Apixaban versus enoxaparin for thromboprophylaxis in medically ill patients

The efficacy and safety of prolonging prophylaxis for venous thromboembolism in medically ill patients beyond hospital discharge remain uncertain. We hypothesized that extended prophylaxis with apixaban would be safe and more effective than short-term prophylaxis with enoxaparin. METHODS: In this double-blind, double-dummy, placebo-controlled trial, we randomly assigned acutely ill patients who had congestive heart failure or respiratory failure or other medical disorders and at least one additional risk factor for venous thromboembolism and who were hospitalized with an expected stay of at least 3 days to receive apixaban, administered orally at a dose of 2.5 mg twice daily for 30 days, or enoxaparin, administered subcutaneously at a dose of 40 mg once daily for 6 to 14 days. The primary efficacy outcome was the 30-day composite of death related to venous thromboembolism, pulmonary embolism, symptomatic deep-vein thrombosis, or asymptomatic proximal-leg deep-vein thrombosis, as detected with the use of systematic bilateral compression ultrasonography on day 30. The primary safety outcome was bleeding. All efficacy and safety outcomes were independently adjudicated. RESULTS: A total of 6528 subjects underwent randomization, 4495 of whom could be evaluated for the primary efficacy outcome - 2211 in the apixaban group and 2284 in the enoxaparin group. Among the patients who could be evaluated, 2.71% in the apixaban group (60 patients) and 3.06% in the enoxaparin group (70 patients) met the criteria for the primary efficacy outcome (relative risk with apixaban, 0.87; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.62 to 1.23; P = 0.44). By day 30, major bleeding had occurred in 0.47% of the patients in the apixaban group (15 of 3184 patients) and in 0.19% of the patients in the enoxaparin group (6 of 3217 patients) (relative risk, 2.58; 95% CI, 1.02 to 7.24; P = 0.04). CONCLUSIONS: In medically ill patients, an extended course of thromboprophylaxis with apixaban was not superior to a shorter course with enoxaparin. Apixaban was associated with significantly more major bleeding events than was enoxaparinSupported by Bristol-Myers Squibb and Pfize

Impact of Non-HIV and HIV Risk Factors on Survival in HIV-Infected Patients on HAART: A Population-Based Nationwide Cohort Study

BACKGROUND: We determined the impact of three factors on mortality in HIV-infected patients who had been on highly active antiretroviral therapy (HAART) for at least one year: (1) insufficient response to (HAART) and presence of AIDS-defining diseases, (2) comorbidity, and (3) drug and alcohol abuse and compared the mortality to that of the general population. METHODOLOGY/PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: In a Danish nationwide, population-based cohort study, we used population based registries to identify (1) all Danish HIV-infected patients who started HAART in the period 1 January 1998-1 July 2009, and (2) a comparison cohort of individuals matched on date of birth and gender (N = 2,267 and 9,068, respectively). Study inclusion began 1 year after start of HAART. Patients were categorised hierarchically in four groups according to the three risk factors, which were identified before study inclusion. The main outcome measure was probability of survival from age 25 to 65 years. The probability of survival from age 25 to age 65 was substantially lower in HIV patients [0.48 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.42-0.55)] compared to the comparison cohort [0.88 (0.86 to 0.90)]. However, in HIV patients with no risk factors (N = 871) the probability of survival was equivalent to that of the general population [0.86 (95% CI 0.77-0.92)]. In contrast, the probability of survival was 0.58 in patients with HIV risk factors (N = 704), 0.30 in patients with comorbidities (N = 479), and 0.03 in patients with drug or alcohol abuse (N = 313). CONCLUSIONS: The increased risk of death in HIV-infected individuals is mainly attributable to risk factors that can be identified prior to or in the initial period of antiretroviral treatment. Mortality in patients without risk factors on a successful HAART is almost identical to that of the non-HIV-infected population

Cause-Specific Excess Mortality in Siblings of Patients Co-Infected with HIV and Hepatitis C Virus

BACKGROUND: Co-infection with hepatitis C in HIV-infected individuals is associated with 3- to 4-fold higher mortality among these patients' siblings, compared with siblings of mono-infected HIV-patients or population controls. This indicates that risk factors shared by family members partially account for the excess mortality of HIV/HCV-co-infected patients. We aimed to explore the causes of death contributing to the excess sibling mortality. METHODOLOGY AND PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: We retrieved causes of death from the Danish National Registry of Deaths and estimated cause-specific excess mortality rates (EMR) for siblings of HIV/HCV-co-infected individuals (n = 436) and siblings of HIV mono-infected individuals (n = 1837) compared with siblings of population controls (n = 281,221). Siblings of HIV/HCV-co-infected individuals had an all-cause EMR of 3.03 (95% CI, 1.56-4.50) per 1,000 person-years, compared with siblings of matched population controls. Substance abuse-related deaths contributed most to the elevated mortality among siblings [EMR = 2.25 (1.09-3.40)] followed by unnatural deaths [EMR = 0.67 (-0.05-1.39)]. No siblings of HIV/HCV co-infected patients had a liver-related diagnosis as underlying cause of death. Siblings of HIV-mono-infected individuals had an all-cause EMR of 0.60 (0.16-1.05) compared with siblings of controls. This modest excess mortality was due to deaths from an unknown cause [EMR = 0.28 (0.07-0.48)], deaths from substance abuse [EMR = 0.19 (-0.04-0.43)], and unnatural deaths [EMR = 0.18 (-0.06-0.42)]. CONCLUSIONS: HCV co-infection among HIV-infected patients was a strong marker for family-related mortality due to substance abuse and other unnatural causes. To reduce morbidity and mortality in HIV/HCV-co-infected patients, the advances in antiviral treatment of HCV should be accompanied by continued focus on interventions targeted at substance abuse-related risk factors

Liver stiffness measurement among patients with chronic hepatitis B and C: results from a 5-year prospective study.

Liver stiffness measurement (LSM) is widely used to evaluate liver fibrosis, but longitudinal studies are rare. The current study was aimed to monitor LSM during follow-up, and to evaluate the association of LSM data with mortality and liver-related outcomes. We included all patients with chronic viral hepatitis and valid LSM using Fibroscan. Information about liver biopsy, antiviral treatment, and clinical outcome was obtained from medical records and national registers. The study included 845 patients: 597 (71%) with hepatitis C virus (HCV), 235 (28%) with hepatitis B virus (HBV) and 13 (2%) with dual infection. The initial LSM distribution (20% and >2 kPa increase, with one measure >7 kPa) were 3.4/100 person years (PY) for HCV and 1.5/100 PY for HBV infected patients. Patients with LSM values of ≥ 17 kPa had the same liver-related complication incidence as patients with biopsy-proven cirrhosis (11.1 versus 12.1/100 PY). Thirteen liver-related deaths occurred among HCV patients (0.6/100 PY), but none among HBV patients. Among patients who died of liver-related causes, all but one had baseline LSM values of ≥ 17 kPa. Overall, patients with LSM values <17 kPa were not associated with adverse outcomes. In contrast, LSM values ≥ 17 kPa were associated with significant risk of liver-related problems. The results of the current study suggest that clinical decisions should not be taken based on a single LSM measurement

Change between first and last liver stiffness measurements among 530 untreated patients who were monoinfected with viral hepatitis B or C and followed for >3 months.

<p>Change between first and last liver stiffness measurements among 530 untreated patients who were monoinfected with viral hepatitis B or C and followed for >3 months.</p