The comparative effectiveness of direct oral anti-coagulants and low molecular weight heparins for prevention of recurrent venous thromboembolism in cancer: The CANVAS pragmatic randomized trial.

Authors

null

Deborah Schrag

Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, MA

Deborah Schrag , Hajime Uno , Rachel Pam Greenerger Rosovsky , Cynthia Rutherford , Kristen Marie Sanfilippo , John L. Villano , Monic R Drescher , Nagesh H. Jayaram , Chris E. Holmes , Lawrence Eric Feldman , Ottavia Zattra , Christine Cronin , Ethan M. Basch , Anna Weiss , Jean M. Connors

Organizations

Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, MA, Mass General North Shore Cancer Ctr, Waban, MA, University of Texas Southwestern, Dallas, TX, Barnes and Jewish Hospital/Washington University, St. Louis, MO, University of Kentucky, Lexington, KY, Dartmouth Hitchcock Cancer Center, Hanover, NH, Southeastern Med Onc Ctr, Jacksonville, NC, University of Vermont, Colchester, VT, University of Illinois Hospital & Health Sciences System, Chicago, IL, UNC Lineberger Comprehensive Cancer Center, Chapel Hill, NC, Hematology Division, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA

Research Funding

Other
PCORI CER-1503-29805

Background: Previous randomized trials in cancer patients suggest that DOACs are non-inferior to LMWH for preventing recurrent VTE but have higher risk of bleeding. However, the balance of benefits and burdens remains uncertain. Objective: The CANVAS pragmatic trial compared recurrent VTE, bleeding and death in cancer patients following an initial VTE treated with either DOAC or LMWH therapy. Methods: CANVAS was an unblinded hybrid comparative effectiveness non-inferiority trial, with randomized and preference cohorts. Between 12/16 and 4/20, 671 participants were randomized and followed for 6-months. Between 12/16 and 12/17, 140 participants declined randomization, chose their preferred anticoagulant and were followed for 6-months. The preference cohort was closed when predetermined stopping criteria were met. Final follow-up was 11/30/20. Randomized patients were assigned 1:1 to receive either a DOAC or a LMWH. If assigned to LMWH, transitions to warfarin were allowed. Physicians and patients could choose among any DOAC or LMWH. Doses were suggested based on FDA-approved labeling but not mandated. Patients from 67 practices in the US with any invasive solid tumor, lymphoma, multiple myeloma or CLL and a diagnosis of symptomatic or radiographically detected VTE within 30 days of enrollment were eligible. The 1° analysis was conducted in the randomized modified-into to treat popululation, (all subjects who received study drug). The 1° outcome was recurrent VTE. The aim was to establish noninferiority of anticoagulation with a DOAC as defined by the upper limit of the 2-sided 90% CI for the difference in the event rate at 6 months of < 3%. Secondary outcomes included death and bleeding. Hypothesis testing included only the randomized cohort but propensity score adjusted results for the preference and combined cohorts are also shown. Results: The non-inferiority criteria for recurrent VTE was met. Conclusions: Among adult cancer patients with VTE, the use of a DOAC compared with a LMWH resulted in a noninferior risk of recurrent VTE with no differences in rates of bleeding or death in randomized patients. Clinical trial information: NCT02744092

CANVAS event rate at 6 months.
Cohort
Endpoint
DOAC
LMWH
Difference (0.90 CI2)
Randomized Cohort1



(N = 330)
(N = 308)

Recurrent VTE
6.1%
8.8%
-2.7% (-6.1%, 0.7%)
Major Bleeding3
4.6%
4.6%
0.0% (-2.7%, 2.7%)
Mortality
21.5%
18.4%
3.1% (-2.1%, 8.3%)
Preference Cohort4



(N = 107)
(N = 30)

Recurrent VTE
7.5%
4.1%
3.3% (-3.1%, 9.7%)
Major Bleeding3
11.5%
3.0%
8.5% (1.2%, 15.8%)
Mortality
16.3%
23.8%
-7.5% (-18.8%, 3.8%)
Combined Cohort



(N = 437)
(N = 338)

Recurrent VTE
6.4%
7.8%
-1.3% (-4.4%, 1.7%)
Major Bleeding3
5.4%
4.4%
1.0% (-1.5%, 3.6%)
Mortality
20.5%
19.3%
1.2% (-3.5%, 6.0%)

1. analysis for hypothesis tesing 2. CI: Confidence interval 3. CTCAE grade 3-5 4. Adjusted by propensity score weighting.

Disclaimer

This material on this page is ©2024 American Society of Clinical Oncology, all rights reserved. Licensing available upon request. For more information, please contact licensing@asco.org

Abstract Details

Meeting

2021 ASCO Annual Meeting

Session Type

Poster Discussion Session

Session Title

Symptoms and Survivorship

Track

Symptom Science and Palliative Care

Sub Track

End-of-Life Care

Clinical Trial Registration Number

NCT02744092

Citation

J Clin Oncol 39, 2021 (suppl 15; abstr 12020)

DOI

10.1200/JCO.2021.39.15_suppl.12020

Abstract #

12020

Abstract Disclosures