CHAMGAP
APPROVEDReviewed and approved by the Chamgap Editorial Team (2026-07-24). The draft was written by AI, the existence of all 2 cited sources was verified at the original page, and the verdict passed blind grading and adversarial audit. Methodology v0.6.
Verdict No. 1803 · Search date 2026-07-24 · Methodology v0.6

Apixaban,
does it really help with Prevention of recurrent cancer-associated venous thromboembolism?

30-Second Summary
B
Evidence Grade B · 74 · Safety warning
Apixaban is noninferior to dalteparin for recurrent cancer-associated VTE, but superiority was not established
Major and clinically relevant nonmajor bleeding can occur. Renal function, interacting medicines, platelet count, and tumor site require review; bleeding was not used to grade efficacy.
What the
research shows
Apixaban is rated B because it was noninferior to dalteparin for cancer-associated VTE. CARAVAGGIO randomized 1,170 participants and analyzed 1,155 by modified intention to treat; recurrence was 5.6% versus 7.9%, HR 0.63 (95% CI 0.37 to 1.07), P<.001 for noninferiority. The prespecified HR margin was 2.00, and superiority was not established.
What the
ads claim
Claims of universal superiority to injections or suitability for every cancer and bleeding-risk profile exceed the trials.
*

Useful facts when choosing a product

  • CARAVAGGIO used 10 mg twice daily for seven days, then 5 mg twice daily for six months.
  • Brain tumors, known cerebral metastases, and acute leukemia were excluded.
Gap Measurement · Verdict 1803 · B 74
What advertising claims
What independent, higher-quality research supports
△ GAP
01

What the research actually shows

CARAVAGGIO randomized 1,170 and included 1,155 in modified intention-to-treat analysis, 576 apixaban and 579 dalteparin. Recurrent VTE occurred in 32 versus 46, HR 0.63 (0.37 to 1.07), P<.001 for noninferiority, meeting the primary endpoint. FADOI sponsored the trial with an unrestricted Bristol Myers Squibb-Pfizer Alliance grant. ADAM VTE randomized 300 and analyzed 287; recurrence was 0.7% versus 6.3%, HR 0.099, P=.0281, with the same alliance funding. Verdict 1334, which is B with 73 points, and verdict 1352, which is B with 74 points, address other drugs in general acute VTE. Verdict 659, which is B with 79 points, is the same drug in atrial fibrillation and was not transferred to this indication.

02

Why this is classified as B (74)

The profile is H, R1, I0, E+, and B1 with the large hard-endpoint prescription-drug exception. ADAM VTE shared Bristol Myers Squibb-Pfizer Alliance funding with CARAVAGGIO, so it is not independent replication and R1 is retained, giving B with 74 points.

Counterpoint. Cancer type, renal function, interactions, platelet count, and gastrointestinal or genitourinary bleeding risk guide selection.

Rejudgment record. Cross-check applied — Successful large objective VTE-recurrence noninferiority trial plus a second trial

Scoring profile behind this grade
EndpointHHard endpoint - actual events such as death
ReplicationR1Single confirmatory trial
IndependenceI0Evidence comes only from manufacturer studies
Effect sizeE+Meets the clinically important threshold

The scoring table and the verdict agree (B).

Sub-claim grades by effect

This ingredient is marketed for several effects. A single overall grade blends strong and weak claims together, so each effect is graded separately here. The overall grade reflects the strongest disconfirming or core claim.

Effect (sub-claim)GradeBasis
Prevention of recurrent VTEBCARAVAGGIO met noninferiority.
Prevention of recurrent deep-vein thrombosisBThis is a component of objectively confirmed recurrence.
Prevention of recurrent pulmonary embolismBThis is a component of objectively confirmed recurrence.

Cross-check — Codex and Claude

This verdict was drafted by Codex through literature review and source-existence checks, cross-checked through blind grading and adversarial audit, and settled by reapplying the methodology boundary rules. Cases with split grades were resolved through rejudgment.
03

Evidence Table

StudyDesignSampleFundingEndpointResultWeight
Agnelli G et al. 2020Open-label noninferiority trial with blinded event adjudication1,155Unrestricted Bristol Myers Squibb-Pfizer Alliance grantRecurrent VTE5.6% versus 7.9%, HR 0.63 (0.37 to 1.07), P<.001 for noninferiority; metDecisive trial
McBane RD II et al. 2020Randomized active-controlled trial287Bristol Myers Squibb-Pfizer AllianceMajor bleeding primary; recurrent VTE secondaryRecurrence 0.7% versus 6.3%, HR 0.099, P=.0281Supportive evidence with the same BMS-Pfizer funding, not independent replication
§

Receipt — 2 References

All 2 cited sources were verified for existence at the original page (as of 2026-07-24).

Agnelli G, Becattini C, Meyer G, et al. Apixaban for the treatment of venous thromboembolism associated with cancer. N Engl J Med. 2020;382(17):1599-1607. PMID: 32223112. DOI: 10.1056/NEJMoa1915103.
checked
McBane RD II, Wysokinski WE, Le-Rademacher JG, et al. Apixaban and dalteparin in active malignancy-associated venous thromboembolism: the ADAM VTE trial. J Thromb Haemost. 2020;18(2):411-421. PMID: 31630479. DOI: 10.1111/jth.14662.
checked
Draft and rewrite: Codex (AI) · Verification: Codex blind grading and adversarial audit · Final adjudication: Claude
Reviewed and approved: Chamgap Editorial Team · Approval date: 2026-07-24 · Corrections: none

Cite this verdict

Apixaban x prevention of recurrent cancer-associated venous thromboembolism Evidence Grade B card
[Chamgap] Apixaban x prevention of recurrent cancer-associated venous thromboembolism — Evidence Grade B·74. 2 cited sources checked. Source: https://chamgap.com/en/verdicts/general/apixaban-cancer-associated-vte-recurrence/ · CC BY 4.0

CC BY 4.0 — free to use with attribution; do not distort grades, numbers, or verdict meaning.

!

What this document does and does not do

Chamgap is an information source. It reports what research has and has not confirmed; it does not tell readers what to take or buy. That decision belongs to readers and, when needed, medical or legal professionals. This verdict reflects literature available up to the search date and may change as new research appears. Nothing here is medical advice.