Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 481

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 26 of the 26 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Therapeutic versus prophylactic anticoagulation for patients admitted to hospital with COVID-19 and elevated D-dimer concentration (ACTION): an open-label, multicentre, randomised, controlled trial

Open access
Lopes, Renato D, de Barros e Silva, Pedro Gabriel Melo, Furtado, Remo H M, Macedo, Ariane Vieira Scarlatelli, Bronhara, Bruna, Damiani, Lucas Petri, Barbosa, Lilian Mazza, de Aveiro Morata, Júlia, Ramacciotti, Eduardo, de Aquino Martins, Priscilla, de Oliveira, Aryadne Lyrio, Nunes, Vinicius Santana, Ritt, Luiz Eduardo Fonteles, Rocha, Ana Thereza, Tramujas, Lucas, Santos, Sueli V, Diaz, Dario Rafael Abregu, Viana, Lorena Souza, Melro, Lívia Maria Garcia, de Alcântara Chaud, Mariana Silveira, Figueiredo, Estêvão Lanna, Neuenschwander, Fernando Carvalho, Dracoulakis, Marianna Deway Andrade, Lima, Rodolfo Godinho Souza Dourado, de Souza Dantas, Vicente Cés, Fernandes, Anne Cristine Silva, Gebara, Otávio Celso Eluf, Hernandes, Mauro Esteves, Queiroz, Diego Aparecido Rios, Veiga, Viviane C, Canesin, Manoel Fernandes, de Faria, Leonardo Meira, Feitosa-Filho, Gilson Soares, Gazzana, Marcelo Basso, Liporace, Idelzuíta Leandro, de Oliveira Twardowsky, Aline, Maia, Lilia Nigro, Machado, Flávia Ribeiro, de Matos Soeiro, Alexandre, Conceição-Souza, Germano Emílio, Armaganijan, Luciana, Guimarães, Patrícia O, Rosa, Regis G, Azevedo, Luciano C P, Alexander, John H, Avezum, Alvaro, Cavalcanti, Alexandre B, Berwanger, Otavio·2021·The Lancet

Abstract

Background COVID-19 is associated with a prothrombotic state leading to adverse clinical outcomes. Whether therapeutic anticoagulation improves outcomes in patients hospitalised with COVID-19 is unknown. We aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of therapeutic versus prophylactic anticoagulation in this population. Methods We did a pragmatic, open-label (with blinded adjudication), multicentre, randomised, controlled trial, at 31 sites in Brazil. Patients (aged ≥18 years) hospitalised with COVID-19 and elevated D-dimer concentration, and who had COVID-19 symptoms for up to 14 days before randomisation, were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive either therapeutic or prophylactic anticoagulation. Therapeutic anticoagulation was in-hospital oral rivaroxaban (20 mg or 15 mg daily) for stable patients, or initial subcutaneous enoxaparin (1 mg/kg twice per day) or intravenous unfractionated heparin (to achieve a 0·3–0·7 IU/mL anti-Xa concentration) for clinically unstable patients, followed by rivaroxaban to day 30. Prophylactic anticoagulation was standard in-hospital enoxaparin or unfractionated heparin. The primary efficacy outcome was a hierarchical analysis of time to death, duration of hospitalisation, or duration of supplemental oxygen to day 30, analysed with the win ratio method (a ratio >1 reflects a better outcome in the therapeutic anticoagulation group) in the intention-to-treat population. The primary safety outcome was major or clinically relevant non-major bleeding through 30 days. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT04394377) and is completed. Findings From June 24, 2020, to Feb 26, 2021, 3331 patients were screened and 615 were randomly allocated (311 [50%] to the therapeutic anticoagulation group and 304 [50%] to the prophylactic anticoagulation group). 576 (94%) were clinically stable and 39 (6%) clinically unstable. One patient, in the therapeutic group, was lost to follow-up because of withdrawal of consent and was not included in the primary analysis. The primary efficacy outcome was not different between patients assigned therapeutic or prophylactic anticoagulation, with 28 899 (34·8%) wins in the therapeutic group and 34 288 (41·3%) in the prophylactic group (win ratio 0·86 [95% CI 0·59–1·22], p=0·40). Consistent results were seen in clinically stable and clinically unstable patients. The primary safety outcome of major or clinically relevant non-major bleeding occurred in 26 (8%) patients assigned therapeutic anticoagulation and seven (2%) assigned prophylactic anticoagulation (relative risk 3·64 [95% CI 1·61–8·27], p=0·0010). Allergic reaction to the study medication occurred in two (1%) patients in the therapeutic anticoagulation group and three (1%) in the prophylactic anticoagulation group. Interpretation In patients hospitalised with COVID-19 and elevated D-dimer concentration, in-hospital therapeutic anticoagulation with rivaroxaban or enoxaparin followed by rivaroxaban to day 30 did not improve clinical outcomes and increased bleeding compared with prophylactic anticoagulation. Therefore, use of therapeutic-dose rivaroxaban, and other direct oral anticoagulants, should be avoided in these patients in the absence of an evidence-based indication for oral anticoagulation. Funding Coalition COVID-19 Brazil, Bayer SA.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/s0140-6736(21)01203-4

Cites

26 of 26 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 26 references

Cited by

See all 481

Metadata

Authors
Lopes, R. D., de Barros e Silva, P. G. M., Furtado, R. H. M., Macedo, A. V. S., Bronhara, B., Damiani, L. P., Barbosa, L. M., de Aveiro Morata, J., Ramacciotti, E., de Aquino Martins, P., de Oliveira, A. L., Nunes, V. S., Ritt, L. E. F., Rocha, A. T., Tramujas, L., Santos, S. V., Diaz, D. R. A., Viana, L. S., Melro, L. M. G., de Alcântara Chaud, M. S., Figueiredo, E. L., Neuenschwander, F. C., Dracoulakis, M. D. A., Lima, R. G. S. D., de Souza Dantas, V. C., Fernandes, A. C. S., Gebara, O. C. E., Hernandes, M. E., Queiroz, D. A. R., Veiga, V. C., Canesin, M. F., de Faria, L. M., Feitosa-Filho, G. S., Gazzana, M. B., Liporace, I. L., de Oliveira Twardowsky, A., Maia, L. N., Machado, F. R., de Matos Soeiro, A., Conceição-Souza, G. E., Armaganijan, L., Guimarães, P. O., Rosa, R. G., Azevedo, L. C. P., Alexander, J. H., Avezum, A., Cavalcanti, A. B., & Berwanger, O.
Venue
The Lancet
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2021-06
Volume
397
Issue
10291
Pages
2253-2263
ISSN
  • 0099-5355 (ISSN-L)
  • 0140-6736
OpenAlex
W3172155398
Cited by
481
References
26
FWCI
32.28
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
bronze

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Therapeutic versus prophylactic anticoagulation for patients admitted to hospital with COVID-19 and elevated D-dimer concentration (ACTION): an open-label, multicentre, randomised, controlled trial. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/s0140-6736(21)01203-4
The paper
Lopes, R. D., de Barros e Silva, P. G. M., Furtado, R. H. M., Macedo, A. V. S., Bronhara, B., Damiani, L. P., Barbosa, L. M., de Aveiro Morata, J., Ramacciotti, E., de Aquino Martins, P., de Oliveira, A. L., Nunes, V. S., Ritt, L. E. F., Rocha, A. T., Tramujas, L., Santos, S. V., Diaz, D. R. A., Viana, L. S., Melro, L. M. G., . . . Berwanger, O. (2021). Therapeutic versus prophylactic anticoagulation for patients admitted to hospital with COVID-19 and elevated D-dimer concentration (ACTION): an open-label, multicentre, randomised, controlled trial. The Lancet. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0140-6736(21)01203-4

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.