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 prophylaxis in severe TBI is associated with better

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

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

12 5% CI: 0.1 to 0.8), compared with VKA (39%), LMWH and VKA (23%), or UFH and VKA (34%).

13 ; 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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

22 in the groups treated with 125 IU/kg AT and LMWH alone.

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

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

25 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

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

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

28 Heparin and LMWHs interact with multiple components of the coagulati

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

38 Daily LMWH injections do not increase ongoing pregnancy or liv

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

47 0 IU/kg; enteral SNAD, 50 mg/kg; and enteral LMWH, 2,000 IU/kg and SNAD, 50 mg/kg.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

55 15 studies (174 patients) the indication for LMWH was treatment of acute VTE, and in 61 studies (2603

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

88 mbination with low molecular weight heparin (LMWH) or if LMWH was adminstered alone, mortality from D

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

108 inhibition by low molecular weight heparin (LMWH).

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

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

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

112 eparin [MMWH]; low-molecular-weight heparin [LMWH]; and ultralow-molecular-weight heparin [ULMWH]) on

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

129 th low molecular weight heparin (LMWH) or if LMWH was adminstered alone, mortality from DIC-SA was sl

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

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

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

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

134 biophysical characterization of each intact LMWH.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

152 tentiates the gastrointestinal absorption of LMWH.

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

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

155 0.55-1.19;P= .28), suggesting no benefit of LMWH in preventing recurrent pregnancy loss in women wit

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

173 n did not significantly differ from those of LMWH.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

183 Ongoing LMWH and A6 hyperalgesia are reversed by HMWH.

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

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

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

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

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

189 f reproducible systemic levels of heparin or LMWH.

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

191 64 h, which was ~4.5 times longer than plain LMWH.

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

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

194 7%) of 358 of women being given prophylactic LMWH had recurrent severe placenta-mediated pregnancy co

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

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

197 6 to $71,431) for 1862 patients who received LMWH compared with $40,805 (IQR, $24,393 to $76,139) for

198 compare outcomes between patients receiving LMWH and UH.

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

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

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

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

203 eing most effective for enoxaparin and Sigma LMWH.

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

205 Subcutaneous LMWH has replaced unfractionated heparin for the initial

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

220 .6% versus 0.8%, P=0.37) were similar in the LMWH and UFH groups.

221 0.57; 95% CI, 0.42 to 0.79; P = .001) in the LMWH arm and no difference in major bleeding events but

222 clinically relevant nonmajor bleeding in the LMWH arm.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

235 The LMWHs are recommended by the American Heart Association

236 The LMWHs could potentially replace unfractionated heparin a

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

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

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

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

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

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

243 effective and less-expensive alternative to LMWH thromboprophylaxis.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

255 ding constants between protamine and various LMWH preparations.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

267 inhibitors increased bleeding compared with LMWH.

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

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

270 urvival of patients with cancer, mainly with LMWH.

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

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

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

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

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

276 sponding lower overall use of resources with LMWH.

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

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

279 In contrast, groups treated with LMWH, alone or with AT, experienced hemorrhage and appea

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

281 /=5 mg warfarin daily and women treated with LMWH.

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

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

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