This Article  • Full text  • PDF  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Citing articles on HighWire  • Citing articles on Web of Science (1)  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Related letters  • Related article  • Similar articles in JAMA  Topic Collections  • Thrombolysis  • Men's Health  • Men's Health, Other  • Venous Thromboembolism  • Cardiovascular System  • Drug Therapy  • Adverse Effects  • Hematology/ Hematologic Malignancies  • Coagulation Disorders  • Cardiovascular Intervention  • Alert me on articles by topic  Social Bookmarking   What's this?

	Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text and any section headings.

To the Editor: The clinical trial comparing unfractionated and low-molecular-weight heparin for the treatment of VTE by Dr Kearon and colleagues¹ lacks an important component recommended by the CONSORT statement: a justification for the chosen noninferiority margin.² The authors' assertion of noninferiority of unfractionated heparin is called into question by this omission, combined with the enrollment of fewer patients than planned, as well as recent reports of a trend in favor of low-molecular-weight heparin compared with intravenous unfractionated heparin.^3-4

Although the superiority of low-molecular-weight heparin cannot be excluded, the data suggest limits of the potential cost-effectiveness of this treatment. With a cost differential of $675 estimated by the authors and a maximum risk difference of 3.3%, the cost per event prevented is at least $20 000. Therefore, the decision to use unfractionated heparin can perhaps be better justified by cost-effectiveness arguments than by claiming that clinical noninferiority has been rigorously established.

. . . [Full Text of this Article]

Jonathan Lee Edwards, MD, MA
jedwards@barbhosp.com
Department of Family Practice
Barberton Hospital
Barberton, Ohio

CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter     What's this?

RELATED LETTERS

Fixed-Dose Unfractionated Heparin vs Low-Molecular-Weight Heparin for Venous Thromboembolism
Neeraj Bhala, Ashit Shah, Andrew King, and Chakri Molugu
JAMA. 2007;297(3):261.
EXTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Fixed-Dose Unfractionated Heparin vs Low-Molecular-Weight Heparin for Venous Thromboembolism
Huichun Zhan and Haoyi Zheng
JAMA. 2007;297(3):261-262.
EXTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Fixed-Dose Unfractionated Heparin vs Low-Molecular-Weight Heparin for Venous Thromboembolism
Darrell W. Harrington and Ayad Jindeel
JAMA. 2007;297(3):262.
EXTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Fixed-Dose Unfractionated Heparin vs Low-Molecular-Weight Heparin for Venous Thromboembolism—Reply
Clive Kearon, Jeffrey S. Ginsberg, Jim A. Julian, Michael Gent, and for the Fixed-Dose Heparin (FIDO) Investigators
JAMA. 2007;297(3):263.
EXTRACT | FULL TEXT  

RELATED ARTICLE

Comparison of Fixed-Dose Weight-Adjusted Unfractionated Heparin and Low-Molecular-Weight Heparin for Acute Treatment of Venous Thromboembolism
Clive Kearon, Jeffrey S. Ginsberg, Jim A. Julian, James Douketis, Susan Solymoss, Paul Ockelford, Sharon Jackson, Alexander G. Turpie, Betsy MacKinnon, Jack Hirsh, Michael Gent, and for the Fixed-Dose Heparin (FIDO) Investigators
JAMA. 2006;296(8):935-942.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

THIS ARTICLE HAS BEEN CITED BY OTHER ARTICLES

Initial management of deep venous thrombosis in the outpatient setting
Groce
Am J Health Syst Pharm 2008;65:866-874.
FULL TEXT