Anticoagulation for the long-term treatment of venous thromboembolism in patients with cancer

Moderne Antikoagulation mit FXa-Inhibitoren in der Onkologie: Ist die gastrointestinale Blutungsrate (mit)-entscheidend?

Das erhöhte Thrombose- und Blutungsrisiko bei aktiver Tumorerkrankung wird als sog. „thrombo-hämorrhagisches Syndrom“ bezeichnet, welches hohe Anforderungen an die Antikoagulation stellt. Aktuell liegen 4 randomisierte, prospektive Studien zum Einsatz von neuen, nicht Vitamin K-abhängigen oralen Antikoagulantien (NOAK) zur Behandlung von in der Onkologie aufgetretenen venösen Thromboembolien (VTE) vor. Dabei wurden die FXa-Inhibitoren Rivaroxaban, Edoxaban und zweimal Apixaban jeweils in einzelnen Studien gegenüber dem Standardtherapeutikum Dalteparin eingesetzt. Da es keinen direkten Head-to-Head-Vergleich der genannten FXa-Inhibitoren innerhalb einer Studie gibt, wurde zu jedem NOAK die jeweils größte Studie – stets verglichen gegenüber Dalteparin – ausgewertet. Die Studien wurden bzgl. ihrer Wirksamkeit, Sicherheit, fataler Blutungsraten, dem Risiko für gastrointestinale Blutungen (GIB) und sonstiger Unterschiede anhand deskriptiver Statistik analysiert. Unter Dalteparin ergab sich eine mittlere VTE-Rezidivrate von ca. 9% bei einem 6-monatigen Behandlungszeitraum. Alle 3 FXa-Inhibitoren waren gegenüber Dalteparin bezüglich der Wirksamkeit nicht unterlegen. Die VTE-Rezidivrate war bei mit Edoxaban und Apixaban behandelten Patienten um – 2,3% und bei Rivaroxaban um – 5,0% niedriger.

Bei der Sicherheit fanden sich – jeweils gegenüber Dalteparin – für Rivaroxaban und Edoxaban eine erhöhte Rate an schweren Blutungen (jeweils +2,4%); insbesondere war hierbei die Zahl GIB deutlich erhöht. Dagegen war für Apixaban die Zahl schwerer Blutungen, wie auch für verschiedene Blutungstypen inkl. GIB, nicht erhöht. In der Apixabanstudie war insgesamt die Rate von schweren GIB, die ca. 50% aller schweren Blutungen ausmachten, und die der klinisch-relevanten nicht schweren Blutungen, am niedrigsten. Die FXa-Inhibitoren sind der Standardtherapie mit Dalteparin in der VTE-Rezidivrate bei onkologischen Patienten nicht unterlegen. Die GIB-Rate scheint ein wichtiger prädiktiver Faktor für die Sicherheit dieser Substanzgruppe zu sein, sodass Tumorlokalisation, gastrointestinale Risikofaktoren und andere individuelle Kriterien in Zukunft stärker bei der Therapieentscheidung für oder gegen einen FXa-Inhibitor berücksichtigt werden sollten.

Management of Cancer-Associated Thrombosis: Unmet Needs and Future Perspectives

Patients with cancer are at a high risk of symptomatic venous thromboembolism (VTE), which is a common cause of morbidity and mortality in this patient population. Increased risk of recurrent VTE and bleeding complications are two major challenges associated with therapeutic anticoagulation in these patients. Long-term therapy with low-molecular-weight heparins (LMWHs) has been the standard of care for the treatment of cancer-associated VTE given its favorable risk–benefit ratio in comparison with vitamin K antagonists. Direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs), which offer the convenience of oral administration and have a rapid onset of action, have recently emerged as a new treatment option for patients with cancer-associated thrombosis (CT). Randomized clinical trial data with head-to-head comparisons between DOACs and LMWHs showed that overall, DOACs have a similar efficacy profile but a higher risk of bleeding was observed in some of these studies. This review aims to identify unmet needs in the treatment of CT. We discuss important considerations for clinicians tailoring anticoagulation (1) drug–drug interactions, (2) risk of bleeding (e.g., gastrointestinal bleeding), (3) thrombocytopenia, hematological malignancies, (4) metastatic or primary brain tumors, and (5) renal impairment. Additional research is warranted in several clinical scenarios to help clinicians on the best therapeutic approach.

Treatment of venous thromboembolism in patients with cancer: from clinical trials to real life

Approximately one-fifth of all cases of venous thromboembolism (VTE) are related to cancer. VTE complications may have a substantial impact on prognosis, quality of life and care in patients with cancer. Patients with cancer-related VTE are at increased risk of developing recurrent VTE compared to patients without cancer, but also have a higher risk of major bleeding. In the last years, direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) have been evaluated in a head-to-head comparison with low molecular weight heparin (LMWH) in two randomized trials for the long-term treatment of VTE in patients with advanced cancer. The results of these trials show that DOACs have a similar efficacy profile, but probably higher risk of bleeding, compared to LMWH dalteparin. Because DOACs offer a simple oral treatment regimen without the need for anticoagulation monitoring, they could be attractive alternatives to LMWHs in these setting. The American Society of Clinical Oncology guidelines, published in August 2019, recommend LMWH, edoxaban and rivaroxaban as first-choice therapies for long-term anticoagulation in cancer patients with VTE. However, several practical issues should be considered concerning the long-term use of DOAC treatment in patients with cancer. Major concerns have been highlighted about the gastrointestinal bleeding risk in patients with gastrointestinal cancers and the potential drug-drug interactions in combination for some specific anticancer therapies. Several studies comparing DOACs with LMWH are currently ongoing to refine our knowledge concerning treatment with DOACs in patients with cancer-associated VTE.

American Society of Hematology 2021 guidelines for management of venous thromboembolism: prevention and treatment in patients with cancer

BACKGROUND

Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is a common complication among patients with cancer. Patients with cancer and VTE are at a markedly increased risk for morbidity and mortality.

OBJECTIVE

These evidence-based guidelines of the American Society of Hematology (ASH) are intended to support patients, clinicians, and other health care professionals in their decisions about the prevention and treatment of VTE in patients with cancer.

METHODS

ASH formed a multidisciplinary guideline panel balanced to minimize potential bias from conflicts of interest. The guideline development process was supported by updated or new systematic evidence reviews. The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) approach was used to assess evidence and make recommendations.

RESULTS

Recommendations address mechanical and pharmacological prophylaxis in hospitalized medical patients with cancer, those undergoing a surgical procedure, and ambulatory patients receiving cancer chemotherapy. The recommendations also address the use of anticoagulation for the initial, short-term, and long-term treatment of VTE in patients with cancer.

CONCLUSIONS

Strong recommendations include not using thromboprophylaxis in ambulatory patients receiving cancer chemotherapy at low risk of VTE and to use low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) for initial treatment of VTE in patients with cancer. Conditional recommendations include using thromboprophylaxis in hospitalized medical patients with cancer, LMWH or fondaparinux for surgical patients with cancer, LMWH or direct oral anticoagulants (DOAC) in ambulatory patients with cancer receiving systemic therapy at high risk of VTE and LMWH or DOAC for initial treatment of VTE, DOAC for the short-term treatment of VTE, and LMWH or DOAC for the long-term treatment of VTE in patients with cancer.

The Prescription of Vitamin K Antagonists in a Very Old Population: A Cross-Sectional Study of 8696 Ambulatory Subjects Aged Over 85 Years

We compared very elderly people taking vitamin K antagonists (VKA) and those not taking VKA (noVKA). Individuals were included in the noVKA group if there was no VKA on their reimbursed prescriptions during the study period. We also compared three subgroups, constituted by VKA type (fluindione, warfarin, or acenocoumarol). We included individuals aged over 85 years, affiliated to Mutualité Sociale Agricole of Burgundy, who were refunded for prescribed VKA in September 2017. The VKA and noVKA groups were compared in terms of demographic conditions, registered chronic diseases (RCD), number of drugs per prescription and cardiovascular medications. The three VKA subgroups were compared for the same items plus laboratory monitoring, novel and refill VKA prescriptions, and prescriber specialty. Of the 8696 included individuals, 1157 (13.30%) were prescribed VKA. Mean age was 90 years. The noVKA group had fewer women (53.67 vs 66.08%), more RCD (93.43 vs. 71.96%) and more drugs per prescription (6.65 vs. 5.18) than the VKA group (all p < 0.01). Except for direct oral anticoagulants and platelet aggregation inhibitors, the VKA group took significantly more cardiovascular medications. The most commonly prescribed VKA was fluindione (59.46%). Mean age was higher in the warfarin (90.42) than in the acenocoumarol (89.83) or fluindione (89.71) subgroups (p < 0.01). No differences were observed for sex (women were predominant) or RCD. 13% of subjects in this population had a VKA prescription. Fluindione was the most commonly prescribed VKA.

Anticoagulation in Deep Venous Thrombosis: Current Trends in the Era of Non- Vitamin K Antagonists Oral Anticoagulants

:

Anticoagulation therapy is the cornerstone of treatment in acute vein thrombosis (DVT) and it aims to reduce symptoms, thrombus extension, DVT recurrences, and mortality. The treatment for DVT depends on its anatomical extent, among other factors. Anticoagulation therapy for proximal DVT is clearly recommended (at least for 3 months), while AT for isolated distal DVT should be considered, especially in the presence of high thromboembolic risk factors. The optimal anticoagulant and duration of therapy are determined by the clinical assessment, taking into account the thromboembolic and bleeding risk in each patient in a case-by-case decision making. Non-Vitamin K antagonists oral anticoagulants (NOACs) were a revolution in the anticoagulation management of DVT. Nowadays, NOACs are considered as first-line therapy in the anticoagulation therapy for DVT and are recommended as the preferred anticoagulant agents by most scientific societies. NOACs offer a simple route of administration (oral agents), a rapid onset-offset of their action along with a good efficacy and safety profile in comparison with Vitamin K Antagonists (VKAs). However, there are issues about their efficacy and safety profile in specific populations with high thromboembolic and bleeding risks, such as renal failure patients, active-cancer patients, and pregnant women, in which VKAs and heparins were the standard care of treatment. Since the available data are promising for the use of NOACs in end-stage chronic kidney disease and cancer patients, several ongoing randomized trials are currently trying to solve that issues and give evidence about the safety and efficacy of NOACs in these populations.

Optimal duration of Vitamin K antagonists anticoagulant therapy after venous thromboembolism: a systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Background

The optimal duration of oral anticoagulant therapy for patients with venous thromboembolism (VTE) remains highly uncertain in clinical practice. It is essential to accurately assess the effect of anticoagulant therapy in reducing recurrent VTE against the risk of inducing major bleeding.

Methods

Randomized controlled trials were identified by searching PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, and the Cochrane library, reporting rates of recurrent VTE and major bleeding in patients taking Vitamin K Antagonists (VKA) with VTE and comparing different durations.

Results

Eleven RCTs with 3109 participants utilizing varied durations were included in the meta-analysis. Longer VKA therapy was associated with significantly lower rates of VTE recurrence compared with shorter duration of VKA therapy (OR 0.75, 95%CI 0.57–0.99), with significant difference noted in major bleeding risk (OR 2.31, 95%CI 1.17–4.56). During anticoagulation duration, patients treated by 6-month VKA had higher risk of major bleeding compared with 3-month VKA regimen (OR 33.45, 95%CI 2.00–559.67).

Conclusions

Regimen longer than 6 months did not show statistical elevation of major bleeding risk. VKA treatment strongly reduces the risk of recurrent VTE during anticoagulation therapy. The absolute risk of recurrent VTE declines over time while the risk for major bleeding after 6 months’ treatment did not demonstrate a continuous significant increase with extended duration of VKA therapy.

Lifestyle and Non-muscle Invasive Bladder Cancer Recurrence, Progression, and Mortality: Available Research and Future Directions

BACKGROUND:

A broad, comprehensive review of studies exploring associations between lifestyle factors and non-muscle invasive bladder cancer (NMIBC) outcomes is warranted to consolidate recommendations and identify gaps in research.

OBJECTIVE:

To summarize the literature on associations between lifestyle factors and clinical outcomes among patients with NMIBC.

METHODS:

PubMed was systematically queried for articles published through March 2019 regarding lifestyle factors and recurrence, progression, cancer-specific mortality, and all-cause mortality among patients with NMIBC.

RESULTS:

Notwithstanding many ambiguities, there is good-quality evidence suggesting a benefit of smoking avoidance/cessation, healthy body mass index (BMI), and type II diabetes mellitus prevention and treatment. Lactobacillus casei probiotic supplementation may reduce recurrence. There have been individual studies suggesting a benefit for uncooked broccoli and supplemental vitamin E as well as avoidance of supplemental vitamin B9, areca nut chewing, and a “Western diet” pattern high in fried foods and red meat. Additional studies do not suggest associations between NMIBC outcomes and use of fibrin clot inhibitors; insulin and other oral hypoglycemics; statins; supplemental selenium, vitamin A, vitamin C, and vitamin B6; fluid intake and intake of specific beverages (e.g., alcohol, coffee, green tea, cola); various dietary patterns (e.g., Tex-Mex, high fruit and vegetable, low-fat); and occupational and chemical exposures.

CONCLUSIONS:

Despite a myriad of publications on lifestyle factors and NMIBC, a need remains for research on unexplored associations (e.g., physical activity) and further studies that can elucidate causal effects. This would inform future implementation strategies for healthy lifestyle change in NMIBC patients.

Discretionary Thrombophilia Test Acquisition and Outcomes in Patients With Venous Thromboembolism in a Real-World Clinical Setting

Background The value of thrombophilia test acquisition in improving risk prediction beyond clinical presentation remains unknown. We investigated the effect of thrombophilia test acquisition on venous thromboembolism (VTE) outcomes. Methods and Results We performed a retrospective cohort study of adult patients over a 15-year period (September 2001 and May 2016) with first diagnosis of VTE in a single academic medical center. Participants were identified by International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision (ICD-9), Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) codes and medication history. Participants with thrombophilia testing were matched to control participants without thrombophilia testing using a propensity model. Primary outcomes included recurrent VTE, anticoagulant use 12 months after the index VTE event, bleeding-related hospitalization, and death. From 3590 unique patients who met the inclusion criteria, 747 participants with VTE who underwent thrombophilia testing were matched to a control participant without testing. Tested participants were more likely to have a recurrent event (46.1% versus 28.5%; P<0.001) and an anticoagulant prescription 12 months from the index event (53.9% versus 37.1%; P<0.001) but had no significant difference in bleeding-related hospitalization (11.4% versus 11.8%; P=0.81) compared with untested participants. An abnormal thrombophilia test result, per se, did not predict recurrent VTE (47.8% versus 44.1%; P=0.13), longer duration anticoagulation (53.2% versus 54.8%; P=0.51), bleeding (11.5% versus 11.3%; P=0.70), or mortality (12.2% versus 16.1%; P=0.18) compared with participants who had normal test results. Conclusions The decision to perform thrombophilia testing, but not the test result, is associated with a high risk of recurrent VTE despite a greater likelihood of long-duration anticoagulation.

Extreme Elevation of the Prothrombin Time-International Normalized Ratio due to a Probable Interaction between Warfarin and Flutamide

Flutamide, a chemotherapeutic agent for prostate cancer, is known to enhance warfarin anticoagulation. However, not much is known about its pharmaceutical interaction. We herein report the case of a patient with an implanted pacemaker for atrial fibrillation with bradycardia who was on warfarin. This patient presented with deterioration of hematuria, gingival, ear, and subcutaneous bleeding. The prothrombin time-international normalized ratio was extremely elevated after starting flutamide to treat progression of prostate cancer. Fatal bleeding complications were able to be prevented by the immediate administration of prothrombin complex concentrate, but the effect of flutamide on warfarin was prolonged for about two more weeks after the withdrawal of flutamide.

Efficacy and Safety of Direct Oral Anticoagulants for Secondary Prevention of Cancer-Associated Thrombosis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials and Prospective Cohort Studies

Background: Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is a common complication in patients with cancer. Direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) have been proved to be effective on anticoagulation therapy in many diseases. However, the efficacy and the safety of DOACs in the secondary prevention of cancer-associated thrombosis (CAT) remain unclear. To assess the value of DOACs in patients with CAT, we performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials and prospective cohort studies. Methods: Medline, Embase, and the Cochrane Library were searched from their earliest date through to June 2018. Two investigators independently assessed eligibility. Data were extracted by one investigator and verified by the second investigator. The efficacy outcome of this study was recurrent VTE, whereas the safety outcome was major and clinically relevant nonmajor bleeding. Relative risks (RRs) and their corresponding 95% confidence interval (CI) were determined. To pool the results, the Mantel-Haenszel fixed-effects or random-effects models were used. Results: A total of nine articles (six randomized controlled trials and three prospective studies) involving 2,697 patients with CAT who were prescribed DOACs (apixaban, edoxaban, rivaroxaban, or dabigatran) and 2,852 patients who were prescribed traditional anticoagulants [vitamin K antagonists (VKAs), low molecular weight heparin (LMWH), dalteparin, or enoxaparin] were compared. VTE recurrence in the DOAC group was significantly lower than that observed in the traditional anticoagulant group (RR: 0.60; 95%CI: 0.49-0.75; I 2: 0%; p < 0.00001). No significant difference in bleeding risk between both groups was found (RR: 0.95; 95%CI: 0.67-1.36; I 2: 75%; p = 0.79). Conclusions: Our findings showed that anticoagulant therapy with DOACs may be more effective than traditional anticoagulants to prevent recurrent VTE in patients with CAT, while the safety of DOACs may be equal to that of traditional anticoagulants. These findings support the use of DOACs as the first-line therapy for secondary prevention of CAT in most cancer patients.

Simultaneous multiple organ emboli in a patient with solid organ malignancy: a case report

Background

Thrombosis is a dangerous complication of cancer. At least 20% of cancer patients are diagnosed with a venous thrombotic event and 1% with an intra-arterial thrombotic event. Here, we present a patient that developed separate thrombi that occurred simultaneously in both the venous and arterial circulation.

Case summary

An 80-year-old woman with a history of recently diagnosed squamous cell lung cancer presented to our institution with an out of hospital cardiac arrest. On arrival, she was found to have an inferior ST-elevation myocardial infarction on electrocardiogram and on examination was found to have right-sided neurological deficits. Computed tomography head and aortogram showed an acute ischaemic stroke and bilateral segmental pulmonary emboli. Coronary angiogram showed thrombotic occlusion distal to the right coronary artery, and the patient underwent aspiration thrombectomy with thrombolysis in myocardial infarction 3 flow established at the end of the procedure. The patient was then transferred to interventional radiology where she had successful clot retrieval of the cerebral thrombus. The patient progressed well and had full neurological recovery 72 h post-presentation. Subsequent transoesophageal echocardiography showed no evidence of a patent foramen ovale or other intracardiac shunt. The patient was prescribed long-term anticoagulant with Clexane.

Discussion

There was suspicion for a deep vein thrombosis with subsequent embolization to the lungs and paradoxical embolization through an intracardiac shunt. However, no such defect was detected and it appears that the patient did develop thrombi in the arterial and venous system separately. This case highlights the prothrombotic state of malignancy, with the patient suffering from multiple separate life-threatening thrombi.

[Modern treatment of deep vein thrombosis and pulmonary embolism]

Virchow's triad has been known for a 100 years. The development of therapeutic possibilities during this time was enormous. Today anticoagulant therapy is much more differentiated. Four new oral substances have replaced the traditional treatment with vitamin K antagonists in angiology. A standardized dosage is available. The monitoring of the coagulation parameters is no longer necessary, but it is important to monitor renal function. Direct oral anticoagulants are approved for the treatment of venous thrombosis and pulmonary embolism, but not during pregnancy or in children. Severe bleeding complications, especially intracerebral bleeding, are less common. The incidence of venous thromboembolism is still high. Obesity and cancer are of particular importance. The "therapeutic pact" with the patient requires that physicians master the art of "talking medicine".

Treatment and Prevention of Cancer-Associated Thrombosis in Frail Patients: Tailored Management

Advanced age is one of the major determinants of frailty in patients with cancer-associated thrombosis. However, multiple other factors contribute to frailty in these patients. The identification of frailty in patients with cancer-associated thrombosis is critical as it influences the complexity of the anticoagulant treatment in this population at high risk of venous thromboembolism and bleeding. Factors that contribute to frailty in patients with cancer-associated thrombosis include age, type of cancer, comorbidities such as chronic kidney disease, poly-pharmacotherapy, treatment compliance, cognitive impairment, anemia, thrombocytopenia, mobility, nutritional status, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group grade, risk of falls, and reduced life expectancy. In the absence of specific clinical studies current anticoagulant treatment guidelines for the management are not fully applicable to frail patients with cancer. The anticoagulant treatment should therefore benefit from a tailored approach based on an algorithm that takes into account the specificities of the malignant disease.

Impact of anticoagulant choice on hospitalized bleeding risk when treating cancer-associated venous thromboembolism

Essentials Bleeding risk by anticoagulant choice for cancer-associated venous thrombosis (CA-VTE) is unknown. 26 894 people with CA-VTE were followed for bleeding in a claims database in the United States. Hospitalized bleeding risk was similar with direct acting oral anticoagulants vs. warfarin. Relative hospitalized bleeding risk varied by cancer type and anticoagulant choice. SUMMARY: Background Direct acting oral anticoagulants (DOACs) are associated with less bleeding than traditional venous thromboembolism (VTE) treatments in the general population but are little studied in cancer-associated VTE (CA-VTE). Objective To determine whether different anticoagulation strategies for CA-VTE have different hospitalized bleeding rates. Patients/Methods We conducted a retrospective study of patients with CA-VTE, diagnosed between 2011 and 2015, in a large administrative database. Using validated algorithms, we identified 26 894 CA-VTE patients treated with anticoagulants and followed them for hospitalized severe bleeding. Cox models were used to assess bleeding risk, adjusted for age, sex, high dimensional propensity score and frailty. Results Over 27 281 person-years of follow-up (median 0.6 years), 1204 bleeding events occurred, for a bleeding rate of 4.4% per patient-year. Bleeding rates varied by cancer type, with the highest rate for upper gastrointestinal cancers (8.6%) and the lowest for breast cancer (2.9%). In Cox models (hazard ratio [HR]; 95% confidence interval [CI]), compared with warfarin, DOACS and low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) had similar hazards of bleeding (HR, 0.88; 95% CI, 0.69-1.11 and 0.98; 0.85-1.13). Compared with LMWH, there was no difference in hazard of bleeding with DOACs (0.86; 0.66-1.12). There was heterogeneity in bleeding risk with DOACs by cancer type, with a higher risk of bleeding in upper gastrointestinal cancers and lower risk of bleeding in prostate cancer and hematologic cancers. Conclusions In this practice-based sample of CA-VTE patients, DOACs were associated with similar bleeding risks to warfarin and LMWH. These findings suggest a complex association of bleeding risk with anticoagulant choice in cancer patients.

Anticoagulation for the long-term treatment of venous thromboembolism in people with cancer

BACKGROUND

Cancer increases the risk of thromboembolic events, especially in people receiving anticoagulation treatments.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the efficacy and safety of low molecular weight heparins (LMWHs), direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) and vitamin K antagonists (VKAs) for the long-term treatment of venous thromboembolism (VTE) in people with cancer.

SEARCH METHODS

We conducted a literature search including a major electronic search of the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL; 2016, Issue 1), MEDLINE (Ovid), and Embase (Ovid); handsearching conference proceedings; checking references of included studies; use of the 'related citation' feature in PubMed and a search for ongoing studies in trial registries. As part of the living systematic review approach, we run searches continually, incorporating new evidence after it is identified. Last search date 14 May 2018.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) assessing the benefits and harms of long-term treatment with LMWHs, DOACs or VKAs in people with cancer and symptomatic VTE.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We extracted data in duplicate on study characteristics and risk of bias. Outcomes included: all-cause mortality, recurrent VTE, major bleeding, minor bleeding, thrombocytopenia, and health-related quality of life (QoL). We assessed the certainty of the evidence at the outcome level following the GRADE approach (GRADE handbook).

MAIN RESULTS

Of 15,785 citations, including 7602 unique citations, 16 RCTs fulfilled the eligibility criteria. These trials enrolled 5167 people with cancer and VTE.Low molecular weight heparins versus vitamin K antagonistsEight studies enrolling 2327 participants compared LMWHs with VKAs. Meta-analysis of five studies probably did not rule out a beneficial or harmful effect of LMWHs compared to VKAs on mortality up to 12 months of follow-up (risk ratio (RR) 1.00, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.88 to 1.13; risk difference (RD) 0 fewer per 1000, 95% CI 45 fewer to 48 more; moderate-certainty evidence). Meta-analysis of four studies did not rule out a beneficial or harmful effect of LMWHs compared to VKAs on major bleeding (RR 1.09, 95% CI 0.55 to 2.12; RD 4 more per 1000, 95% CI 19 fewer to 48 more, moderate-certainty evidence) or minor bleeding (RR 0.78, 95% CI 0.47 to 1.27; RD 38 fewer per 1000, 95% CI 92 fewer to 47 more; low-certainty evidence), or thrombocytopenia (RR 0.94, 95% CI 0.52 to 1.69). Meta-analysis of five studies showed that LMWHs probably reduced the recurrence of VTE compared to VKAs (RR 0.58, 95% CI 0.43 to 0.77; RD 53 fewer per 1000, 95% CI 29 fewer to 72 fewer, moderate-certainty evidence).Direct oral anticoagulants versus vitamin K antagonistsFive studies enrolling 982 participants compared DOACs with VKAs. Meta-analysis of four studies may not rule out a beneficial or harmful effect of DOACs compared to VKAs on mortality (RR 0.93, 95% CI 0.71 to 1.21; RD 12 fewer per 1000, 95% CI 51 fewer to 37 more; low-certainty evidence), recurrent VTE (RR 0.66, 95% CI 0.33 to 1.31; RD 14 fewer per 1000, 95% CI 27 fewer to 12 more; low-certainty evidence), major bleeding (RR 0.77, 95% CI 0.38 to 1.57, RD 8 fewer per 1000, 95% CI 22 fewer to 20 more; low-certainty evidence), or minor bleeding (RR 0.84, 95% CI 0.58 to 1.22; RD 21 fewer per 1000, 95% CI 54 fewer to 28 more; low-certainty evidence). One study reporting on DOAC versus VKA was published as abstract so is not included in the main analysis.Direct oral anticoagulants versus low molecular weight heparinsTwo studies enrolling 1455 participants compared DOAC with LMWH. The study by Raskob did not rule out a beneficial or harmful effect of DOACs compared to LMWH on mortality up to 12 months of follow-up (RR 1.07, 95% CI 0.92 to 1.25; RD 27 more per 1000, 95% CI 30 fewer to 95 more; low-certainty evidence). The data also showed that DOACs may have shown a likely reduction in VTE recurrence up to 12 months of follow-up compared to LMWH (RR 0.69, 95% CI 0.47 to 1.01; RD 36 fewer per 1000, 95% CI 62 fewer to 1 more; low-certainty evidence). DOAC may have increased major bleeding at 12 months of follow-up compared to LMWH (RR 1.71, 95% CI 1.01 to 2.88; RD 29 more per 1000, 95% CI 0 fewer to 78 more; low-certainty evidence) and likely increased minor bleeding up to 12 months of follow-up compared to LMWH (RR 1.31, 95% CI 0.95 to 1.80; RD 35 more per 1000, 95% CI 6 fewer to 92 more; low-certainty evidence). The second study on DOAC versus LMWH was published as an abstract and is not included in the main analysis.Idraparinux versus vitamin K antagonistsOne RCT with 284 participants compared once-weekly subcutaneous injection of idraparinux versus standard treatment (parenteral anticoagulation followed by warfarin or acenocoumarol) for three or six months. The data probably did not rule out a beneficial or harmful effect of idraparinux compared to VKAs on mortality at six months (RR 1.11, 95% CI 0.78 to 1.59; RD 31 more per 1000, 95% CI 62 fewer to 167 more; moderate-certainty evidence), VTE recurrence at six months (RR 0.46, 95% CI 0.16 to 1.32; RD 42 fewer per 1000, 95% CI 65 fewer to 25 more; low-certainty evidence) or major bleeding (RR 1.11, 95% CI 0.35 to 3.56; RD 4 more per 1000, 95% CI 25 fewer to 98 more; low-certainty evidence).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

For the long-term treatment of VTE in people with cancer, evidence shows that LMWHs compared to VKAs probably produces an important reduction in VTE and DOACs compared to LMWH, may likely reduce VTE but may increase risk of major bleeding. Decisions for a person with cancer and VTE to start long-term LMWHs versus oral anticoagulation should balance benefits and harms and integrate the person's values and preferences for the important outcomes and alternative management strategies.Editorial note: this is a living systematic review (LSR). LSRs offer new approaches to review updating in which the review is continually updated, incorporating relevant new evidence as it becomes available. Please refer to the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews for the current status of this review.

Diagnosis, Treatment, and Prevention of Cardiovascular Toxicity Related to Anti-Cancer Treatment in Clinical Practice: An Opinion Paper from the Working Group on Cardio-Oncology of the Korean Society of Echocardiography

Cardiovascular (CV) toxicity associated with anti-cancer treatment is commonly encountered and raises critical problems that often result in serious morbidity or mortality. Most cardiac toxicities are related to the cumulative dose of chemotherapy; however, the type of chemotherapy, concomitant agents, and/or conventional CV risk factors have been frequently implicated in CV toxicity. Approximately half of the patients exhibiting CV toxicity receive an anthracycline-based regimen. Therefore, serologic biomarkers or cardiac imagings are important during anti-cancer treatment for early detection and the decision of appropriate management of cardiotoxicity. However, given the difficulty in determining a causal relationship, a multidisciplinary collaborative approach between cardiologists and oncologists is required. In this review, we summarize the CV toxicity and focus on the role of cardiac imaging in management strategies for cardiotoxicity associated with anti-cancer treatment.

Higher Adherence to Treatment With Low-Molecular-Weight-Heparin Nadroparin Than Enoxaparin Because of Side Effects in Cancer-Associated Venous Thromboembolism

Current guidelines recommend low-molecular-weight-heparins (LMWH) monotherapy for 3 to 6 months as first-line treatment for cancer-associated venous thromboembolism (VTE). In clinical practice, enoxaparin and nadroparin are common agents used. However, differences in therapy adherence between these LMWHs have never been reported. Therefore, our aim was to compare adherence to enoxaparin and nadroparin in patients with cancer-associated VTE. Consecutive patients with active cancer and objectively confirmed VTE, treated at a Dutch or a Spanish hospital, were followed during LMWH therapy with a maximum of 180 days. Cumulative incidences of discontinuation of both LMWHs were estimated and compared according to the Kaplan-Meier method, applying a competing risk analysis to correct for mortality. A total of 366 patients were analyzed during LMWH treatment, of whom 284 patients (78%) were treated with enoxaparin and 82 (22%) with nadroparin. The cumulative incidence of discontinuation of enoxaparin and nadroparin treatment because of side effects was 30% (95% confidence interval [CI] 24–36) and 8.8% (95% CI 1.1–15), respectively. Competing risk analysis revealed a higher number of patients discontinuing enoxaparin due to side effects (adjusted hazard ratio [HR]: 2.8; 95% CI 1.06–7.2). Pain at the injection site was the most common reason of discontinuation in patients using enoxaparin, occurring in 32 patients, while it occurred in 1 patient using nadroparin (adjusted HR: 4.0; 95% CI 0.52–31). This analysis reveals that enoxaparin was associated with a higher risk of discontinuation because of side effects compared to nadroparin. However, given the nature of the patient groups, these findings should be followed by future studies.

Parenteral anticoagulation in ambulatory patients with cancer

BACKGROUND

Anticoagulation may improve survival in patients with cancer through a speculated anti-tumour effect, in addition to the antithrombotic effect, although may increase the risk of bleeding.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the efficacy and safety of parenteral anticoagulants in ambulatory patients with cancer who, typically, are undergoing chemotherapy, hormonal therapy, immunotherapy or radiotherapy, but otherwise have no standard therapeutic or prophylactic indication for anticoagulation.

SEARCH METHODS

A comprehensive search included (1) a major electronic search (February 2016) of the following databases: Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (2016, Issue 1), MEDLINE (1946 to February 2016; accessed via OVID) and Embase (1980 to February 2016; accessed via OVID); (2) handsearching of conference proceedings; (3) checking of references of included studies; (4) use of the 'related citation' feature in PubMed and (5) a search for ongoing studies in trial registries. As part of the living systematic review approach, we are running searches continually and we will incorporate new evidence rapidly after it is identified. This update of the systematic review is based on the findings of a literature search conducted on 14 August, 2017.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) assessing the benefits and harms of parenteral anticoagulation in ambulatory patients with cancer. Typically, these patients are undergoing chemotherapy, hormonal therapy, immunotherapy or radiotherapy, but otherwise have no standard therapeutic or prophylactic indication for anticoagulation.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Using a standardized form we extracted data in duplicate on study design, participants, interventions outcomes of interest, and risk of bias. Outcomes of interested included all-cause mortality, symptomatic venous thromboembolism (VTE), symptomatic deep vein thrombosis (DVT), pulmonary embolism (PE), major bleeding, minor bleeding, and quality of life. We assessed the certainty of evidence for each outcome using the GRADE approach (GRADE handbook).

MAIN RESULTS

Of 6947 identified citations, 18 RCTs fulfilled the eligibility criteria. These trials enrolled 9575 participants. Trial registries' searches identified nine registered but unpublished trials, two of which were labeled as 'ongoing trials'. In all included RCTs, the intervention consisted of heparin (either unfractionated heparin or low molecular weight heparin). Overall, heparin appears to have no effect on mortality at 12 months (risk ratio (RR) 0.98; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.93 to 1.03; risk difference (RD) 10 fewer per 1000; 95% CI 35 fewer to 15 more; moderate certainty of evidence) and mortality at 24 months (RR 0.99; 95% CI 0.96 to 1.01; RD 8 fewer per 1000; 95% CI 31 fewer to 8 more; moderate certainty of evidence). Heparin therapy reduces the risk of symptomatic VTE (RR 0.56; 95% CI 0.47 to 0.68; RD 30 fewer per 1000; 95% CI 36 fewer to 22 fewer; high certainty of evidence), while it increases in the risks of major bleeding (RR 1.30; 95% 0.94 to 1.79; RD 4 more per 1000; 95% CI 1 fewer to 11 more; moderate certainty of evidence) and minor bleeding (RR 1.70; 95% 1.13 to 2.55; RD 17 more per 1000; 95% CI 3 more to 37 more; high certainty of evidence). Results failed to confirm or to exclude a beneficial or detrimental effect of heparin on thrombocytopenia (RR 0.69; 95% CI 0.37 to 1.27; RD 33 fewer per 1000; 95% CI 66 fewer to 28 more; moderate certainty of evidence); quality of life (moderate certainty of evidence).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Heparin appears to have no effect on mortality at 12 months and 24 months. It reduces symptomatic VTE and likely increases major and minor bleeding. Future research should further investigate the survival benefit of different types of anticoagulants in patients with different types and stages of cancer. The decision for a patient with cancer to start heparin therapy should balance the benefits and downsides, and should integrate the patient's values and preferences.Editorial note:This is a living systematic review. Living systematic reviews offer a new approach to review updating in which the review is continually updated, incorporating relevant new evidence, as it becomes available. Please refer to the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews for the current status of this review.

Vitamin K antagonists versus low-molecular-weight heparin for the long term treatment of symptomatic venous thromboembolism

BACKGROUND

People with venous thromboembolism (VTE) generally are treated for five days with intravenous unfractionated heparin or subcutaneous low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH), followed by three months of vitamin K antagonists (VKAs). Treatment with VKAs requires regular laboratory measurements and carries risk of bleeding; some patients have contraindications to such treatment. Treatment with LMWH has been proposed to minimise the risk of bleeding complications. This is the second update of a review first published in 2001.

OBJECTIVES

The purpose of this review was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of long term treatment (three months) with LMWH versus long term treatment (three months) with VKAs for symptomatic VTE.

SEARCH METHODS

For this update, the Cochrane Vascular Information Specialist searched the Specialised Register (last searched November 2016) and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL; 2016, Issue 10), The Cochrane Vascular Information Specialistalso searched clinical trials registries for ongoing studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials comparing LMWH versus VKA for long treatment (three months) of symptomatic VTE. Two review authors independently evaluated trials for inclusion and methodological quality.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Review authors independently extracted data and assessed risk of bias. We resolved disagreements by discussion and performed meta-analysis using fixed-effect models with Peto odds ratios (Peto ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Outcomes of interest were recurrent VTE, major bleeding, and mortality. We used GRADE to assess the overall quality of evidence supporting these outcomes.

MAIN RESULTS

Sixteen trials, with a combined total of 3299 participants fulfilled our inclusion criteria. According to GRADE, the quality of evidence was moderate for recurrent VTE, low for major bleeding, and moderate for mortality. We downgraded the quality of the evidence for imprecision (recurrent VTE, mortality) and for risk of bias and inconsistency (major bleeding).We found no clear differences in recurrent VTE between LMWH and VKA (Peto OR 0.83, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.60 to 1.15; P = 0.27; 3299 participants; 16 studies; moderate-quality evidence). We found less bleeding with LMWH than with VKA (Peto OR 0.51, 95% CI 0.32 to 0.80; P = 0.004; 3299 participants; 16 studies; low-quality evidence). However, when comparing only high-quality studies for bleeding, we observed no clear differences between LMWH and VKA (Peto OR 0.62, 95% CI 0.36 to 1.07; P = 0.08; 1872 participants; seven studies). We found no clear differences between LMWH and VKA in terms of mortality (Peto OR 1.08, 95% CI 0.75 to 1.56; P = 0.68; 3299 participants; 16 studies; moderate-quality evidence).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Moderate-quality evidence shows no clear differences between LMWH and VKA in preventing symptomatic VTE and death after an episode of symptomatic DVT. Low-quality evidence suggests fewer cases of major bleeding with LMWH than with VKA. However, comparison of only high-quality studies for bleeding shows no clear differences between LMWH and VKA. LMWH may represent an alternative for some patients, for example, those residing in geographically inaccessible areas, those who are unable or reluctant to visit the thrombosis service regularly, and those with contraindications to VKA.

Key points to optimizing management and research on cancer-associated thrombosis

Despite the fact that thromboembolism is relatively common in oncology patients and that the interrelationship between thrombotic risk and specific mechanisms of tumorigenesis has long been known, many cardinal elements of prevention and treatment remain unresolved. Among the existing knowledge gaps, the need to validate the Ay scale and compare it to the Khorana index, develop, and standardize the use of predictive biomarkers for thrombotic risk, conduct clinical trials in thromboprophylaxis adapted to thrombotic risk, evaluate the efficacy and safety of direct anticoagulants, select patients who can benefit from anticoagulants for antitumor treatment, validate the EPIPHANY study decision tree to choose patients with low-risk pulmonary embolism, and accumulate more practical experience in special situations (rethrombosis, prolonged therapy beyond 6 months, etc.) are especially remarkable. These gray areas surrounding cancer-related thromboembolism explain why it continues to be a relatively common cause of serious events, at times interfering significantly with the development of new tumor-fighting strategies.

Potential and Limitations of Cochrane Reviews in Pediatric Cardiology: A Systematic Analysis

Evidence-based medicine has contributed substantially to the quality of medical care in pediatric and adult cardiology. However, our impression from the bedside is that a substantial number of Cochrane reviews generate inconclusive data that are of limited clinical benefit. We performed a systematic synopsis of Cochrane reviews published between 2001 and 2015 in the field of pediatric cardiology. Main outcome parameters were the number and percentage of conclusive, partly conclusive, and inconclusive reviews as well as their recommendations and their development over three a priori defined intervals. In total, 69 reviews were analyzed. Most of them examined preterm and term neonates (36.2%), whereas 33.3% included also non-pediatric patients. Leading topics were pharmacological issues (71.0%) followed by interventional (10.1%) and operative procedures (2.9%). The majority of reviews were inconclusive (42.9%), while 36.2% were conclusive and 21.7% partly conclusive. Although the number of published reviews increased during the three a priori defined time intervals, reviews with "no specific recommendations" remained stable while "recommendations in favor of an intervention" clearly increased. Main reasons for missing recommendations were insufficient data (n = 41) as well as an insufficient number of trials (n = 22) or poor study quality (n = 19). There is still need for high-quality research, which will likely yield a greater number of Cochrane reviews with conclusive results.

Tinzaparin for Long-Term Treatment of Venous Thromboembolism in Patients With Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Patients with cancer are at increased risk of recurrent venous thromboembolism (VTE) and bleeding. Thus, long-term treatment with anticoagulants for secondary prevention is challenging. The objective of this review was to evaluate current evidence on the safety and efficacy of tinzaparin compared with other anticoagulants for long-term VTE treatment in patients with cancer. Based on a preregistered protocol, we identified randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing long-term tinzaparin (therapeutic dose: 175 IU/kg) versus other anticoagulants for at least 3 months after an acute episode of VTE that included adult patients with underlying malignancy. We extracted predefined, clinically relevant outcomes of patients with cancer and, using standard methodology, pooled available data and assessed risk of bias and quality of evidence for each study. Three open-label RCTs evaluating 1169 patients with cancer were included in the analysis. Tinzaparin was associated with a significantly lower risk of recurrent VTE at the end of treatment (relative risk [RR], [95% confidence interval] 0.67 [0.46-0.99]) and at longest follow-up (RR: 0.58 [0.39-0.88]) and showed a lower risk of clinically relevant non-major bleeding at the end of treatment (RR: 0.71 [0.51-1.00]). No significant between-treatment differences were found for all-cause mortality (RR: 1.09 [0.91-1.30]) or fatal and non-fatal major bleeding events (RR: 1.06 [0.56-1.99]). The overall quality of evidence was deemed moderate, mainly due to small sample size in 2 of the studies and limited number of events in the meta-analyses. In conclusion, both short- and long-term treatments with tinzaparin were found to be superior to vitamin K antagonists for avoiding recurrences of VTE.

FOTROCAN Delphi consensus statement regarding the prevention and treatment of cancer-associated thrombosis in areas of uncertainty and low quality of evidence

INTRODUCTION

Decision-making in cancer-related venous thromboembolism (VTE) is often founded on scant lines of evidence and weak recommendations. The aim of this work is to evaluate the percentage of agreement surrounding a series of statements about complex, clinically relevant, and highly uncertain aspects to formulate explicit action guidelines.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Opinions were based on a structured questionnaire with appropriate scores and were agreed upon using a Delphi method. Questions were selected based on a list of recommendations with low evidence from the Spanish Society of Oncology Clinical Guideline for Thrombosis. The questionnaire was completed in two iterations by a multidisciplinary panel of experts in thrombosis.

RESULTS

Of the 123 statements analyzed, the panel concurred on 22 (17%) and another 81 (65%) were agreed on by qualified majority, including important aspects of long-term and prolonged anticoagulation, major bleeding and rethrombosis management, treatment in special situations, catheter-related thrombosis and thromboprophylaxis. Among them, the panelists agreed the incidental events should be equated to symptomatic ones, long-term and extended use of full-dose low-molecular weight heparin, and concluded that the Khorana score is not sensitive enough to uphold an effective thromboprophylaxis strategy.

CONCLUSION

Though the level of consensus varied depending on the scenario presented, overall, the iterative process achieved broad agreement as to the general treatment principles of cancer-associated VTE. Clinical validation of these statements in genuine practice conditions would be useful.

Hypercoagulability and Mortality of Patients with Stroke and Active Cancer: The OASIS-CANCER Study

Background and Purpose

Patients with active cancer are at an increased risk for stroke. Hypercoagulability plays an important role in cancer-related stroke. We aimed to test whether 1) hypercoagulability is a predictor of survival, and 2) correction of the hypercoagulable state leads to better survival in patients with stroke and active cancer.

Methods

We recruited consecutive patients with acute ischemic stroke and active systemic cancer between January 2006 and July 2015. Hypercoagulability was assessed using plasma D-dimer levels before and after 7 days of anticoagulation treatment. The study outcomes included overall and 1-year survival. Plasma D-dimer levels before and after treatment were tested in univariate and multivariate Cox regression models. We controlled for systemic metastasis, stroke mechanism, age, stroke severity, primary cancer type, histology, and atrial fibrillation using the forward stepwise method.

Results

A total of 268 patients were included in the analysis. Patients with high (3rd–4th quartiles) pre-treatment plasma D-dimer levels showed decreased overall and 1-year survival (adjusted HR, 2.19 [95% CI, 1.46–3.31] and 2.70 [1.68–4.35], respectively). After anticoagulation treatment, post-treatment D-dimer level was significantly reduced and independently associated with poor 1-year survival (adjusted HR, 1.03 [95% CI, 1.01–1.05] per 1 μg/mL increase, P=0.015). The successful correction of hypercoagulability was a protective factor for 1-year survival (adjusted HR 0.26 [CI 0.10–0.68], P=0.006).

Conclusions

Hypercoagulability is associated with poor survival after stroke in patients with active cancer. Effective correction of hypercoagulability may play a protective role for survival in these patients.

[Summary of the ESC position paper on cancer treatment and cardiovascular toxicity]

The numbers of survivors of cancer have increased as a consequence of advances in chemotherapy; however, the side effects of cancer treatment have become increasingly more important. The most frequent side effects include cardiovascular complications, which can lead to acute and delayed morbidity and mortality, often many years later. The discipline of cardio-oncology deals with the prevention, diagnostics and treatment of cardiovascular diseases caused by cancer therapy. The most important cardiovascular side effects of cytostatic therapy are heart failure due to myocardial dysfunction (cardiotoxicity), coronary artery disease, valvular disease and ventricular arrhythmia as a result of QT extension. In addition, arterial hypertension, thromboembolic events, pulmonary hypertension, vasculopathy and pericardial complications can also occur. Fundamentally, a strict limitation of risk factors is necessary to minimize the cardiovascular side effects of potentially cardiotoxic therapeutic procedures. Patients with impaired left ventricular function should be identified by echocardiographic examination prior to cardiotoxic chemotherapy. Treatment with beta blockers and angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors can also be indicated in asymptomatic patients in order to minimize the effects of chemotherapy on myocardial dysfunction. Prophylactic administration of ACE inhibitors and beta blockers during anthracycline chemotherapy can be considered in patients free of cardiac disease.

Venous thromboembolism treatment outcomes in cancer patients and effect of third-party payers on anticoagulant choice

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study is to compare the rates of recurrent VTE among cancer patients treated with parenteral agents to the oral anticoagulants.

METHODS

This single-center study was a retrospective chart review of cancer patients with recurrent VTE between January 1, 2009 and December 31, 2014. The primary outcome of the study is the rate of recurrent VTE in patients who received a parenteral anticoagulant (enoxaparin, dalteparin, fondaparinux) versus those who received oral anticoagulants (warfarin and rivaroxaban). Other outcomes investigated include risk factors associated with recurrent VTE events and influence of third-party payer on anticoagulant selection.

RESULTS

Four hundred fifty-seven patients met inclusion criteria (178 in the oral anticoagulant group and 279 in the parenteral anticoagulant group). Patients with Medicare were more likely to have received an oral anticoagulant (P = 0.003) and patients with private insurance were more likely to have received a parenteral anticoagulant (P = 0.004). There were 23 recurrent VTE events, 12 events (6.7 %) in the oral anticoagulant group and 11 events (3.94 %) in the parenteral group (P = 0.182). The only significant risk factor noted to increase risk of recurrent VTE was the presence of an IVC filter (adjusted OR 4.38, 95 % CI 1.67-11.53, P = 0.003).

CONCLUSIONS

While there is no statistical difference in VTE events between groups, the oral anticoagulant group numerically had a higher rate. Important associations were found to have an influence on anticoagulant selection and risk of recurrent VTE. These factors must be incorporated into decision making when treating cancer patients with VTE.

Rivaroxaban: An Affordable and Effective Alternative in Cancer-Related Thrombosis?

Background

Venous thromboembolic events (VTEs) are common and potentially fatal complications in cancer patients, and they are responsible for the second most common cause of death. Low molecular weight heparin (LMWH) is the gold-standard treatment, but the costs involved limit its use, especially in developing countries. Recently, the oral anticoagulant rivaroxaban, which directly inhibits factor Xa, was approved for VTE treatment.

Methods

We conducted a retrospective analysis from January 2009 to February 2014 with patients who had cancer and VTE who were receiving rivaroxaban. We compared the efficacy, safety, and cost of rivaroxaban and low molecular weight heparin (LMWH) alone or followed by vitamin K antagonists.

Results

Forty-one patients were identified, with a median age of 62.5 years. The most frequent tumor histology was adenocarcinoma (78%), which was most often found in the colon (26.8%). Most participants had advanced disease and an implanted central venous catheter. Patients’ VTE risk-assessment scores were low (12.5%), intermediate (50%), and high (35.5%). Pulmonary thromboembolism was reported in 41.4% of patients, but inferior limb thrombosis was reported only in 14.6%; 43.9% of patients received enoxaparin before starting rivaroxaban. Rivaroxaban was used for a median time of 5.5 months. Nonmajor bleeding was reported in 12.2% of patients, and rethrombosis was reported in 12.2%. In our study, rivaroxaban was as safe and effective as enoxaparin/vitamin K antagonists (P = .54 and P = .25, respectively) or LMWH (P = .46 and P = .29, respectively).

Conclusion

Although our study was a retrospective analysis, our results suggest that in this cohort of oncologic patients, rivaroxaban was safe and effective. Its oral route and lower cost make it an attractive alternative to LMWH, improving management of patients with cancer in low-income countries. Additional studies are necessary to confirm our data.

Novel Oral Anticoagulants for Venous Thromboembolism with Special Emphasis on Risk of Hemorrhagic Complications and Reversal Agents

Warfarin was the only oral anticoagulant available for the treatment of venous thromboembolism for about half a century until the recent approval of novel oral agents dabigatran, rivoraxaban and apixaban. This presents new classes of medications less cumbersome to use. They do not require frequent laboratory monitoring or have nurmerous drug interactions. On the other hand it also poses a challenge to the physicians deciding which agent to use in specific patient populations, how to predict the bleeding risk compared to warfarin and between the different novel agents and how to manage bleeding with relatively recent discovery of few potential antidotes. This review summarizes the major trials that led to the approval of these agents and their exclusion criteria helping physicians understand which patient types might not benefit from these agents. It provides clinical pearls invaluable in everyday practice such as transitioning between traditional and novel anticoagulants, dose adjustments for high risk populations, drug interactions and cost analysis. Futhermore, the review provides direct comparisons with warfarin and indirect comparisons among the novel agents in terms of efficacy and bleeding risk narrating the numbers of patients with intracranial, gastrointestinal and fatal hemorrhages in each of the major trials. We hope that this review will help the physicians inform their patients about the benefits and risks of these agents and enable them to make an informed selection of the most appropriate anticoagulant.

Management of Venous Thromboembolisms: Part I. The Consensus for Deep Vein Thrombosis

Deep vein thrombosis (DVT) is a potentially catastrophic condition because thrombosis, left untreated, can result in detrimental pulmonary embolism. Yet in the absence of thrombosis, anticoagulation increases the risk of bleeding. In the existing literature, knowledge about the epidemiology of DVT is primarily based on investigations among Caucasian populations. There has been little information available about the epidemiology of DVT in Taiwan, and it is generally believed that DVT is less common in Asian patients than in Caucasian patients. However, DVT is a multifactorial disease that represents the interaction between genetic and environmental factors, and the majority of patients with incident DVT have either inherited thrombophilia or acquired risk factors. Furthermore, DVT is often overlooked. Although symptomatic DVT commonly presents with lower extremity pain, swelling and tenderness, diagnosing DVT is a clinical challenge for physicians. Such a diagnosis of DVT requires a timely systematic assessment, including the use of the Wells score and a D-dimer test to exclude low-risk patients, and imaging modalities to confirm DVT. Compression ultrasound with high sensitivity and specificity is the front-line imaging modality in the diagnostic process for patients with suspected DVT in addition to conventional invasive contrast venography. Most patients require anticoagulation therapy, which typically consists of parenteral heparin bridged to a vitamin K antagonist, with variable duration. The development of non-vitamin K oral anticoagulants has revolutionized the landscape of venous thromboembolism treatment, with 4 agents available,including rivaroxaban, dabigatran, apixaban, and edoxaban. Presently, all 4 drugs have finished their large phase III clinical trial programs and come to the clinical uses in North America and Europe. It is encouraging to note that the published data to date regarding Asian patients indicates that such new therapies are safe and efficacious. Ultimately, our efforts to improve outcomes in patients with DVT rely on the awareness in the scientific and medical community regarding the importance of DVT.

KEY WORDS

Combination therapy; Hypertension; α1-blocker.

Risk of recurrent venous thromboembolism and major hemorrhage in cancer-associated incidental pulmonary embolism among treated and untreated patients: a pooled analysis of 926 patients

ESSENTIALS: We performed a pooled analysis of 926 patients with cancer-associated incidental pulmonary embolism (IPE). Vitamin K antagonists (VKA) are associated with a higher risk of major hemorrhage. Recurrence risk is comparable after subsegmental and more proximally localized IPE. Our results support low molecular weight heparins over VKA and similar management of subsegmental IPE.

BACKGROUND

Incidental pulmonary embolism (IPE) is defined as pulmonary embolism (PE) diagnosed on computed tomography scanning not performed for suspected PE. IPE has been estimated to occur in 3.1% of all cancer patients and is a growing challenge for clinicians and patients. Nevertheless, knowledge about the treatment and prognosis of cancer-associated IPE is scarce. We aimed to provide the best available evidence on IPE management.

METHODS

Incidence rates of symptomatic recurrent venous thromboembolism (VTE), major hemorrhage, and mortality during 6-month follow-up were pooled using individual patient data from studies identified by a systematic literature search. Subgroup analyses based on cancer stage, thrombus localization, and management were performed.

RESULTS

In 926 cancer patients with IPE from 11 cohorts, weighted pooled 6-month risks of recurrent VTE, major hemorrhage and mortality were 5.8% (95% confidence interval [CI] 3.7-8.3%), 4.7% (95% CI 3.0-6.8%), and 37% (95% CI 28-47%). VTE recurrence risk was comparable under low molecular weight heparins (LMWH) and vitamin K antagonists (VKAs) (6.2% vs. 6.4%; hazard ratio [HR] 0.9; 95% CI 0.3-3.1), while 12% in untreated patients (HR 2.6; 95% CI 0.91-7.3). Risk of major hemorrhage was higher under VKAs than under LMWH (13% vs. 3.9%; HR 3.9; 95% CI 1.6-10). VTE recurrence risk was comparable in patients with an subsegmental IPE and those with a more proximally localized IPE (HR 1.1; 95% CI 0.50-2.4).

CONCLUSION

These results support the current recommendation to anticoagulate cancer-associated IPE with LMWH and argue against different management of subsegmental IPE.

L-asparaginase and venous thromboembolism in acute lymphocytic leukemia

The occurrence of venous thromboembolism (VTE) in acute lymphocytic leukemia patients receiving L-asparaginase therapy may cause significant morbidity, neurological sequela and possibly worse outcomes. The prophylactic use of antithrombin infusion (to keep antithrombin activity >60%) or low molecular weight heparin (LMWH) may reduce the risk of VTE. The decision to continue L-asparaginase therapy after the development of VTE should be based on anticipated benefits, severity of VTE and the ability to continue therapeutic anticoagulation. In patients receiving asparaginase rechallenge, the use of therapeutic LMWH, monitoring of anti-Xa level and antithrombin level are important. Novel oral anticoagulants are not dependent on antithrombin level, hence offer theoretical advantages over LMWH for the prevention and therapy of asparaginase-related VTE.

Canadian consensus recommendations on the management of venous thromboembolism in patients with cancer. Part 2: treatment

Patients with cancer are at increased risk of venous thromboembolism (vte). Anticoagulation therapy is used to treat vte; however, patients with cancer have unique clinical circumstances that can often make decisions surrounding the administration of therapeutic anticoagulation complicated. No national Canadian guidelines on the management of established cancer-associated thrombosis have been published. We therefore aimed to develop a consensus-based, evidence-informed guideline on the topic. PubMed was searched for clinical trials and meta-analyses published between 2002 and 2013. Reference lists of key articles were hand-searched for additional publications. Content experts from across Canada were assembled to review the evidence and make recommendations. Low molecular weight heparin is the treatment of choice for cancer patients with established vte. Direct oral anticoagulants are not recommended for the treatment of vte at this time. Specific clinical scenarios, including the presence of an indwelling venous catheter, renal insufficiency, and thrombocytopenia, warrant modifications in the therapeutic administration of anticoagulation therapy. Patients with recurrent vte should receive extended (>3 months) anticoagulant therapy. Incidental vte should generally be treated in the same manner as symptomatic vte. There is no evidence to support the monitoring of anti-factor Xa levels in clinically stable cancer patients receiving prophylactic anticoagulation; however, levels of anti-factor Xa could be checked at baseline and periodically thereafter in patients with renal insufficiency. Follow-up and education about the signs and symptoms of vte are important components of ongoing patient care.

Prophylaxis and treatment of venous thromboembolism in patients with cancer: the Saudi clinical practice guideline

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is commonly encountered in the daily clinical practice. Cancer is an important VTE risk factor. Proper thromboprophylaxis is key to prevent VTE in patients with cancer, and proper treatment is essential to reduce VTE complications and adverse events associated with the therapy.

DESIGN AND SETTINGS

As a result of an initiative of the Ministry of Health of Saudi Arabia, an expert panel led by the Saudi Association for Venous Thrombo-Embolism (a subsidiary of the Saudi Thoracic Society) and the Saudi Scientific Hematology Society with the methodological support of the McMaster University working group produced this clinical practice guideline to assist health care providers in evidence-based clinical decision-making for VTE prophylaxis and treatment in patients with cancer.

METHODS

Six questions related to thromboprophylaxis and antithrombotic therapy were identified and the corresponding recommendations were made following the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation) approach.

RESULTS

Question 1. Should heparin versus no heparin be used in outpatients with cancer who have no other therapeutic or prophylactic indication for anticoagulation?

RECOMMENDATION

For outpatients with cancer, the Saudi Expert Panel suggests against routine thromboprophylaxis with heparin (weak recommendation; moderate quality evidence).Question 2. Should oral anticoagulation versus no oral anticoagulation be used in outpatients with cancer who have no other therapeutic or prophylactic indication for anticoagulation?

RECOMMENDATION

For outpatients with cancer, the Saudi Expert Panel recommends against thromboprophylaxis with oral anticoagulation (strong recommendation; moderate quality evidence).Question 3. Should parenteral anticoagulation versus no anticoagulation be used in patients with cancer and central venous catheters?

RECOMMENDATION

For outpatients with cancer and central venous catheters, the Saudi Expert Panel suggests thromboprophylaxis with parenteral anticoagulation (weak recommendation; moderate quality evidence).Question 4. Should oral anticoagulation versus no anticoagulation be used in patients with cancer and central venous catheters?

RECOMMENDATION

For outpatients with cancer and central venous catheters, the Saudi Expert Panel suggests against thromboprophylaxis with oral anticoagulation (weak recommendation; low quality evidence).Question 5. Should low-molecular-weight heparin versus unfractionated heparin be used in patients with cancer being initiated on treatment for venous thromboembolism?

RECOMMENDATION

In patients with cancer being initiated on treatment for venous thromboembolism, the Saudi Expert Panel suggests low-molecular-weight heparin over intravenous unfractionated heparin (weak; very low quality evidence).Question 6. Should heparin versus oral anticoagulation be used in patients with cancer requiring long-term treatment of VTE?

RECOMMENDATION

In patients with metastatic cancer requiring long-term treatment of VTE, the Saudi Expert Panel recommends low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) over vitamin K antagonists (VKAs) (strong recommendation; moderate quality evidence). In patients with non-metastatic cancer requiring long-term treatment of venous thromboembolism, the Saudi Expert Panel suggests LMWH over VKA (weak recommendation; moderate quality evidence).