Combined oral contraceptives, thrombophilia and the risk of venous thromboembolism: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Background Combined oral contraceptives (COCs) are associated with an increased risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE), which is shown to be more pronounced in women with hereditary thrombophilia. Currently, WHO recommendations state that COC-use in women with hereditary thrombophilias (antithrombin deficiency, protein C deficiency, protein S deficiency, factor V Leiden and prothrombin-G20210A mutation) is associated with an unacceptable health risk. Objective To perform a meta-analysis evaluating the additional risk of VTE in COC-users with thrombophilia. Methods The MEDLINE and EMBASE databases were searched on 10 February 2015 for potential eligible studies. A distinction was made between mild' (factor V Leiden and prothrombin-G20210A mutation) and severe' thrombophilia (antithrombin deficiency, protein C deficiency, protein S deficiency, double heterozygosity or homozygosity of factor V Leiden and prothrombin-G20210A mutation). Results We identified 12 case-control and three cohort studies. In COC-users, mild and severe thrombophilia increased the risk of VTE almost 6-fold (rate ratio [RR], 5.89; 95% confidence interval [CI], 4.21-8.23) and 7-fold (RR, 7.15; 95% CI, 2.93-17.45), respectively. The cohort studies showed that absolute VTE risk was far higher in COC-users with severe thrombophilia than in those with mild thrombophilia (4.3 to 4.6 vs. 0.49 to 2.0 per 100 pill-years, respectively), and these differences in absolute risks were also noted in non-affected women (0.48 to 0.7 vs. 0.19 to 0.0), but with the caveat that absolute risks were estimated in relatives of thrombophilic patients with VTE (i.e. with a positive family history). Conclusion These results support discouraging COC-use in women with severe hereditary thrombophilia. By contrast, additive VTE risk of mild thrombophilia is modest. When no other risk factors are present, (e.g. family history) COCs can be offered to these women when reliable alternative contraceptives are not tolerated

No increased systemic fibrinolysis in women with heavy menstrual bleeding

BackgroundBleeding disorders have been recognized as important etiologic or contributory factors in women with heavy menstrual bleeding. Fibrinolysis in the endometrium plays a role in heavy menstrual bleeding. It is unknown whether increased systemic fibrinolysis might also increase the risk of heavy menstrual bleeding. ObjectiveTo investigate fibrinolytic parameters, including clot lysis time, in women with heavy menstrual bleeding. MethodsWe included 102 patients referred for heavy menstrual bleeding (Pictorial Bleeding Assessment Chart score of >100) in our cohort. Patients and controls (28 healthy volunteers without heavy menstrual bleeding) underwent hemostatic testing in the first week after menstruation. For 79 patients and all controls, fibrinolytic parameters (thrombin-activatable fibrinolysis inhibitor activity, and plasminogen activator inhibitor-1, tissue-type plasminogen activator and plasmin inhibitor levels) and clot lysis time were available. ResultsFibrinolytic parameters were similar between patients and controls, except for thrombin-activatable fibrinolysis inhibitor (89.4% vs. 82.5%) and plasmin inhibitor (106% vs. 96%), the levels of which which were significantly higher in patients. In women with menorrhagia without gynecologic abnormalities, we found lower thrombin-activatable fibrinolysis inhibitor and plasminogen activator inhibitor-1 levels than in women with gynecologic abnormalities (thrombin-activatable fibrinolysis inhibitor, 85.4% vs. 94.8%; plasminogen activator inhibitor-1, 16.0gL(-1) vs. 24.5gL(-1)). ConclusionSystemic fibrinolytic capacity is not increased in women with heavy menstrual bleeding. Overall, levels of the fibrinolytic inhibitors thrombin-activatable fibrinolysis inhibitor and plasmin inhibitor were even higher in patients than in controls. However, in a subgroup of women without gynecologic abnormalities, relatively lower levels of inhibitors may contribute to the heavy menstrual bleeding

Edoxaban versus warfarin for the treatment of symptomatic venous thromboembolism.

BACKGROUND: Whether the oral factor Xa inhibitor edoxaban can be an alternative to warfarin in patients with venous thromboembolism is unclear. METHODS: In a randomized, double-blind, noninferiority study, we randomly assigned patients with acute venous thromboembolism, who had initially received heparin, to receive edoxaban at a dose of 60 mg once daily, or 30 mg once daily (e.g., in the case of patients with creatinine clearance of 30 to 50 ml per minute or a body weight below 60 kg), or to receive warfarin. Patients received the study drug for 3 to 12 months. The primary efficacy outcome was recurrent symptomatic venous thromboembolism. The principal safety outcome was major or clinically relevant nonmajor bleeding. RESULTS: A total of 4921 patients presented with deep-vein thrombosis, and 3319 with a pulmonary embolism. Among patients receiving warfarin, the time in the therapeutic range was 63.5%. Edoxaban was noninferior to warfarin with respect to the primary efficacy outcome, which occurred in 130 patients in the edoxaban group (3.2%) and 146 patients in the warfarin group (3.5%) (hazard ratio, 0.89; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.70 to 1.13; P<0.001 for noninferiority). The safety outcome occurred in 349 patients (8.5%) in the edoxaban group and 423 patients (10.3%) in the warfarin group (hazard ratio, 0.81; 95% CI, 0.71 to 0.94; P=0.004 for superiority). The rates of other adverse events were similar in the two groups. A total of 938 patients with pulmonary embolism had right ventricular dysfunction, as assessed by measurement of N-terminal pro-brain natriuretic peptide levels; the rate of recurrent venous thromboembolism in this subgroup was 3.3% in the edoxaban group and 6.2% in the warfarin group (hazard ratio, 0.52; 95% CI, 0.28 to 0.98). CONCLUSIONS: Edoxaban administered once daily after initial treatment with heparin was noninferior to high-quality standard therapy and caused significantly less bleeding in a broad spectrum of patients with venous thromboembolism, including those with severe pulmonary embolism. (Funded by Daiichi-Sankyo; Hokusai-VTE ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00986154.)