Enoxaparin for symptomatic COVID-19 managed in the ambulatory setting: An individual patient level analysis of the OVID and ETHIC trials.
Anticoagulation
COVID-19
Death
Trial
Venous thromboembolism
Journal
Thrombosis research
ISSN: 1879-2472
Titre abrégé: Thromb Res
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 0326377
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Oct 2023
Oct 2023
Historique:
received:
25
06
2023
revised:
09
08
2023
accepted:
14
08
2023
pubmed:
25
8
2023
medline:
25
8
2023
entrez:
25
8
2023
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Antithrombotic treatment may improve the disease course in non-critically ill, symptomatic COVID-19 outpatients. We performed an individual patient-level analysis of the OVID and ETHIC randomized controlled trials, which compared enoxaparin thromboprophylaxis for either 14 (OVID) or 21 days (ETHIC) vs. no thromboprophylaxis for outpatients with symptomatic COVID-19 and at least one additional risk factor. The primary efficacy outcome included all-cause hospitalization and all-cause death within 30 days from randomization. Both studies were prematurely stopped for futility. Secondary efficacy outcomes were major symptomatic venous thromboembolic events, arterial cardiovascular events, or their composite occurring within 30 days from randomization. The same outcomes were assessed over a 90-day follow-up. The primary safety outcome was major bleeding (ISTH criteria). A total of 691 patients were randomized: 339 to receive enoxaparin and 352 to the control group. Over 30-day follow-up, the primary efficacy outcome occurred in 6.0 % of patients in the enoxaparin group vs. 5.8 % of controls for a risk ratio (RR) of 1.05 (95%CI 0.57-1.92). The incidence of major symptomatic venous thromboembolic events and arterial cardiovascular events was 0.9 % vs. 1.8 %, respectively (RR 0.52; 95%CI 0.13-2.06). Most cardiovascular thromboembolic events were represented by symptomatic venous thromboembolic events, occurring in 0.6 % vs. 1.5 % of patients, respectively. A similar distribution of outcomes between the treatment groups was observed over 90 days. No major bleeding occurred in the enoxaparin group vs. one (0.3 %) in the control group. We found no evidence for the clinical benefit of early administration of enoxaparin thromboprophylaxis in outpatients with symptomatic COVID-19. These results should be interpreted taking into consideration the relatively low occurrence of events.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Antithrombotic treatment may improve the disease course in non-critically ill, symptomatic COVID-19 outpatients.
METHODS
METHODS
We performed an individual patient-level analysis of the OVID and ETHIC randomized controlled trials, which compared enoxaparin thromboprophylaxis for either 14 (OVID) or 21 days (ETHIC) vs. no thromboprophylaxis for outpatients with symptomatic COVID-19 and at least one additional risk factor. The primary efficacy outcome included all-cause hospitalization and all-cause death within 30 days from randomization. Both studies were prematurely stopped for futility. Secondary efficacy outcomes were major symptomatic venous thromboembolic events, arterial cardiovascular events, or their composite occurring within 30 days from randomization. The same outcomes were assessed over a 90-day follow-up. The primary safety outcome was major bleeding (ISTH criteria).
RESULTS
RESULTS
A total of 691 patients were randomized: 339 to receive enoxaparin and 352 to the control group. Over 30-day follow-up, the primary efficacy outcome occurred in 6.0 % of patients in the enoxaparin group vs. 5.8 % of controls for a risk ratio (RR) of 1.05 (95%CI 0.57-1.92). The incidence of major symptomatic venous thromboembolic events and arterial cardiovascular events was 0.9 % vs. 1.8 %, respectively (RR 0.52; 95%CI 0.13-2.06). Most cardiovascular thromboembolic events were represented by symptomatic venous thromboembolic events, occurring in 0.6 % vs. 1.5 % of patients, respectively. A similar distribution of outcomes between the treatment groups was observed over 90 days. No major bleeding occurred in the enoxaparin group vs. one (0.3 %) in the control group.
CONCLUSIONS
CONCLUSIONS
We found no evidence for the clinical benefit of early administration of enoxaparin thromboprophylaxis in outpatients with symptomatic COVID-19. These results should be interpreted taking into consideration the relatively low occurrence of events.
Identifiants
pubmed: 37625200
pii: S0049-3848(23)00235-9
doi: 10.1016/j.thromres.2023.08.009
pii:
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
27-32Informations de copyright
Copyright © 2023 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
Declaration of competing interest The authors declare the following financial interests/personal relationships which may be considered as potential competing interests: Stefano Barco reports grants or contracts from Bayer, INARI, Boston Scientific, Medtronic, Bard, Sanofi, and Concept Medical; consulting fees from INARI; payment or honoraria from INARI, Boston Scientific, Penumbra and Concept Medical; and support for attending meetings and/or travel from Bayer and Sanofi. Roland Bingisser reports no conflicts of interest. Stefan Stortecky has received research grants to the institution from Edwards Lifesciences, Medtronic, Abbott Vascular, Boston Scientific and Guerbet AG and speaker fees from Boston Scientific. Giuseppe Colucci reports no conflicts of interest. Bernhard Gerber reports non-financial support and funding for an accredited continuing medical education programme from Axonlab, and Thermo Fisher Scientific; personal fees and funding for an accredited continuing medical education programme from Alnylam, Pfizer, and Sanofi; funding for an accredited continuing medical education programme from Bayer, Bristol Myers Squibb, Daiichi-Sankyo, Takeda, Octapharma, SOBI, Janssen, Novo Nordisk, Mitsubishi Pfizer, Tanabe Pharma, outside the submitted work. Jelle C L Himmelreich reports no conflicts of interest. DS reports employment by Sanofi-Aventis Switzerland. Thomas Rosemann reports no conflicts of interest. Walter Ageno reports research grants from Bayer; advisory boards for Bayer, Leo Pharma, Norgine, Sanofi, Techdow, Viatris. Juan Ignacio Arcelus declares speaker fees from Sanofi and Rovi. H.G reports personal fees from Pfizer, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim. Peter MacCallum reports no conflicts of interest. Daniel Duerschmied has received consulting fees from Boston Scientific and speakers' honoraria from Bayer, Daiichi Sankyo, Boston Scientific, Boehringer Ingelheim, and BMS/Pfizer. Tim Sebastian reports no conflicts of interest. Sylvia Haas reports honoraria from Bayer, BMS, Daiichi-Sankyo, Pfizer and Sanofi. Lukas Hobohm received lecture/consultant fees from Johnson&Johnson, INARI, MSD and Boston Scientific; outside the submitted work. The other authors report no conflicts of interest. Renato D Lopes reports research grants or contracts from Amgen, Bristol-Myers Squibb, GlaxoSmithKline, Medtronic, Pfizer, Sanofi-Aventis; funding for educational activities or lectures from Pfizer, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Novo Nordisk, AstraZeneca, and unding for consulting from Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Novo Nordisk, AstraZeneca.