Are direct oral anticoagulants an economically attractive alternative to low molecular weight heparins in lung cancer associated venous thromboembolism management?

Management of venous thromboembolism in patients with lung cancer: a state-of-the-art review

Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is common and life-threatening in patients with lung cancer. Management of VTE is critical for patients with lung cancer. Risk assessment, thromboprophylaxis and treatment of VTE constitute the core issues of VTE management in patients with lung cancer. Although its overall principles should follow recommendations in authoritative guidelines, VTE management in patients with lung cancer may be slightly special in some specific aspects. Despite the extensive validation of Khorana score for patients with all cancer types, its value in VTE risk assessment of patients with lung cancer is controversial. It is important to determine the VTE risk assessment score that can accurately and specifically assess the VTE risk of patients with lung cancer. Clinical practice patterns of thromboprophylaxis may vary by cancer types, since different sites of cancer may have different levels of VTE risk. To understand the thromboprophylaxis specific for lung cancer is of vital importance for patients with lung cancer. Although it is essential to comply with authoritative guidelines, the duration and timing of initiation of thromboprophylaxis in surgical patients with lung cancer may need further study. Taken together, the purpose of this review is to provide an overview of state-of-the-art VTE stewardship specific for patients with lung cancer.

Advances in the Prediction and Risk Assessment of Lung Cancer-Associated Venous Thromboembolism

According to the most recent data from the National Cancer Center, venous thromboembolism (VTE) has unsurprisingly become one of the most common complications in lung cancer. VTE not only interferes with the equilibrium of the clotting system but it also affects tumor progression and prognosis. For the identification of high-risk patients, many clinical risk assessment models have been developed and validated based on the risk factors found in previous studies. In this review, we will summarize advances in prediction and risk assessment of VTE, with a focus on early diagnosis and therapy, reduction of mortality, and the burden of medical costs in lung cancer patients.

Direct oral anticoagulants versus low molecular weight heparins for the treatment of cancer-associated thrombosis: a cost-effectiveness analysis

BACKGROUND

Recently, direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) have been included in guidelines for the treatment of cancer-associated thrombosis (CAT) to be extended to suitable cancer patients. The purpose of this study was to compare the cost-effectiveness of using DOACs and low molecular weight heparins (LMWHs) for treating CAT from the perspective of the Chinese healthcare system.

METHODS

A Markov model was constructed to estimate the cost-effectiveness of the two strategies with a 6-month and 5-year time horizon. Input parameters were either sourced from the clinical trial, published literature. The primary outcome of the model was reported as incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs). Sensitivity analyses were performed to test model uncertainty.

RESULTS

The 6-month cost of DOACs was $ 654.65 with 0.40 quality adjusted life-years (QALYs) while the 6-month cost of LMWHs was $USD 1719.31 with 0.37 QALYs. Similarly, treatment with DOACs had a lower cost ($USD 657.85 vs. $USD 1716.56) and more health benefits (0.40 QALYs vs. 0.37 QALYs) than treatment with LMWHs in a subgroup of patients with gastrointestinal malignancy. We found treatment with DOACs would result in a large reduction in cost ($USD 1447.22 vs. $USD 3374.70) but a small reduction in QALYs (3.07 QALYs vs. 3.09 QALYs) compared with LMWHs over a 5-year time frame, resulting in an ICER of $USD 112895.50/QALYs. Sensitivity analysis confirmed the robustness of the results.

CONCLUSION

As compared to LMWHs, DOACs can be a cost-saving anticoagulant choice for the treatment of CAT in the general oncology population and gastrointestinal malignancy population.