Effect of tailoring anticoagulant treatment duration by applying a recurrence risk prediction model in patients with venous thromboembolism compared to usual care: A randomized controlled trial

Autoři: Geert-Jan Geersing aff001;  Janneke M. T. Hendriksen aff001;  Nicolaas P. A. Zuithoff aff001;  Kit C. Roes aff001;  Ruud Oudega aff001;  Toshihiko Takada aff001;  Roger E. G. Schutgens aff003;  Karel G. M. Moons aff001
Působiště autorů: Julius Center for Health Sciences and Primary Care, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht University, Utrecht, the Netherlands aff001;  Biostatistics Research Group, Department of Health Evidence, Radboud University Medical Center, Radboud University, Nijmegen, the Netherlands aff002;  Van Creveld Clinic, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht University, Utrecht, the Netherlands aff003
Vyšlo v časopise: Effect of tailoring anticoagulant treatment duration by applying a recurrence risk prediction model in patients with venous thromboembolism compared to usual care: A randomized controlled trial. PLoS Med 17(6): e32767. doi:10.1371/journal.pmed.1003142
Kategorie: Research Article
doi: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1003142



Patients with unprovoked (i.e., without the presence of apparent transient risk factors such as recent surgery) venous thromboembolism (VTE) are at risk of recurrence if anticoagulants are stopped after 3–6 months, yet their risk remains heterogeneous. Thus, prolonging anticoagulant treatment should be considered in high-risk patients, whereas stopping is likely preferred in those with a low predicted risk. The Vienna Prediction Model (VPM) could aid clinicians in estimating this risk, yet its clinical effects and external validity are currently unknown. The aim of this study was to investigate the clinical impact of this model on reducing recurrence risk in patients with unprovoked VTE, compared to usual care.

Methods and findings

In a randomized controlled trial, the decision to prolong or stop anticoagulant treatment was guided by predicted recurrence risk using the VPM (n = 441), which was compared with usual care (n = 442). Patients with unprovoked VTE were recruited from local thrombosis services in the Netherlands (in Utrecht, Harderwijk, Ede, Amersfoort, Zwolle, Hilversum, Rotterdam, Deventer, and Enschede) between 22 July 2011 and 30 November 2015, with 24-month follow-up complete for all patients by early 2018. The primary outcome was recurrent VTE during 24 months of follow-up. Secondary outcomes included major bleeding and clinically relevant non-major (CRNM) bleeding. In the total study population of 883 patients, mean age was 55 years, and 507 (57.4%) were men. A total of 96 recurrent VTE events (10.9%) were observed, 46 in the intervention arm and 50 in the control arm (risk ratio 0.92, 95% CI 0.63–1.35, p = 0.67). Major bleeding occurred in 4 patients, 2 in each treatment arm, whereas CRNM bleeding occurred in 20 patients (12 in intervention arm versus 8 in control arm). The VPM showed good discriminative power (c-statistic 0.76, 95% CI 0.69–0.83) and moderate to good calibration, notably at the lower spectrum of predicted risk. For instance, in 284 patients with a predicted risk of >2% to 4%, the observed rate of recurrence was 2.5% (95% CI 0.7% to 4.3%). The main limitation of this study is that it did not enroll the preplanned number of 750 patients in each study arm due to declining recruitment rate.


Our results show that application of the VPM in all patients with unprovoked VTE is unlikely to reduce overall recurrence risk. Yet, in those with a low predicted risk of recurrence, the observed rate was also low, suggesting that it might be safe to stop anticoagulant treatment in these patients.

Trial registration

Netherlands Trial Register NTR2680

Klíčová slova:

Cancer treatment – Deep vein thrombosis – Forecasting – Hemorrhage – Physicians – Surgical and invasive medical procedures – Thrombosis – Venous thromboembolism


1. Willich SN, Chuang L-H, van Hout B, Gumbs P, Jimenez D, Kroep S, et al. Pulmonary embolism in Europe—burden of illness in relationship to healthcare resource utilization and return to work. Thromb Res. 2018;170:181–91. doi: 10.1016/j.thromres.2018.02.009 30199784

2. Prandoni P, Noventa F, Ghirarduzzi A, Pengo V, Bernardi E, Pesavento R, et al. The risk of recurrent venous thromboembolism after discontinuing anticoagulation in patients with acute proximal deep vein thrombosis or pulmonary embolism. A prospective cohort study in 1,626 patients. Haematologica. 2007;92:199–205. doi: 10.3324/haematol.10516 17296569

3. Robertson L, Yeoh SE, Ramli A. Secondary prevention of recurrent venous thromboembolism after initial oral anticoagulation therapy in patients with unprovoked venous thromboembolism. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2017;12:CD011088. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD011088.pub2 29244199

4. Eichinger S, Heinze G, Jandeck LM, Kyrle PA. Risk assessment of recurrence in patients with unprovoked deep vein thrombosis or pulmonary embolism. Circulation. 2010;121:1630–6. doi: 10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.109.925214 20351233

5. Schulz KF, Altman DG, Moher D, Group C. CONSORT 2010 statement: updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomized trials. Ann Intern Med. 2010;152:726–32. doi: 10.7326/0003-4819-152-11-201006010-00232 20335313

6. Moigne EL, Delluc A, Tromeur C, Nowak E, Mottier D, Lacut K, et al. Risk of recurrent venous thromboembolism among young women after a first event while exposed to combined oral contraception versus not exposed to: a cohort study. Thromb Res. 2013;132:51–5. doi: 10.1016/j.thromres.2013.05.028 23786893

7. Klok FA, Schreiber K, Stach K, Ageno W, Middeldorp S, Eichinger S, et al. Oral contraception and menstrual bleeding during treatment of venous thromboembolism: expert opinion versus current practice: combined results of a systematic review, expert panel opinion and an international survey. Thromb Res. 2017;153:101–7. doi: 10.1016/j.thromres.2017.03.013 28376343

8. Kearon C, Iorio A, Palareti G. Risk of recurrent venous thromboembolism after stopping treatment in cohort studies: recommendation for acceptable rates and standardized reporting. J Thromb Haemost. 2010;8:2313–5. doi: 10.1111/j.1538-7836.2010.03991.x 20738761

9. Moons KGM, Altman DG, Vergouwe Y, Royston P. Prognosis and prognostic research: application and impact of prognostic models in clinical practice. BMJ. 2009;338:b606. doi: 10.1136/bmj.b606 19502216

10. Palareti G, Cosmi B, Legnani C, Tosetto A, Brusi C, Iorio A, et al. D-dimer testing to determine the duration of anticoagulation therapy. N Engl J Med. 2006;355:1780–9. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa054444 17065639

11. Austin PC. The performance of different propensity score methods for estimating marginal hazard ratios. Stat Med. 2013;32:2837–49. doi: 10.1002/sim.5705 23239115

12. Rodger MA, Gal GL, Anderson DR, Schmidt J, Pernod G, Kahn SR, et al. Validating the HERDOO2 rule to guide treatment duration for women with unprovoked venous thrombosis: multinational prospective cohort management study. BMJ. 2017;356:j1065. doi: 10.1136/bmj.j1065 28314711

13. Kearon C, Spencer FA, O’Keeffe D, Parpia S, Schulman S, Baglin T, et al. D-dimer testing to select patients with a first unprovoked venous thromboembolism who can stop anticoagulant therapy. Ann Intern Med. 2015;162:27. doi: 10.7326/M14-1275 25560712

14. Marcucci M, Iorio A, Douketis JD, Eichinger S, Tosetto A, Baglin T, et al. Risk of recurrence after a first unprovoked venous thromboembolism: external validation of the Vienna Prediction Model with pooled individual patient data. J Thromb Haemost. 2015;13:775–81. doi: 10.1111/jth.12871 25660555

15. Kearon C, Ageno W, Cannegieter SC, Cosmi B, Geersing G‐ J, Kyrle PA, et al. Categorization of patients as having provoked or unprovoked venous thromboembolism: guidance from the SSC of ISTH. J Thromb Haemost. 2016;14:1480–3. doi: 10.1111/jth.13336 27428935

16. Hernán MA, Robins JM. Per-protocol analyses of pragmatic trials. N Engl J Med. 2017;377:1391–8. doi: 10.1056/NEJMsm1605385 28976864

17. Pajouheshnia R, Peelen LM, Moons KGM, Reitsma JB, Groenwold RHH. Accounting for treatment use when validating a prognostic model: a simulation study. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2017;17:103. doi: 10.1186/s12874-017-0375-8 28709404

18. Agnelli G, Buller HR, Cohen A, Curto M, Gallus AS, Johnson M, et al. Apixaban for extended treatment of venous thromboembolism. N Engl J Med. 2013;368:699–708. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1207541 23216615

19. Weitz JI, Lensing AWA, Prins MH, Bauersachs R, Beyer-Westendorf J, Bounameaux H, et al. Rivaroxaban or aspirin for extended treatment of venous thromboembolism. N Engl J Med. 2017;376:1211–22. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1700518 28316279

Článek vyšel v časopise

PLOS Medicine

2020 Číslo 6

Nejčtenější v tomto čísle
Zapomenuté heslo

Nemáte účet?  Registrujte se

Zapomenuté heslo

Zadejte e-mailovou adresu, se kterou jste vytvářel(a) účet, budou Vám na ni zaslány informace k nastavení nového hesla.


Nemáte účet?  Registrujte se