We have located links that may give you full text access.
Primary thromboembolic prevention in multiple myeloma patients: An exploratory meta-analysis on aspirin use.
Seminars in Hematology 2018 October
BACKGROUND: Multiple myeloma (MM) is a common hematological disorder, often complicated by venous thromboembolism, especially during treatment with immunomodulatory drugs. Acetylsalicylic acid (ASA) has been extensively used as thromboprophylaxis but its rationale is unclear and the efficacy versus low-molecular weight heparins (LMWH) is still matter of debate. European and American guidelines suggest different approaches and the optimal antithrombotic strategy is yet to be established.
METHODS: We conducted an exploratory metanalysis and a systematic review on studies comparing ASA versus other interventions for thromboprophylaxis (no intervention or LMWH) in patients with MM.
RESULTS: Ten studies were included (2 randomized controlled trials, 6 longitudinal and 2 retrospective studies) with 1,964 participants (1,257 treated with ASA, 640 with LMWH and 67 with no thromboprophylaxis). Patients treated with ASA had a significantly lower risk of VTE compared to no intervention (OR=0.20; 95%CI: 0.07-0.61, p=0.005; I2 =41%). The use of ASA was associated with a higher VTE risk compared to LMWH in longitudinal studies (OR=2.60; 95%CI: 1.08-6.25; p=0.03; I2 =0%), however no differences have been showed in randomized controlled trials.
CONCLUSIONS: ASA demonstrated a good efficacy compared to no intervention; data are insufficient to confirm superiority of LMWH over ASA as thromboprophylaxis in MM patients. Large and well powered trials are warranted.
METHODS: We conducted an exploratory metanalysis and a systematic review on studies comparing ASA versus other interventions for thromboprophylaxis (no intervention or LMWH) in patients with MM.
RESULTS: Ten studies were included (2 randomized controlled trials, 6 longitudinal and 2 retrospective studies) with 1,964 participants (1,257 treated with ASA, 640 with LMWH and 67 with no thromboprophylaxis). Patients treated with ASA had a significantly lower risk of VTE compared to no intervention (OR=0.20; 95%CI: 0.07-0.61, p=0.005; I2 =41%). The use of ASA was associated with a higher VTE risk compared to LMWH in longitudinal studies (OR=2.60; 95%CI: 1.08-6.25; p=0.03; I2 =0%), however no differences have been showed in randomized controlled trials.
CONCLUSIONS: ASA demonstrated a good efficacy compared to no intervention; data are insufficient to confirm superiority of LMWH over ASA as thromboprophylaxis in MM patients. Large and well powered trials are warranted.
Full text links
Trending Papers
A Personalized Approach to the Management of Congestion in Acute Heart Failure.Heart International 2023
Potential Mechanisms of the Protective Effects of the Cardiometabolic Drugs Type-2 Sodium-Glucose Transporter Inhibitors and Glucagon-like Peptide-1 Receptor Agonists in Heart Failure.International Journal of Molecular Sciences 2024 Februrary 21
The Effect of Albumin Administration in Critically Ill Patients: A Retrospective Single-Center Analysis.Critical Care Medicine 2024 Februrary 8
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app