderate to severe COVID-19. Whether initial rivaroxaban at therapeutic doses might be superior to thromboprophylaxis in patients with COVID-19 and a high risk as defined by D-dimer > 2 ULN needs confirmation in further studies.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
COVID-19 is associated with a prothrombotic state. Current guidelines recommend prophylactic anticoagulation upon hospitalization.
METHODS
METHODS
COVID-PREVENT, an open-label, multicenter, randomized, clinical trial enrolled patients (≥ 18 years) with moderate to severe COVID-19 and age-adjusted D-dimers > 1.5 upper limit of normal (ULN). The participants were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive either therapeutic anticoagulation with rivaroxaban 20 mg once daily or thromboprophylaxis with a heparin (SOC) for at least 7 days followed by prophylactic anticoagulation with rivaroxaban 10 mg once daily for 28 days or no thromboprophylaxis. The primary efficacy outcome was the D-dimer level and the co-primary efficacy outcome the 7-category ordinal COVID-19 scale by WHO at 7 days post randomization. The secondary outcome was time to the composite event of either venous or arterial thromboembolism, new myocardial infarction, non-hemorrhagic stroke, all-cause death or progression to intubation and invasive ventilation up to 35 days post randomization.
RESULTS
RESULTS
The primary efficacy outcome D-dimer at 7 days was not different between patients assigned to therapeutic (n = 55) or prophylactic anticoagulation (n = 56) (1.21 mg/L [0.79, 1.86] vs 1.27 mg/L [0.79, 2.04], p = 0.78). In the whole study population D-dimer was significantly lower at 7 days compared to baseline (1.05 mg/L [0.75, 1.48] vs 1.57 mg/L [1.13, 2.19], p < 0.0001). Therapy with rivaroxaban compared to SOC was not associated an improvement on the WHO 7-category ordinal scale at 7 days (p = 0.085). Rivaroxaban improved the clinical outcome measured by the score in patients with a higher baseline D-dimer > 2.0 ULN (exploratory analysis; 0.632 [0.516, 0.748], p = 0.026). The secondary endpoint occurred in 6 patients (10.9%) in the rivaroxaban group and in 12 (21.4%) in the SOC group (time-to-first occurrence of the components of the secondary outcome: HR 0.5; 95% CI 0.15-1.67; p = 0.264). There was no difference in fatal or non-fatal major or clinically relevant non-major bleeding between the groups.
CONCLUSIONS
CONCLUSIONS
Therapeutic anticoagulation with rivaroxaban compared to prophylactic anticoagulation with a heparin did not improve surrogates of clinical outcome in patients with moderate to severe COVID-19. Whether initial rivaroxaban at therapeutic doses might be superior to thromboprophylaxis in patients with COVID-19 and a high risk as defined by D-dimer > 2 ULN needs confirmation in further studies.
Identifiants
pubmed: 37407731
doi: 10.1007/s00392-023-02240-1
pii: 10.1007/s00392-023-02240-1
pmc: PMC10584737
doi:
Substances chimiques
Rivaroxaban
9NDF7JZ4M3
Anticoagulants
0
Heparin
9005-49-6
Types de publication
Randomized Controlled Trial
Multicenter Study
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
1620-1638Informations de copyright
© 2023. The Author(s).
Références
J Am Coll Cardiol. 2023 Oct 3;82(14):1445-1463
pubmed: 37758440
J Infect Dis. 2020 Apr 27;221(10):1688-1698
pubmed: 31822885
JAMA. 2021 Nov 2;326(17):1703-1712
pubmed: 34633405
BMJ. 2021 Oct 14;375:n2400
pubmed: 34649864
J Med Virol. 2021 Jan;93(1):250-256
pubmed: 32592501
Int J Lab Hematol. 2018 Oct;40(5):503-507
pubmed: 29806239
Eur Heart J. 2022 May 7;43(18):1776
pubmed: 34927669
Thromb Haemost. 2020 Dec;120(12):1691-1699
pubmed: 33186991
Chest. 2021 Mar;159(3):1182-1196
pubmed: 33217420
J Thromb Haemost. 2015 Nov;13(11):2119-26
pubmed: 26764429
Lancet. 2022 Jan 1;399(10319):50-59
pubmed: 34921756
N Engl J Med. 2020 May 7;382(19):1787-1799
pubmed: 32187464
Blood. 2020 Sep 10;136(11):1347-1350
pubmed: 32746455
Am J Emerg Med. 2021 Jan;39:173-179
pubmed: 33069541
N Engl J Med. 2021 Aug 26;385(9):790-802
pubmed: 34351721
Crit Care Med. 2020 Sep;48(9):1358-1364
pubmed: 32467443
N Engl J Med. 2020 Jul 9;383(2):120-128
pubmed: 32437596
N Engl J Med. 2021 Aug 26;385(9):777-789
pubmed: 34351722
Chin Med J (Engl). 2020 May 5;133(9):1087-1095
pubmed: 32358325
J Am Coll Cardiol. 2020 Jun 30;75(25):3140-3147
pubmed: 32586587
JAMA Intern Med. 2021 Dec 1;181(12):1612-1620
pubmed: 34617959
JAMA. 2021 Apr 27;325(16):1620-1630
pubmed: 33734299
Chest. 2011 Sep;140(3):706-714
pubmed: 21436241
Lancet. 2021 Jun 12;397(10291):2253-2263
pubmed: 34097856
TH Open. 2017 Jun 28;1(1):e56-e65
pubmed: 31249911
Eur Heart J. 2022 Mar 14;43(11):1059-1103
pubmed: 34791154
Lancet. 2020 Mar 28;395(10229):1033-1034
pubmed: 32192578
N Engl J Med. 2020 Nov 5;383(19):1813-1826
pubmed: 32445440
Br J Haematol. 2020 Aug;190(4):e192-e195
pubmed: 32584423
N Engl J Med. 2018 Sep 20;379(12):1118-1127
pubmed: 30145946
Blood. 2020 Jul 23;136(4):489-500
pubmed: 32492712