From the publishers of The New England Journal of Medicine

Save time and stay informed. Our physician-editors offer you clinical perspectives on key research and news.

  1. Home>
  2. Specialties>
  3. Cardiology>
  4. Top Story

LOW-INTENSITY WARFARIN IS TOO LOW

In a recent multicenter, randomized trial that enrolled patients with documented idiopathic venous thromboembolism (VTE) who had completed at least 3 months of uninterrupted warfarin therapy, a long-term strategy of low-intensity warfarin (target INR, 1.5-2.0) was significantly more effective than placebo for preventing VTE recurrence (Journal Watch Cardiology Apr 18 2003).

In a new multicenter study, researchers compared different INR-target strategies directly. They randomized 738 patients with unprovoked venous thromboembolism (65% with deep-vein thrombosis only, 35% with pulmonary embolism) who had received at least 3 months of conventional-intensity warfarin to continued therapy at either low intensity (target INR, 1.5-1.9; mean, 1.8) or conventional intensity (target INR, 2.0-3.0; mean, 2.4). Mean follow-up was 2.4 years.

Compared with the conventional-intensity group, the low-intensity group had a significantly higher rate of VTE recurrence (1.9% vs. 0.7%), a marginally higher mortality rate (1.9% vs. 0.9%), and similar rates of major bleeding (1.1% vs. 0.9%) and any bleeding (4.9% vs. 3.7%). Factor V Leiden did not predict VTE recurrence.

Comment: The authors conclude that the intensity of warfarin therapy should not be reduced after the initial 3 months of treatment in patients who have had unprovoked venous thromboembolism. The editorialists declare that the debate about treatment intensity for VTE is now settled and that the remaining unresolved issue is the optimal duration of therapy. No one has identified any subgroups for whom conventional-intensity treatment is unnecessary, so an INR target of 2.0-3.0 remains the appropriate one for secondary prevention of VTE.

— Harlan M. Krumholz, MD, SM

Published in Journal Watch Cardiology January 2, 2004

Citation(s):

Kearon C et al. for the Extended Low-Intensity Anticoagulation for Thrombo-Embolism Investigators. Comparison of low-intensity warfarin therapy with conventional-intensity warfarin therapy for long-term prevention of recurrent venous thromboembolism. N Engl J Med 2003 Aug 14; 349:631-9.

Büller HR and Prins MH. Secondary prophylaxis with warfarin for venous thromboembolism. N Engl J Med 2003 Aug 14; 349:702-4.

Your Remark:

Reader Remarks are intended to encourage lively discussion of clinical topics with your peers in the medical community. Please consider this when composing your remark.

Fields marked with an * are required.

Name as you'd like it to appear:

Submitting a comment indicates you have read and agreed to the remark guidelines and declare:*

PRIVACY: We will not use your email address, submitted for a comment, for any other purpose nor sell, rent, or share your e-mail address with any third parties. Please see our Privacy Policy.

 

CLEAR erases anything you've added in any part of the form. CONTINUE allows you to check your entire post (and edit it if necessary) before submitting.

To ensure that your Reader Remark is not formatted as one long paragraph, precede new paragraphs with either a blank line or an indentation.

Search

Advanced

Article Tools

Reader Remarks

Sign-In

Forgot your password?

New to Journal Watch?

E-mail Alerts

Delivered to your inbox.
Tailored to your interests. Free.

Sign Up Now!

Journal Watch Newsletters

Available in 13 specialties with convenient delivery and 10 free online CME exams.

Subscribe Now!

Copyright © 2004. Massachusetts Medical Society. All rights reserved.