Enoxaparin once daily vs. twice daily dosing for the treatment of venous thromboembolism in cancer patients: A literature summary
Current anticoagulation guidelines for cancer patients are largely based upon studies done in the general population. Anticoagulation studies in cancer patients with venous thromboembolism (VTE) have compared varying doses of different low molecular weight heparins (LMWH) to warfarin or unfractionat...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Journal of Oncology Pharmacy Practice 2012-06, Vol.18 (2), p.264-270 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 270 |
---|---|
container_issue | 2 |
container_start_page | 264 |
container_title | Journal of Oncology Pharmacy Practice |
container_volume | 18 |
creator | Diaz, Amber H Rodgers, George M Gilreath, Jeffrey A |
description | Current anticoagulation guidelines for cancer patients are largely based upon studies done in the general population. Anticoagulation studies in cancer patients with venous thromboembolism (VTE) have compared varying doses of different low molecular weight heparins (LMWH) to warfarin or unfractionated heparin (UFH) regimens, and most guidelines recommend LMWH as the preferred agent over vitamin K antagonists. However, very few studies compare different dosing regimens of the LMWH itself. As a result, practitioners attempt to extrapolate results from studies done in the general medicine population and apply them to cancer patients with VTE. Considering the differences in risk factors and hypercoagulability between these populations, such generalizations may compromise outcomes or safety for cancer patients. Currently, no study to date has compared the safety and efficacy of enoxaparin 1.5 mg/kg subcutaneously (SC) once daily vs. 1 mg/kg SC twice daily in a prospective, randomized fashion, for the longterm treatment of VTE in patients with cancer. The purpose of this article is to review currently available literature utilizing these dosing schemes in order to risk-stratify cancer patients who may better qualify for one dosing regimen as compared to the other. Our analysis suggests that enoxaparin dosed at 1.5 mg/kg SC once daily may be a safe and effective alternative for the treatment of VTE in cancer patients with both a low risk of recurrent VTE and bleeding. In the absence of additional studies, the dosing of enoxaparin for cancer patients should be based on patient-specific risk factors. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1177/1078155211412990 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1012748465</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sage_id>10.1177_1078155211412990</sage_id><sourcerecordid>1012748465</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c280t-9b82f757ca73b24e01685c1ad37a7f0a46721c5d0995689528b79f8dbb09d01e3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp1kUFP3DAQha0KVCjtnROyxKWXbGe8cWz3hhAUJKReWqm3yEkm1CiJt7YD5cg_x8suCCFxsMbj-eZ5Ro-xQ4QFolLfEJRGKQViicIY-MD2sVSqACP-7OR7Lhfr-h77FOMNAGgl9Ee2J9AsoZJinz2cTf6_XdngJu6nlnhn3XDPb-OCpzv3knc-uuma9z7w9Jd4CmTTSFPivue3NPk55vfgx8ZTPoOLI8-Crc2Kga9scpmN3_kJH1yiYNMciMd5HG24_8x2eztE-rKNB-z3-dmv04vi6uePy9OTq6IVGlJhGi16JVVr1bIRJQFWWrZou6WyqgdbVkpgKzswRlbaSKEbZXrdNQ2YDpCWB-zrRncV_L-ZYqpHF1saBjtRnr9GQKFKXVYyo8dv0Bs_hylP90QhlMJUmYIN1QYfY6C-XgW33ihD9dqe-q09ueVoKzw3I3UvDc9-ZKDYANFe0-tf3xF8BFnwl8U</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1012104296</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Enoxaparin once daily vs. twice daily dosing for the treatment of venous thromboembolism in cancer patients: A literature summary</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>SAGE Complete A-Z List</source><creator>Diaz, Amber H ; Rodgers, George M ; Gilreath, Jeffrey A</creator><creatorcontrib>Diaz, Amber H ; Rodgers, George M ; Gilreath, Jeffrey A</creatorcontrib><description>Current anticoagulation guidelines for cancer patients are largely based upon studies done in the general population. Anticoagulation studies in cancer patients with venous thromboembolism (VTE) have compared varying doses of different low molecular weight heparins (LMWH) to warfarin or unfractionated heparin (UFH) regimens, and most guidelines recommend LMWH as the preferred agent over vitamin K antagonists. However, very few studies compare different dosing regimens of the LMWH itself. As a result, practitioners attempt to extrapolate results from studies done in the general medicine population and apply them to cancer patients with VTE. Considering the differences in risk factors and hypercoagulability between these populations, such generalizations may compromise outcomes or safety for cancer patients. Currently, no study to date has compared the safety and efficacy of enoxaparin 1.5 mg/kg subcutaneously (SC) once daily vs. 1 mg/kg SC twice daily in a prospective, randomized fashion, for the longterm treatment of VTE in patients with cancer. The purpose of this article is to review currently available literature utilizing these dosing schemes in order to risk-stratify cancer patients who may better qualify for one dosing regimen as compared to the other. Our analysis suggests that enoxaparin dosed at 1.5 mg/kg SC once daily may be a safe and effective alternative for the treatment of VTE in cancer patients with both a low risk of recurrent VTE and bleeding. In the absence of additional studies, the dosing of enoxaparin for cancer patients should be based on patient-specific risk factors.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1078-1552</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1477-092X</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1177/1078155211412990</identifier><identifier>PMID: 21930652</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>London, England: SAGE Publications</publisher><subject>Anticoagulants ; Cancer ; Clinical Trials as Topic - methods ; Drug Administration Schedule ; Enoxaparin - administration & dosage ; Humans ; Neoplasms - drug therapy ; Neoplasms - epidemiology ; Oncology ; Pharmacology ; Risk factors ; Side effects ; Treatment Outcome ; Venous Thromboembolism - drug therapy ; Venous Thromboembolism - epidemiology</subject><ispartof>Journal of Oncology Pharmacy Practice, 2012-06, Vol.18 (2), p.264-270</ispartof><rights>The Author(s) 2011 Reprints and permissions: sagepub.co.uk/journalsPermissions.nav</rights><rights>SAGE Publications © Jun 2012</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c280t-9b82f757ca73b24e01685c1ad37a7f0a46721c5d0995689528b79f8dbb09d01e3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c280t-9b82f757ca73b24e01685c1ad37a7f0a46721c5d0995689528b79f8dbb09d01e3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/1078155211412990$$EPDF$$P50$$Gsage$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/1078155211412990$$EHTML$$P50$$Gsage$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>313,314,780,784,792,21818,27921,27923,27924,43620,43621</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21930652$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Diaz, Amber H</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Rodgers, George M</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Gilreath, Jeffrey A</creatorcontrib><title>Enoxaparin once daily vs. twice daily dosing for the treatment of venous thromboembolism in cancer patients: A literature summary</title><title>Journal of Oncology Pharmacy Practice</title><addtitle>J Oncol Pharm Pract</addtitle><description>Current anticoagulation guidelines for cancer patients are largely based upon studies done in the general population. Anticoagulation studies in cancer patients with venous thromboembolism (VTE) have compared varying doses of different low molecular weight heparins (LMWH) to warfarin or unfractionated heparin (UFH) regimens, and most guidelines recommend LMWH as the preferred agent over vitamin K antagonists. However, very few studies compare different dosing regimens of the LMWH itself. As a result, practitioners attempt to extrapolate results from studies done in the general medicine population and apply them to cancer patients with VTE. Considering the differences in risk factors and hypercoagulability between these populations, such generalizations may compromise outcomes or safety for cancer patients. Currently, no study to date has compared the safety and efficacy of enoxaparin 1.5 mg/kg subcutaneously (SC) once daily vs. 1 mg/kg SC twice daily in a prospective, randomized fashion, for the longterm treatment of VTE in patients with cancer. The purpose of this article is to review currently available literature utilizing these dosing schemes in order to risk-stratify cancer patients who may better qualify for one dosing regimen as compared to the other. Our analysis suggests that enoxaparin dosed at 1.5 mg/kg SC once daily may be a safe and effective alternative for the treatment of VTE in cancer patients with both a low risk of recurrent VTE and bleeding. In the absence of additional studies, the dosing of enoxaparin for cancer patients should be based on patient-specific risk factors.</description><subject>Anticoagulants</subject><subject>Cancer</subject><subject>Clinical Trials as Topic - methods</subject><subject>Drug Administration Schedule</subject><subject>Enoxaparin - administration & dosage</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Neoplasms - drug therapy</subject><subject>Neoplasms - epidemiology</subject><subject>Oncology</subject><subject>Pharmacology</subject><subject>Risk factors</subject><subject>Side effects</subject><subject>Treatment Outcome</subject><subject>Venous Thromboembolism - drug therapy</subject><subject>Venous Thromboembolism - epidemiology</subject><issn>1078-1552</issn><issn>1477-092X</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2012</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><sourceid>8G5</sourceid><sourceid>ABUWG</sourceid><sourceid>AFKRA</sourceid><sourceid>AZQEC</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><sourceid>CCPQU</sourceid><sourceid>DWQXO</sourceid><sourceid>GNUQQ</sourceid><sourceid>GUQSH</sourceid><sourceid>M2O</sourceid><recordid>eNp1kUFP3DAQha0KVCjtnROyxKWXbGe8cWz3hhAUJKReWqm3yEkm1CiJt7YD5cg_x8suCCFxsMbj-eZ5Ro-xQ4QFolLfEJRGKQViicIY-MD2sVSqACP-7OR7Lhfr-h77FOMNAGgl9Ee2J9AsoZJinz2cTf6_XdngJu6nlnhn3XDPb-OCpzv3knc-uuma9z7w9Jd4CmTTSFPivue3NPk55vfgx8ZTPoOLI8-Crc2Kga9scpmN3_kJH1yiYNMciMd5HG24_8x2eztE-rKNB-z3-dmv04vi6uePy9OTq6IVGlJhGi16JVVr1bIRJQFWWrZou6WyqgdbVkpgKzswRlbaSKEbZXrdNQ2YDpCWB-zrRncV_L-ZYqpHF1saBjtRnr9GQKFKXVYyo8dv0Bs_hylP90QhlMJUmYIN1QYfY6C-XgW33ihD9dqe-q09ueVoKzw3I3UvDc9-ZKDYANFe0-tf3xF8BFnwl8U</recordid><startdate>201206</startdate><enddate>201206</enddate><creator>Diaz, Amber H</creator><creator>Rodgers, George M</creator><creator>Gilreath, Jeffrey A</creator><general>SAGE Publications</general><general>Sage Publications Ltd</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7RV</scope><scope>7T5</scope><scope>7TO</scope><scope>7X7</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>88E</scope><scope>8AO</scope><scope>8FI</scope><scope>8FJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>8G5</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>FYUFA</scope><scope>GHDGH</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>GUQSH</scope><scope>H94</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>KB0</scope><scope>M0S</scope><scope>M1P</scope><scope>M2O</scope><scope>MBDVC</scope><scope>NAPCQ</scope><scope>PADUT</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PRINS</scope><scope>Q9U</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>201206</creationdate><title>Enoxaparin once daily vs. twice daily dosing for the treatment of venous thromboembolism in cancer patients: A literature summary</title><author>Diaz, Amber H ; Rodgers, George M ; Gilreath, Jeffrey A</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c280t-9b82f757ca73b24e01685c1ad37a7f0a46721c5d0995689528b79f8dbb09d01e3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2012</creationdate><topic>Anticoagulants</topic><topic>Cancer</topic><topic>Clinical Trials as Topic - methods</topic><topic>Drug Administration Schedule</topic><topic>Enoxaparin - administration & dosage</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Neoplasms - drug therapy</topic><topic>Neoplasms - epidemiology</topic><topic>Oncology</topic><topic>Pharmacology</topic><topic>Risk factors</topic><topic>Side effects</topic><topic>Treatment Outcome</topic><topic>Venous Thromboembolism - drug therapy</topic><topic>Venous Thromboembolism - epidemiology</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Diaz, Amber H</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Rodgers, George M</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Gilreath, Jeffrey A</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Nursing & Allied Health Database</collection><collection>Immunology Abstracts</collection><collection>Oncogenes and Growth Factors Abstracts</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Medical Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Pharma Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Research Library (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>Research Library Prep</collection><collection>AIDS and Cancer Research Abstracts</collection><collection>ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>Nursing & Allied Health Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Medical Database</collection><collection>Research Library</collection><collection>Research Library (Corporate)</collection><collection>Nursing & Allied Health Premium</collection><collection>Research Library China</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central China</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Basic</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Journal of Oncology Pharmacy Practice</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Diaz, Amber H</au><au>Rodgers, George M</au><au>Gilreath, Jeffrey A</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Enoxaparin once daily vs. twice daily dosing for the treatment of venous thromboembolism in cancer patients: A literature summary</atitle><jtitle>Journal of Oncology Pharmacy Practice</jtitle><addtitle>J Oncol Pharm Pract</addtitle><date>2012-06</date><risdate>2012</risdate><volume>18</volume><issue>2</issue><spage>264</spage><epage>270</epage><pages>264-270</pages><issn>1078-1552</issn><eissn>1477-092X</eissn><abstract>Current anticoagulation guidelines for cancer patients are largely based upon studies done in the general population. Anticoagulation studies in cancer patients with venous thromboembolism (VTE) have compared varying doses of different low molecular weight heparins (LMWH) to warfarin or unfractionated heparin (UFH) regimens, and most guidelines recommend LMWH as the preferred agent over vitamin K antagonists. However, very few studies compare different dosing regimens of the LMWH itself. As a result, practitioners attempt to extrapolate results from studies done in the general medicine population and apply them to cancer patients with VTE. Considering the differences in risk factors and hypercoagulability between these populations, such generalizations may compromise outcomes or safety for cancer patients. Currently, no study to date has compared the safety and efficacy of enoxaparin 1.5 mg/kg subcutaneously (SC) once daily vs. 1 mg/kg SC twice daily in a prospective, randomized fashion, for the longterm treatment of VTE in patients with cancer. The purpose of this article is to review currently available literature utilizing these dosing schemes in order to risk-stratify cancer patients who may better qualify for one dosing regimen as compared to the other. Our analysis suggests that enoxaparin dosed at 1.5 mg/kg SC once daily may be a safe and effective alternative for the treatment of VTE in cancer patients with both a low risk of recurrent VTE and bleeding. In the absence of additional studies, the dosing of enoxaparin for cancer patients should be based on patient-specific risk factors.</abstract><cop>London, England</cop><pub>SAGE Publications</pub><pmid>21930652</pmid><doi>10.1177/1078155211412990</doi><tpages>7</tpages></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 1078-1552 |
ispartof | Journal of Oncology Pharmacy Practice, 2012-06, Vol.18 (2), p.264-270 |
issn | 1078-1552 1477-092X |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1012748465 |
source | MEDLINE; SAGE Complete A-Z List |
subjects | Anticoagulants Cancer Clinical Trials as Topic - methods Drug Administration Schedule Enoxaparin - administration & dosage Humans Neoplasms - drug therapy Neoplasms - epidemiology Oncology Pharmacology Risk factors Side effects Treatment Outcome Venous Thromboembolism - drug therapy Venous Thromboembolism - epidemiology |
title | Enoxaparin once daily vs. twice daily dosing for the treatment of venous thromboembolism in cancer patients: A literature summary |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-12T04%3A05%3A04IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Enoxaparin%20once%20daily%20vs.%20twice%20daily%20dosing%20for%20the%20treatment%20of%20venous%20thromboembolism%20in%20cancer%20patients:%20A%20literature%20summary&rft.jtitle=Journal%20of%20Oncology%20Pharmacy%20Practice&rft.au=Diaz,%20Amber%20H&rft.date=2012-06&rft.volume=18&rft.issue=2&rft.spage=264&rft.epage=270&rft.pages=264-270&rft.issn=1078-1552&rft.eissn=1477-092X&rft_id=info:doi/10.1177/1078155211412990&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E1012748465%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1012104296&rft_id=info:pmid/21930652&rft_sage_id=10.1177_1078155211412990&rfr_iscdi=true |