Assessment of clinically relevant bleeding as a surrogate outcome for major bleeding: validation by meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Essentials Surrogacy of clinically relevant bleeding (CRB) for major bleeding has never been validated. Our meta-analysis evaluated CRB surrogacy in trials of new versus traditional anticoagulants. Surrogacy was not validated in orthopedic surgery, venous thromboembolism or atrial fibrillation The difficulty in demonstrating the surrogacy may reflect a lack of homogeneity in its definition SUMMARY: Background Clinically relevant bleeding (CRB), comprising major bleeding and clinically relevant non-major bleeding, has been used as a surrogate for major bleeding in most anticoagulant trials. The validity of this surrogate to estimate trade-off between thrombotic and bleeding events in clinical trials was never assessed. Methods We systematically reviewed randomized phase III trials comparing new anticoagulants with the standard of care for venous thromboembolism prevention following major orthopedic surgery, venous thromboembolism (VTE) treatment, or stroke and systemic embolism prevention in atrial fibrillation (AF), and reporting both major bleeding and CRB rates. The validity of CRB as a surrogate for major bleeding was assessed according to the strength of the association between the relative risks of major bleeding and CRB, measured by the use of R2trial and its 95% confidence interval (CI). Results In the postoperative prophylactic setting (13 studies), major bleeding and CRB rates were 1.12% and 3.56%, respectively, and R2trial was 0.69 (95% CI 0.34-0.93). For acute VTE studies (n = 12), major bleeding and CRB rates were 1.87% and 9.07%; the corresponding R2trial values were 0.28 (95% CI 0.01-0.80) and 0.68 (95% CI 0.09-1.00) when only double-blind studies were considered (n = 7). For AF studies (n = 7; 22 strata), major bleeding and CRB rates were 4.82% and 15.3%, and R2trial was 0.59 (95% CI 0.15-0.82). Conclusion Despite an apparent correlation between CRB and major bleeding in major orthopedic surgery, AF, and double-blind acute VTE studies, the wide CIs suggest that CRB might not be an acceptable surrogate outcome in any of these settings.

Access to community care for people with dementia and their informal carers : Case vignettes for a European comparison of structures and common pathways to formal care

BACKGROUND

People with dementia and their informal carers often do not receive appropriate professional support or it is not received at the right time.

OBJECTIVES

Description and comparison of common pathways to formal community dementia care in eight European countries as a part of the transnational Actifcare project.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The German team was responsible for creating an individual case scenario as a starting point. The research teams in Ireland, Italy, the Netherlands, Norway, Portugal, Sweden, and the United Kingdom were then asked to describe a common pathway to formal dementia care by writing their own vignette using the provided individual case scenario.

RESULTS

A transnational qualitative content analysis was used to identify the following categories as being the most important: involved professionals, dementia-specific and team-based approaches, proactive roles, and financial aspects. General practitioners (GPs) are described as being the most important profession supporting the access to formal care in all the involved countries. In some countries other professionals take over responsibility for the access procedure. Dementia-specific approaches are rarely part of standard care; team-based approaches have differing significances in each of the countries. Informal carers are mainly proactive in seeking formal care. The Nordic countries demonstrate how financial support enhances access to the professional system.

CONCLUSION

Enhanced cooperation between GPs and other professions might optimize access to formal dementia care. Team-based approaches focusing on dementia care should be developed further. Informal carers should be supported and relieved in their role. Financial barriers remain which should be further investigated and reduced.

Long-term treatment of cancer-associated thrombosis: the choice of the optimal anticoagulant

Patients with cancer-associated thrombosis (CAT) carry a higher risk of recurrence, bleeding and mortality as compared with non-cancer patients. The specific profiles of cancer patients, combining frequent co-morbidities, the use of anti-tumoral therapies and the cancer progression itself, represent a major therapeutic challenge for choosing a long-term anticoagulant treatment. This review discusses the practical basis of making a choice between the available drugs for a long-term antithrombotic strategy, linked to their pharmacology, mechanism of action, evidence of clinical benefits, and advantages and limitations in such a complex clinical context. In patients with cancer, low-molecular-weight heparins (LMWHs) are the preferred option for the secondary prevention of venous thromboembolism according to current guidelines, because their efficacy is significantly superior to vitamin K antagonists (VKAs). Even though LMWHs are effective and safe in cancer patients, they require daily subcutaneous injections, which may be problematic for a long-term therapy that may exceed 6 months' duration. Compared with VKAs, non-vitamin-K antagonist oral anticoagulants or direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) are more target specific and do not require laboratory monitoring, whereas the oral route of administration makes them potentially attractive alternatives to LMWH. In randomized controlled trials in the general population DOACs have been shown to be non-inferior to VKAs in terms of efficacy with a lower rate of clinically relevant or major bleeding. However, given the limited number of cancer patients enrolled in these studies (with poorly defined active cancer), available trials are inconclusive regarding the usefulness of DOACs in the cancer setting. Ongoing head-to-head comparisons vs. LMWH in patients with CAT may allow an informed choice to be made regarding the DOAC option.

Reproducibility of clinical events adjudications in a trial of venous thromboembolism prevention

Essentials The reproducibility of Clinical Events Committee (CEC) adjudications is almost unexplored. A random selection of events from a venous thromboembolism trial was blindly re-adjudicated. 'Unexplained sudden deaths' (possible fatal embolism) explained most discordant adjudications. A precise definition for CEC adjudication of this type of events is needed and proposed.

SUMMARY

Background When clinical trials use clinical endpoints, establishing independent Clinical Events Committees (CECs) is recommended to homogenize the interpretation of investigators' data. However, the reproducibility of CEC adjudications is almost unexplored. Objectives To assess the reproducibility of CEC adjudications in a trial of venous thromboembolism (VTE) prevention. Methods The PREVENU trial, a multicenter trial of VTE prevention, included 15 351 hospitalized medical patients. The primary endpoint was the composite of symptomatic VTE, major bleeding or unexplained sudden death (interpreted as possible fatal pulmonary embolism [PE]) at 3 months. The CEC comprised a chairman and four pairs of adjudicators. Of 2970 adjudicated clinical events, a random selection of 179 events (121 deaths, 40 bleeding events, and 18 VTE events) was blindly resubmitted to the CEC. Kappa values and their 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated to measure adjudication agreement. Results Overall, 18 of 179 (10.1%, 95% CI 6.5-15.3%) adjudications proved discordant. Agreement for the PREVENU composite primary endpoint was good (kappa = 0.73, 95% CI 0.61-0.85). When analyzed separately, agreements were very good for non-fatal VTE events (1, 95% CI not applicable), moderate for all (fatal and non-fatal) VTE events (0.58, 95% CI 0.34-0.82), good for fatal and non-fatal major bleeding events (0.71, 95% CI 0.55-0.88), and moderate for all fatal events (0.60, 95% CI 0.40-0.81). Unexplained sudden death interpreted as possible fatal PE was responsible for nine of 18 (50%) discordant adjudications. Conclusion The reproducibility of CEC adjudications was good or very good for non-fatal VTE and bleeding events, but insufficient for VTE-related deaths, for which more precise and widely accepted definitions are needed.

Improving the mix of institutional and community care for older people with dementia: an application of the balance of care approach in eight European countries

OBJECTIVES

To examine whether the mix of community and institutional long-term care (ILTC) for people with dementia (PwD) in Europe could be improved; assess the economic consequences of providing alternative services for particular groups of ILTC entrants and explore the transnational application of the 'Balance of Care' (BoC) approach.

METHOD

A BoC study was undertaken in Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, the Netherlands, Spain, Sweden, and the UK as part of the RightTimePlaceCare project. Drawing on information about 2014 PwD on the margins of ILTC admission, this strategic planning framework identified people whose needs could be met in more than one setting, and compared the relative costs of the possible alternatives.

RESULTS

The findings suggest a noteworthy minority of ILTC entrants could be more appropriately supported in the community if enhanced services were available. This would not necessarily require innovative services, but more standard care (including personal and day care), assuming quality was ensured. Potential cost savings were identified in all countries, but community care was not always cheaper than ILTC and the ability to release resources varied between nations.

CONCLUSIONS

This is believed to be the first transnational application of the BoC approach, and demonstrates its potential to provide a consistent approach to planning across different health and social care systems. Better comparative information is needed on the number of ILTC entrants with dementia, unit costs and outcomes. Nevertheless, the findings offer important evidence on the appropriateness of current provision, and the opportunity to learn from different countries' experience.