ライフサイエンスコーパス: LMWH

1 LMWH also inhibited factor X activation by the factor IX

2 LMWH did not improve overall survival in the patients wi

3 LMWH did not interact directly with the active site, as

4 LMWH induced a modest decrease in factor IXa-factor VIII

5 LMWH is both safe and effective to prevent or treat VTE

6 LMWH is recommended for the initial 5 to 10 days of trea

7 LMWH is recommended for the initial 5 to 10 days of trea

8 LMWH may be a promising therapy for recurrent, especiall

9 LMWH or VKA use does not preclude breastfeeding.

10 LMWH prophylaxis in severe TBI is associated with better

11 averted less the additional costs of both 1) LMWH and 2) major bleeding.

12 ight heparin (LMWH) throughout pregnancy; 3) LMWH for the first trimester, followed by a VKA (LMWH an

13 5% CI: 0.1 to 0.8), compared with VKA (39%), LMWH and VKA (23%), or UFH and VKA (34%).

14 ; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.5 to 7.5), LMWH and VKA (16%; RAR: 3.1; 95% CI: 1.2 to 7.5), or UFH

15 ies between treated women with APS (n = 513; LMWH + LDA) and women negative for antiphospholipid anti

16 In conclusion, subcutaneous weight-adjusted LMWH is as effective and safe as intravenous UFH in the

17 The combination of enterally administered LMWH and SNAD given for 7 days appeared to decrease cava

18 When all variables were skewed against LMWH, total outlays were trivial (approximately $85 per

19 Also, LMWH appears to be a reliable and effective antithrombot

20 In this system, an amphiphilic LMWH-UA (LHU) conjugate was synthesized and self-assembl

21 ing </=5 mg daily warfarin and those with an LMWH regimen (RAR: 0.9; 95% CI: 0.3 to 2.4).

22 nhaled UF-heparin (n = 4), MMWH (n = 4), and LMWH (n = 6) failed to modify postantigen AHR when admin

23 sm network (RR 0.02 [95% CrI 0.00-3.86]) and LMWH (low prophylactic dose, 10-14 days) ranked first in

24 Patients who received both clopidogrel and LMWH, in addition to a standard fibrinolytic and aspirin

25 Inhaled UF-heparin and LMWH inhibited antigen-induced histamine release as meas

26 PC (0.028 or 0.222 mg/kg for 70 minutes) and LMWH (0.325 to 2.6 mg/kg for 70 minutes), were antithrom

27 candidates for clinical reversal of UFH and LMWH in humans.

28 practical advantages compared with VKAs and LMWH, there are no antidotes that reverse their anticoag

29 Heparin and LMWHs interact with multiple components of the coagulati

30 the structural heterogeneity of heparin and LMWHs, correlating their activity with a particular stru

31 hoice during pregnancy, and anticoagulation (LMWH or vitamin K antagonists [VKAs]) should be continue

32 tion of the clot and reducing clot weight as LMWH.

33 protocol will find special use in assessing LMWH quality and batch-to-batch variability.

34 , reverse engineering of LMWH for biosimilar LMWH has become an active global endeavor.

35 Factor IXa bound LMWH with significantly higher affinity than factor X by

36 r inhibition of the factor IXa-PL complex by LMWH.

37 major bleeding compared to standard of care, LMWH.

38 of determining the exact masses of complete LMWH preparations, up to dp30.

39 In conclusion, LMWH and DOAC appear to have anti-cancer properties that

40 with RVT were randomly assigned to continue LMWH for an additional 6 months (group A1) or to discont

41 In contrast, LMWH caused a substantial reduction in factor IXa-factor

42 Daily LMWH injections do not increase ongoing pregnancy or liv

43 capability will impact the ability to define LMWH mixtures favorably.

44 facile approach for the creation of designer LMWHs with optimal activity profiles.

45 With this understanding we have developed LMWHs with increased anticoagulant activity and decrease

46 direct head-to-head comparison of different LMWH preparations in randomized trials.

47 patients at high risk of bleeding, full-dose LMWH for 7 days followed by a long-term decreased fixed

48 The FDA recommends that each LMWH be considered as an independent drug with its own a

49 the model, patients were managed with either LMWH or LDH.

50 Enteral LMWH/SNAD effected an increase in plasma levels of antif

51 0 IU/kg; enteral SNAD, 50 mg/kg; and enteral LMWH, 2,000 IU/kg and SNAD, 50 mg/kg.

52 ed to four groups: control (saline); enteral LMWH, 2,000 IU/kg; enteral SNAD, 50 mg/kg; and enteral L

53 sidual thrombus after treatment with enteral LMWH/SNAD was significantly decreased.

54 Finally, LMWHs show promise as an antithrombotic agent for the tr

55 For LMWH, the useful range was 312 to over 2000ng/ml.

56 competition demonstrated that the EC(50) for LMWH was increased less than 2-fold for factor IXa H92A

57 g consensus sequences have high affinity for LMWH and neutralize LMWH (enoxaparin) in vivo in rats an

58 tion demonstrated that relative affinity for LMWH was WT > K241A > H92A > R170A >> R233A, correlating

59 15 studies (174 patients) the indication for LMWH was treatment of acute VTE, and in 61 studies (2603

60 e used as monotherapy, avoiding the need for LMWH.

61 ter define women at risk, suggest a role for LMWH, and confirm the need for further investigation.

62 IXa that overlaps with the binding sites for LMWH and factor VIIIa, disrupting critical factor IXa-fa

63 that the repetitive inhalation of formulated LMWH results in no observable toxicity from the delivery

64 mg/kg PO TID), low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) (enoxaparin 5 mg/kg SC QD), and OHEP/SNAC (30 mg/k

65 Low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) along with with vitamin K antagonists and the bene

66 Low molecular weight heparin (LMWH) and direct thrombin inhibitors have a number of th

67 We have used low molecular weight heparin (LMWH) as a model for highly soluble and ionizable drugs

68 ion by APC and low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) at doses that inhibited fibrin deposition on throm

69 y that the GAG low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) binds to Abeta40 fibrils with a three-fold-symmetr

70 y administered low molecular weight heparin (LMWH) combined with sodium N-[10-(2-hydroxybenzoyl)amino

71 onstrated that low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) compounds are effective and safe alternative antic

72 (UFH) and the low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) dalteparin, finding no difference in the primary e

73 The use of low molecular weight heparin (LMWH) during PCI has been limited by the presumed inabil

74 itution of the low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) enoxaparin for unfractionated heparin (UFH).

75 T treated with low molecular weight heparin (LMWH) for 6 months were eligible.

76 acing UFH with low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) for prophylactic and therapeutic indications.

77 parin (UFH) or low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) for prophylaxis or treatment of thrombosis sometim

78 compared with low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) in a large randomized clinical trial involving pat

79 e potential of low molecular weight heparin (LMWH) in anti-angiogenic therapy has been tempered by po

80 cts of heparin/low molecular weight heparin (LMWH) in breast cancer cells.

81 compared with low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) in patients with GI and potentially genitourinary

82 pirin (ASA) or low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) in patients with newly diagnosed MM, treated with

83 Low molecular weight heparin (LMWH) in therapeutic doses is the treatment of choice du

84 Low molecular weight heparin (LMWH) is being tested as an experimental drug for improv

85 Low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) is modestly superior to unfractionated heparin at

86 term full-dose low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) is more effective than warfarin in the secondary p

87 y injection of low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) is often prescribed to women with unexplained recu

88 othesized that low molecular weight heparin (LMWH) is superior to unfractionated heparin (UH) for ven

89 Long-term low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) is the current standard for treatment of venous th

90 othesized that low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) may have greater potency in attenuating exercise-i

91 suggested that low molecular weight heparin (LMWH) might improve survival in patients with cancer by

92 Low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) offers pharmacological and practical advantages ov

93 the effects of low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) on pregnancy complications in women with prior pre

94 ophylaxis with low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) or low dose unfractionated heparin with graded sto

95 is with either low-molecular weight heparin (LMWH) or low-dose aspirin.

96 ophylaxis with low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) or unfractionated heparin and mortality, pulmonary

97 lternatives to low molecular weight heparin (LMWH) or vitamin K antagonists (VKA) for treatment of ca

98 h prophylactic low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) plus low-dose aspirin (LDA) has not been documente

99 f a commercial low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) preparation (Fragmin) in whole blood samples at co

100 analysis of a low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) preparation from porcine heparin.

101 hreshold where low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) prophylaxis is clearly indicated or below a thresh

102 pregnancy; 2) low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) throughout pregnancy; 3) LMWH for the first trimes

103 ith drugs like low molecular weight heparin (LMWH) to prevent placental failure and recurrent pregnan

104 CTs) comparing low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) vs no LMWH for the prevention of recurrent placent

105 ials comparing low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) vs no LMWH in women with inherited thrombophilia a

106 inhibition by low-molecular weight heparin (LMWH) was independent of factor IXa-factor VIIIa membran

107 subfractions, low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH), and the pentasaccharide fondaparinux.

108 Low molecular weight heparin (LMWH), derived from heparin by its controlled breakdown,

109 , clopidogrel, low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH), platelet glycoprotein (GP) IIb/IIIa receptor inhi

110 eutic doses of low-molecular weight heparin (LMWH), with brief interruptions for invasive procedures

111 th heparin and low molecular weight heparin (LMWH), with reduced antigenicity and cross-reactivity to

112 sts (VKAs) and low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH).

113 inhibition by low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH).

114 inhibition by low molecular weight heparin (LMWH).

115 FH (15kDa) and low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH; 6kDa) added to human plasma.

116 Low molecular weight heparin (LMWH; standard prophylactic dose, 28-35 days) ranked fir

117 hism (n = 279; low-molecular-weight heparin [LMWH] treatment during pregnancy only in case of prior f

118 after pretreatment with inhaled UF-heparin, LMWH, or ULMWH.

119 Aside from its potential as a heparin/LMWH antagonist, LMWP also shows the ability to retard i

120 strategy to enhance the efficacy of heparin/LMWH by inhibiting heparanase as a novel treatment for b

121 inically used low molecular weight heparins (LMWH) are anticoagulants of choice and are phenomenally

122 h heparin and low-molecular-weight heparins (LMWH) have been widely used clinically as anticoagulants

123 Low-molecular weight heparins (LMWH) prepared by partial depolymerization of unfraction

124 Low molecular heparins (LMWHs) are structurally complex, heterogeneous, polydisp

125 d efficacy of low-molecular-weight heparins (LMWHs) for thromboprophylaxis and treatment of venous th

126 However, low-molecular-weight heparins (LMWHs) have practical and clinical advantages over UFH a

127 ls evaluating low molecular weight heparins (LMWHs) in the management of patients with acute coronary

128 of DOACs and low-molecular-weight heparins (LMWHs) in these patients.

129 Low-molecular-weight heparins (LMWHs) possess several potential pharmacological advanta

130 Heparin and low-molecular weight heparins (LMWHs), complex, sulfated polysaccharides isolated from

131 articular the low molecular weight heparins (LMWHs), exert an antineoplastic effect through multiple

132 subcutaneous low-molecular-weight heparins (LMWHs).

133 parin include low-molecular-weight heparins (LMWHs); a pentasaccharide (fondaparinux); oral anticoagu

134 Low molecular weight hyaluronan (LMWH) acts at both peptidergic and nonpeptidergic nocice

135 R170A, K241A) reduced binding to immobilized LMWH was observed for the mutant proteases.

136 G competed factor IXa binding to immobilized LMWH with an EC(50) 35-fold lower than soluble LWMH.

137 with anticoagulants, with options including LMWH, vitamin K antagonists, or direct factor Xa or dire

138 estigation we studied the effects of inhaled LMWH, enoxaparin, and unfractionated heparin on EIB in s

139 biophysical characterization of each intact LMWH.

140 MS for the direct characterization of intact LMWHs (top-down analysis) due to their structural comple

141 the effect of these mutations on factor IXa-LMWH affinity and the potency of LMWH for intrinsic tena

142 alysis, and the K(D(app)) for the factor IXa-LMWH complex agreed with the K(I) for inhibition of the

143 tients who received both pravastatin and LDA+LMWH exhibited increased placental blood flow and improv

144 pirin plus low-molecular weight heparin [LDA+LMWH]) for obstetric antiphospholipid syndrome (APS) doe

145 e investigated the use of pravastatin in LDA+LMWH-refractory APS in patients at an increased risk of

146 ntrol group of 10 patients received only LDA+LMWH.

147 ved pravastatin (20 mg/d) in addition to LDA+LMWH at the onset of PE and/or IUGR.

148 Pravastatin treatment combined with LDA+LMWH was also associated with live births that occurred

149 ped PE and/or IUGR during treatment with LDA+LMWH.

150 Among women with prior fetal loss, LMWH + LDA-treated APS women had lower pregnancy loss ra

151 racterize and compare two currently marketed LMWH products using the top-down approach requiring no s

152 s have high affinity for LMWH and neutralize LMWH (enoxaparin) in vivo in rats and in vitro in citrat

153 ng low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) vs no LMWH for the prevention of recurrent placenta-mediated p

154 ng low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) vs no LMWH in women with inherited thrombophilia and prior lat

155 mpared with 127 (42.9%) of 296 women with no LMWH (relative risk reduction, 0.52; 95% CI, 0.32 to 0.8

156 rates with the use of LMWH compared with no LMWH (relative risk, 0.81; 95% confidence interval, 0.55

157 tentiates the gastrointestinal absorption of LMWH.

158 The apparent affinity of LMWH for the factor IXa-PL complex was higher in the abs

159 ere are no differences in the association of LMWH vs unfractionated heparin for preventing mortality,

160 0.55-1.19;P= .28), suggesting no benefit of LMWH in preventing recurrent pregnancy loss in women wit

161 The direct characterization of LMWH is a major challenge for currently available analyt

162 Continuation of LMWH in patients with RVT up to 1 year did not reduce re

163 E) during the 1 year after disconinuation of LMWH, and the secondary end point was major bleeding.

164 nally, the molecular weight distributions of LMWH preparations have been determined using size exclus

165 a levels for 6 hours after enteral dosing of LMWH/SNAD.

166 Nonetheless, the therapeutic effect of LMWH is not replicated by anticoagulation; fondaparinux

167 ized controlled trials testing the effect of LMWH prophylaxis are required in priority.

168 nd further improve the therapeutic effect of LMWH, we designed a novel combination nanosystem of LMWH

169 , effects, incremental cost-effectiveness of LMWH vs UFH during the period of hospitalization, and se

170 With the efficacy of LMWH reduced by 25% of the base-case estimate, enoxapari

171 As a result, reverse engineering of LMWH for biosimilar LMWH has become an active global end

172 e designed a novel combination nanosystem of LMWH and ursolic acid (UA), which is also an angiogenesi

173 from rats treated with PEG-PLGA particles of LMWH.

174 factor IXa-LMWH affinity and the potency of LMWH for intrinsic tenase.

175 y enzymatic tools used for the production of LMWH are the heparinases from Flavobacterium heparinum,

176 trate an anticoagulation-independent role of LMWH in protecting pregnancies and provide evidence agai

177 The clinical significance of LMWH has highlighted the need to understand and develop

178 n did not significantly differ from those of LMWH.

179 ere based on data from prospective trials of LMWH and other studies of the financial ramifications of

180 ifference in livebirth rates with the use of LMWH compared with no LMWH (relative risk, 0.81; 95% con

181 High-quality trials support use of LMWH in place of oral anticoagulation, particularly in p

182 Inpatient or outpatient use of LMWH is cost-saving or cost-effective compared with unfr

183 dverse maternal outcomes, whereas the use of LMWH throughout pregnancy was associated with the lowest

184 STEMI receiving fibrinolytic therapy, use of LMWH with other standard therapies, including clopidogre

185 study is warranted to define the benefit of LMWHs in certain high-risk subgroups before their use ca

186 pective, we provide background on the use of LMWHs such as enoxaparin as the mainstay of treatment of

187 Last, the issue of whether one LMWH preparation is more effective and cost-effective th

188 Ongoing LMWH and A6 hyperalgesia are reversed by HMWH.

189 Enoxaparin is the only LMWH compound to have demonstrated sustained clinical an

190 ssigned to receive ASA 100 mg/d (n = 176) or LMWH enoxaparin 40 mg/d (n = 166).

191 nts with NSTEMI who received fondaparinux or LMWH between September 1, 2006, through June 30, 2010, w

192 In-hospital treatment with fondaparinux or LMWH during the hospital stay.

193 ulmonary administration of either heparin or LMWH were comparable to that of s.c. administration but

194 f reproducible systemic levels of heparin or LMWH.

195 boprophylaxis with apixaban, rivaroxaban, or LMWH to selected high-risk outpatients with cancer; riva

196 f VTE were similar in those receiving UFH or LMWH compared to those not receiving chemoprophylaxis (1

197 Their clinical benefits over LMWH are marginal and offset by increased risk for major

198 64 h, which was ~4.5 times longer than plain LMWH.

199 nt combinations examined, EcSODDeltaHBD plus LMWH provided the best tumor suppressive effects in inhi

200 mmendation regarding long-term postoperative LMWH has been expanded.

201 E risk is above a threshold where postpartum LMWH prophylaxis should be considered (4.4%; 95% CI, 1.2

202 7%) of 358 of women being given prophylactic LMWH had recurrent severe placenta-mediated pregnancy co

203 lusion in the study, 10,018 (49.1%) received LMWH and 10,399 (50.9%) UH.

204 severe TBI (AIS >/= 3), those that received LMWH or UH VTE prophylaxis.

205 6 to $71,431) for 1862 patients who received LMWH compared with $40,805 (IQR, $24,393 to $76,139) for

206 compare outcomes between patients receiving LMWH and UH.

207 gnancies, including 85.4% in those receiving LMWH for recurrent pregnancy loss.

208 binding constants are obtained for the same LMWH preparations titrated with a synthetic protamine an

209 Patent protection for several LMWH has expired and abbreviated new drug applications h

210 Of the several LMWH agents that have been studied in large clinical tri

211 eing most effective for enoxaparin and Sigma LMWH.

212 (group A2), and patients without RVT stopped LMWH (group B).

213 Subcutaneous LMWH has replaced unfractionated heparin for the initial

214 ting for spontaneous delivery with temporary LMWH interruption.

215 The use of long-term LMWH instead of oral anticoagulants can substantially re

216 , with 50-fold higher apparent affinity than LMWH.

217 indicate that DOACs are more effective than LMWH for prevention of recurrent VTE with CAT though car

218 aparinux was associated with lower odds than LMWH of major bleeding events and death both in-hospital

219 he incidence of DVT with LDH was 14.7%, that LMWH resulted in a relative risk reduction of DVT of 50%

220 There is convincing evidence that LMWH is more effective than placebo and at least as effe

221 linical trials with enoxaparin indicate that LMWH is effective and safe in this indication, with or w

222 Multivariate analysis showed that LMWH was an independent protective factor against mortal

223 ently, results of few trials have shown that LMWH may improve patient survival.

224 Clinical work suggests that LMWH may be more effective than UH for VTE prophylaxis i

225 The results indicate, therefore, that LMWH binding to 3Q fibrils requires a precise molecular

226 on, recently published studies indicate that LMWHs can improve reperfusion of the arteries and reduce

227 In this context, the LMWH enoxaparin has demonstrated sustained clinical and

228 an, and 0.89% (95% CrI, 0.66%-1.16%) for the LMWH-vitamin K antagonist combination.

229 ion and 1.30% (95% CrI, 1.02%-1.62%) for the LMWH-vitamin K antagonist combination.

230 .6% versus 0.8%, P=0.37) were similar in the LMWH and UFH groups.

231 0.57; 95% CI, 0.42 to 0.79; P = .001) in the LMWH arm and no difference in major bleeding events but

232 clinically relevant nonmajor bleeding in the LMWH arm.

233 while in the hospital vs 1022 (4.0%) in the LMWH group (adjusted OR, 0.75; 95% CI, 0.63-0.89).

234 aparinux group vs 461 patients (1.8%) in the LMWH group experienced in-hospital bleeding events (adju

235 was 2.27% in the ASA group and 1.20% in the LMWH group.

236 of patients in the ASA group and none in the LMWH group.

237 0) in the OHEP/SNAC and 10% (1 of 10) in the LMWH groups (P<0.001).

238 Xa levels were significantly elevated in the LMWH/SNAD group versus baseline.

239 ealth care payer perspective, the use of the LMWH dalteparin for VTE prophylaxis among critically ill

240 ght and molecular weight distribution of the LMWH preparation are important parameters affecting thei

241 eaving the high molecular weight half of the LMWH preparation unassigned.

242 d with a lower risk of bleeding than was the LMWH-vitamin K antagonist combination, with a lower prop

243 Compared with the LMWH-vitamin K antagonist combination, a treatment strat

244 ute venous thromboembolism compared with the LMWH-vitamin K antagonist combination.

245 The LMWHs are recommended by the American Heart Association

246 The LMWHs could potentially replace unfractionated heparin a

247 Although the LMWHs and related agents hold promise for improving outc

248 unced anti-Xa and anti-IIa activity of these LMWHs, we also demonstrate that they possess desirable i

249 ently used in the clinic, we show that these LMWHs are rapidly and completely neutralized by protamin

250 Capillary electrophoresis of three LMWHs, enoxaparin, tinzaparin, and a Sigma preparation,

251 Thus, LMWH binds to an exosite on factor IXa that antagonizes

252 Thus, LMWH inhibits intrinsic tenase by interacting with the h

253 effective and less-expensive alternative to LMWH thromboprophylaxis.

254 se peptides exhibit high-affinity binding to LMWH (dissociation constant [K(d)], approximately 50 nM)

255 ; 95% CI 0.51-0.79; p < 0.0001), compared to LMWH (RR 0.57; 95% CI 0.40-0.83; p = 0.003), but not com

256 Compared to LMWH, DOACs showed no difference in major bleeding risk

257 C921-78, achieve anticoagulation similar to LMWH but produce little or no improvement in pregnancy o

258 openia in 0%, thrombocytopenia (unrelated to LMWH) in 0.11% (95% CI, 0.02%-0.32%), and osteoporotic f

259 xceeding approximately 30% (achieved by UFH, LMWH, 16-, 8-, 6-mer), (2) formation of multimolecular c

260 from a clinical safety point of view, unlike LMWHs presently used in the clinic, we show that these L

261 or placental insufficiency (5 women had used LMWH).

262 intrauterine fetal deaths (1 woman had used LMWH); 9 cases of preeclampsia or the hemolysis, elevate

263 let count (HELLP) syndrome (3 women had used LMWH); and 11 cases of intrauterine growth restriction o

264 In sensitivity analyses, a strategy using LMWH remained least costly unless the drug acquisition c

265 In 78% of simulations, a strategy using LMWH was most effective and least costly.

266 idote warrants exercising caution when using LMWH with coronary intervention.

267 ding constants between protamine and various LMWH preparations.

268 for the first trimester, followed by a VKA (LMWH and VKA); or 4) unfractionated heparin for the firs

269 ale experience of the use of fondaparinux vs LMWH in a nontrial setting is lacking.

270 clearly indicated or below a threshold where LMWH should be withheld (2.5%; 95% CI, 1.3-4.3).

271 (1) have identified a new mechanism by which LMWH improves pregnancy outcome in a murine model of fac

272 ed with fondaparinux and 25,825 (63.6%) with LMWH.

273 Neither the rate of increased bleeding with LMWH nor the costs incurred as a result of bleeding sign

274 In addition, treatment of CAM with LMWH reduced the local vascular density beyond that achi

275 t had antithrombotic effects comparable with LMWH did not demonstrably impair primary hemostasis.

276 risk was lowest with VKA (5%), compared with LMWH (16%; ratio of averaged risk [RAR]: 3.2; 95% confid

277 uced with factor Xa inhibitors compared with LMWH (4 fewer events per 1000 patients).

278 Compared with LMWH, lower doses of oral factor Xa inhibitors can achie

279 Compared with LMWH, the absolute difference in the proportion of VTE w

280 inhibitors increased bleeding compared with LMWH.

281 valuation of NOACs by common comparison with LMWH showed nonsignificantly reduced risks for venous th

282 Composite fetal risk was lowest with LMWH (13%; RAR: 0.3; 95% CI: 0.1 to 0.8), compared with

283 urvival of patients with cancer, mainly with LMWH.

284 with a first DVT, treated for 6 months with LMWH, absence of RVT identifies a population at low risk

285 inic, having been treated for >6 months with LMWH.

286 e, we show that treatment of the mother with LMWH allows placental development to proceed and affords

287 D DATA: Pharmacological VTE prophylaxis with LMWH or UH is the current standard of care in TBI.

288 tified similar relative risk reductions with LMWH for individual outcomes, including any PE, severe P

289 sponding lower overall use of resources with LMWH.

290 These comprise studies with LMWH, unfractionated heparin, and vitamin K antagonists,

291 d clinical outcomes in patients treated with LMWH (n=1429) versus UFH (n=1431) in CLARITY-TIMI 28, a

292 ncreatic cancer cell lines were treated with LMWH (Tinzaparin and Dalteparin), and DOAC (Apixaban and

293 d more live births as they were treated with LMWH.

294 /=5 mg warfarin daily and women treated with LMWH.

295 Treatment with LMWH was also associated with a significantly lower rate

296 ions, and a propensity score, treatment with LMWH was associated with a significantly lower rate of a

297 Treatment of CAM-implanted tumours with LMWH also reduced tumour vascularisation, while treatmen

298 trials have demonstrated similar safety with LMWHs compared with unfractionated heparin in the settin

299 nonsignificantly lower with DOACs than with LMWHs (RR, 0.68; 95% CI, 0.39-1.17).

300 nonsignificantly lower with DOACs than with LMWHs (RR, 0.86; 95% CI, 0.60-1.23).