Direct oral anticoagulants versus vitamin K antagonists in patients with atrial fibrillation and cancer a meta-analysis

Multidisciplinary Approach in Atrial Fibrillation: As Good as Gold

Atrial fibrillation (AF) represents the most common sustained arrhythmia necessitating dual focus: acute complication management and sustained longitudinal oversight to modulate disease progression and ensure comprehensive patient care over time. AF is a multifaceted disorder; due to such a great number of potential exacerbating conditions, a multidisciplinary team (MDT) should manage AF patients by cooperating with a cardiologist. Effective management of AF patients necessitates the implementation of a well-coordinated and tailored care pathway aimed at delivering optimized treatment through collaboration among various healthcare professionals. Management of AF should be carefully evaluated and mutually agreed upon in consultation with healthcare providers. It is crucial to recognize that treatment may evolve due to the emergence of new risk factors, symptoms, disease progression, and advancements in treatment modalities. In the context of multidisciplinary AF teams, a coordinated approach involves assembling a diverse team tailored to meet individual patients' unique needs based on local services' availability.

Crosslink between atrial fibrillation and cancer: a therapeutic conundrum

Atrial fibrillation (AF) is more common in patients with malignancies than in general population. The pathophysiological processes include the pro-inflammatory condition and the exaggerated inflammatory reaction to chemotherapy, radiotherapy, and surgery interventions. Thus, it is pivotal to decrease morbidity and mortality in this group by providing appropriate care and prevention. In this subset, the risk of thromboembolic and bleeding events is high and the common risk score such as CHA2DS2-VASc and HAS-BLED employed in non-oncologic patients have limited evidence in cancer patients. A paucity of evidence in the setting in individuals having both malignancies and atrial fibrillation entangle the clinician when it comes to therapeutic management. Tailored management is recommended of anticoagulation treatment could be difficult, and there is. In this review, we try to explain the mechanism of AF in cancer patients as well as its management in this setting.

[Translation into French and republication of: "Cancer-related arterial thromboembolic events"]

Cancer is associated with a hypercoagulable state and is a well-known independent risk factor for venous thromboembolism, whereas the association between cancer and arterial thromboembolism is less well established. Arterial thromboembolism, primarily defined as myocardial infarction or stroke is significantly more frequent in patients with cancer, independently of vascular risk factors and associated with a three-fold increase in the risk of mortality. Patients with brain cancer, lung cancer, colorectal cancer and pancreatic cancer have the highest relative risk of developing arterial thromboembolism. Antithrombotic treatments should be used with caution due to the increased risk of haemorrhage, as specified in current practice guidelines.

Antithrombotic Therapy in Cancer Patients with Cardiovascular Diseases: Daily Practice Recommendations by the Hemostasis Working Party of the German Society of Hematology and Medical Oncology (DGHO) and the Society for Thrombosis and Hemostasis Research (GTH e.V.)

Active cancer by itself but also chemotherapy is associated with an increased risk of cardiovascular disease (CVD) and especially coronary artery disease (CAD) and atrial fibrillation (AF). The frequency of CVD, CAD, and AF varies depending on comorbidities (particularly in older patients), cancer type, and stage, as well as the anticancer therapeutic being taken. Many reports exist for anticancer drugs being associated with CVD, CAD, and AF, but robust data are often lacking. Because of this, each patient needs an individual structured approach concerning thromboembolic and bleeding risk, drug-drug interactions, as well as patient preferences to evaluate the need for anticoagulation therapy and targeting optimal symptom control. Interruption of specific cancer therapy should be avoided to reduce the potential risk of cancer progression. Nevertheless, additional factors like thrombocytopenia and anticoagulation in the elderly and frail patient with cancer cause additional challenges which need to be addressed in daily clinical management. Therefore, the aim of these recommendations is to summarize the available scientific data on antithrombotic therapy (both antiplatelet and anticoagulant therapy) in cancer patients with CVD and in cases of missing data providing guidance for optimal careful decision-making in daily routine.

When anticoagulation management in atrial fibrillation becomes difficult: Focus on chronic kidney disease, coagulation disorders, and cancer

Anticoagulation therapy (AT) is fundamental in atrial fibrillation (AF) treatment but poses challenges in implementation, especially in AF populations with elevated thromboembolic and bleeding risks. Current guidelines emphasize the need to estimate and balance thrombosis and bleeding risks for all potential candidates of antithrombotic therapy. However, administering oral AT raises concerns in specific populations, such as those with chronic kidney disease (CKD), coagulation disorders, and cancer due to lack of robust data. These groups, excluded from large direct oral anticoagulants trials, rely on observational studies, prompting physicians to adopt individualized management strategies based on case-specific evaluations. The scarcity of evidence and specific guidelines underline the need for a tailored approach, emphasizing regular reassessment of risk factors and anticoagulation drug doses. This narrative review aims to summarize evidence and recommendations for challenging AF clinical scenarios, particularly in the long-term management of AT for patients with CKD, coagulation disorders, and cancer.

Drug-induced atrial fibrillation. A narrative review of a forgotten adverse effect

Atrial fibrillation (AF) is the most common cardiac arrhythmia and is associated with an increased morbidity and mortality. There is clinical evidence that an increasing number of cardiovascular and non-cardiovascular drugs, mainly anticancer drugs, can induce AF either in patients with or without pre-existing cardiac disorders, but drug-induced AF (DIAF) has not received the attention that it might deserve. In many cases DIAF is asymptomatic and paroxysmal and patients recover sinus rhythm spontaneously, but sometimes, DIAF persists, and it is necessary to perform a cardioversion. Furthermore, DIAF is not mentioned in clinical guidelines on the treatment of AF. The risk of DIAF increases in elderly and in patients treated with polypharmacy and with risk factors and comorbidities that commonly coexist with AF. This is the case of cancer patients. Under these circumstances ascribing causality of DIAF to a given drug often represents a clinical challenge. We review the incidence, the pathophysiological mechanisms, risk factors, clinical relevance, and treatment of DIAF. Because of the limited information presently available, further research is needed to obtain a deeper insight into DIAF. Meanwhile, it is important that clinicians are aware of the problem that DIAF represents, recognize which drugs may cause DIAF, and consider the possibility that a drug may be responsible for a new-onset AF episode.

Primary hepatic mucosa-associated lymphoid tissue lymphoma complicated with atrial fibrillation: A case report and literature review

RATIONALE

Primary hepatic mucosa-associated lymphoid tissue (MALT) lymphoma is a rare malignant primary hepatic lymphoma. The sensible choice of treatment for patients with primary lymphoma combined with atrial fibrillation (AF) is controversial and challenging.

PATIENT CONCERNS

The patient presented with both primary hepatic MALT lymphoma and AF, which was difficult to manage.

DIAGNOSES

Pathological and immunohistochemical examination are helpful for definitive diagnosis.

INTERVENTIONS

Surgical resection and subsequent anticoagulant therapy are main treatment methods, and adjuvant therapy depends on the situation.

OUTCOMES

Primary hepatic MALT lymphoma is easy to misdiagnosis due to a lack of typical symptoms and imaging signs.

LESSONS

This case highlights for patients with primary hepatic MALT lymphoma combined with AF, toxicity caused by adjuvant chemotherapy should be fully considered, and careful selection should be made based on the general conditions and complications of patients.

2023 ACC/AHA/ACCP/HRS Guideline for the Diagnosis and Management of Atrial Fibrillation: A Report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Joint Committee on Clinical Practice Guidelines

AIM

The "2023 ACC/AHA/ACCP/HRS Guideline for the Diagnosis and Management of Atrial Fibrillation" provides recommendations to guide clinicians in the treatment of patients with atrial fibrillation.

METHODS

A comprehensive literature search was conducted from May 12, 2022, to November 3, 2022, encompassing studies, reviews, and other evidence conducted on human subjects that were published in English from PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, and other selected databases relevant to this guideline. Additional relevant studies, published through November 2022, during the guideline writing process, were also considered by the writing committee and added to the evidence tables, where appropriate.

STRUCTURE

Atrial fibrillation is the most sustained common arrhythmia, and its incidence and prevalence are increasing in the United States and globally. Recommendations from the "2014 AHA/ACC/HRS Guideline for the Management of Patients With Atrial Fibrillation" and the "2019 AHA/ACC/HRS Focused Update of the 2014 AHA/ACC/HRS Guideline for the Management of Patients With Atrial Fibrillation" have been updated with new evidence to guide clinicians. In addition, new recommendations addressing atrial fibrillation and thromboembolic risk assessment, anticoagulation, left atrial appendage occlusion, atrial fibrillation catheter or surgical ablation, and risk factor modification and atrial fibrillation prevention have been developed.

2023 ACC/AHA/ACCP/HRS Guideline for the Diagnosis and Management of Atrial Fibrillation: A Report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Joint Committee on Clinical Practice Guidelines

AIM

The "2023 ACC/AHA/ACCP/HRS Guideline for the Diagnosis and Management of Patients With Atrial Fibrillation" provides recommendations to guide clinicians in the treatment of patients with atrial fibrillation.

METHODS

A comprehensive literature search was conducted from May 12, 2022, to November 3, 2022, encompassing studies, reviews, and other evidence conducted on human subjects that were published in English from PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, and other selected databases relevant to this guideline. Additional relevant studies, published through November 2022, during the guideline writing process, were also considered by the writing committee and added to the evidence tables, where appropriate.

STRUCTURE

Atrial fibrillation is the most sustained common arrhythmia, and its incidence and prevalence are increasing in the United States and globally. Recommendations from the "2014 AHA/ACC/HRS Guideline for the Management of Patients With Atrial Fibrillation" and the "2019 AHA/ACC/HRS Focused Update of the 2014 AHA/ACC/HRS Guideline for the Management of Patients With Atrial Fibrillation" have been updated with new evidence to guide clinicians. In addition, new recommendations addressing atrial fibrillation and thromboembolic risk assessment, anticoagulation, left atrial appendage occlusion, atrial fibrillation catheter or surgical ablation, and risk factor modification and atrial fibrillation prevention have been developed.

Cancer-related arterial thromboembolic events

Cancer is associated with a hypercoagulable state and is a well-known independent risk factor for venous thromboembolism, whereas the association between cancer and arterial thromboembolism is less well established. Arterial thromboembolism, primarily defined as myocardial infarction or stroke is significantly more frequent in patients with cancer, independently of vascular risk factors and associated with a three-fold increase in the risk of mortality. Patients with brain cancer, lung cancer, colorectal cancer and pancreatic cancer have the highest relative risk of developing arterial thromboembolism. Antithrombotic treatments should be used with caution due to the increased risk of haemorrhage, as specified in current practice guidelines.

Direct Oral Anticoagulants in Special Patient Populations

Anticoagulants are a cornerstone of treatment in atrial fibrillation. Nowadays, direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) are extensively used for this condition in developed countries. However, DOAC treatment may be inappropriate in certain patient populations, such as: patients with chronic kidney disease in whom DOAC concentrations may be dangerously elevated; frail elderly patients with an increased risk of falls; patients with significant drug-drug interactions (DDI) affecting either DOAC concentration or effect; patients at the extremes of body mass in whom an "abnormal" volume of distribution may result in inappropriate drug concentrations; patients with recurrent stroke reflecting an unusually high thromboembolic tendency; and, lastly, patients who experience major hemorrhage on an anticoagulant and in whom continued anticoagulation is deemed necessary. Herein we provide a fictional case-based approach to review the recommendations for the use of DOACs in these special patient populations.

Current Data and Future Perspectives on Patients with Atrial Fibrillation and Cancer

Atrial fibrillation (AF) is an increasingly recognized comorbidity in patients with cancer. Indeed, cancer patients have a significantly higher incidence of AF than that observed in the general population. A reciprocal relationship between these two diseases has been observed, as much as some assume AF to be a marker for occult cancer screening, especially in older adults. The pathophysiological mechanisms are many and varied, including the underlying pro-inflammatory state, specific treatments (chemo- and radiotherapy), and surgery. The therapeutic management of patients with cancer and AF involves the same rhythm and frequency control strategies as the general population; however, the numerous interactions with chemotherapeutics, which lead to a significant increase in side effects, as well as the extreme fragility of the patient, should be considered. Anticoagulant therapy is also a complex challenge to address, as bleeding and stroke risk scores have not been fully assessed in this subpopulation. Furthermore, in large studies establishing the efficacy of direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs), cancer patients have been underrepresented. In this review, we elaborate on the mechanisms linking AF to cancer patients with a particular focus on the therapeutic challenges in this population.

Cardiac Arrhythmias in Oncological Patients-Epidemiology, Risk Factors, and Management within the Context of the New ESC 2022 Guidelines

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

To provide an update on epidemiology, risk factors, and management of cardiac arrhythmias in oncological patients within the context of the new European Society of Cardiology 2022 guidelines on cardio-oncology.

RECENT FINDINGS

One of the side effects of different chemotherapeutics is their pro-arrhythmic activity. Both atrial and ventricular arrhythmias may be induced by cancer itself or by anticancer treatment. Recent studies report on the cardiotoxic activity of such promising therapies as BRAF and MEK inhibitors, or CAR-T therapy. Risk factors of arrhythmias in oncological patients overlap with cardiovascular diseases risk factors, but there are some groups of anticancer drugs that increase the risk of cardiotoxicity. It is crucial to be aware of the risks associated with the oncological treatment and know how to act in case of cardiotoxicity.

Atrial fibrillation, cancer and anticancer drugs

Active cancer is associated with an increased risk of atrial fibrillation (AF), which varies depending on the pre-existing substrate (particularly in older patients), the cancer type and stage, and the anticancer therapeutics being taken. To date, studies have not been able to identify the individual contribution of each factor. During anticancer drug therapy, AF may occur with a frequency of ≈ 15-20% according to several factors, including the patient's baseline cardiovascular toxicity risk and the AF-detection strategies used. Many anticancer drugs have been associated with AF or AF reporting, both in terms of incident and recurrent AF, but robust data are lacking. Only bruton tyrosine kinase inhibitor associated AF (mainly ibrutinib) has a high level of evidence, with a ≈ 3-4-fold higher risk of AF. AF in patients with active cancer is associated with a twofold higher risk of systemic thromboembolism or stroke, and the "TBIP" (Thromboembolic risk, Bleeding risk, drug-drug Interactions, Patient preferences) structured approach must be used to evaluate the need for anticoagulation therapy. AF in patients with active cancer is also associated with a sixfold higher risk of heart failure, and optimal symptom control must be targeted, usually with rate-control drugs (beta-blockers), but a rhythm-control strategy may be proposed in patients remaining symptomatic despite optimal rate-control. AF is generally manageable, with the continuation of anticancer drugs (including ibrutinib); interruption of cancer drugs must be avoided whenever possible and weighed against the risk of cancer progression.

The Feasibility, Effectiveness and Acceptance of Virtual Visits as Compared to In-Person Visits among Clinical Electrophysiology Patients during the COVID-19 Pandemic

The feasibility and effectiveness of virtual visits (VVs) for cardiac electrophysiology patients are still unknown. We aimed to assess the feasibility and effectiveness of VVs as compared to in-person visits, and to describe patient experience with virtual care in clinical electrophysiology. We prospectively enrolled patients scheduled to receive a clinical electrophysiology evaluation, dividing them in two groups: a VV group and an in-person visit group. Outcomes of interest were: (1) improvement in symptoms after the index visit, (2) disappearance of remote monitoring (RM) alerts at follow-up, (3) necessity of urgent hospitalization and (4) patient satisfaction measured by the Patient Satisfaction Questionnaire-18 (PSQ-18). This study included 162 patients in the VV group and 185 in the in-office visit group. As compared to in-person visits, VVs resulted in a similar reduction in RM alerts (51.5% vs. 43.2%, p-value 0.527) and in symptomatic patient rates (73.6% vs. 56.9%, p-value 0.073) at follow-up, without differences in urgent hospitalization rates (p-value 0.849). Patient satisfaction with VVs was higher than with in-person evaluation (p-value < 0.012). VVs proved to be as feasible and as effective as in-person visits, with high patient satisfaction. A hybrid model of care including VVs and in-person visits may become the new standard of care after the COVID-19 pandemic is over.

Direct Oral Anticoagulants for Stroke Prevention in Special Populations: Beyond the Clinical Trials

Currently, direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) are the first-line anticoagulant strategy in patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF). They are characterized by a more favorable pharmacological profile than warfarin, having demonstrated equal efficacy in stroke prevention and greater safety in terms of intracranial bleeding. The study population in the randomized trials of DOACs was highly selected, so the results of these trials cannot be extended to specific populations such as obese, elderly, frail, and cancer patients, which, on the other hand, are sub-populations widely represented in clinical practice. Furthermore, due to the negative results of DOAC administration in patients with mechanical heart valves, the available evidence in subjects with biological heart valves is still few and often controversial. We sought to review the available literature on the efficacy and safety of DOACs in elderly, obese, underweight, frail, cancer patients, and in patients with bioprosthetic heart valves with NVAF to clarify the best anticoagulant strategy in these special and poorly studied subpopulations.

Risk and Management of Bleeding Complications with Direct Oral Anticoagulants in Patients with Atrial Fibrillation and Venous Thromboembolism: a Narrative Review

Atrial fibrillation (AF) and venous thromboembolism (VTE) are highly prevalent conditions with a significant healthcare burden, and represent the main indications for anticoagulation. Direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) are the first choice treatment of AF/VTE, and have become the most prescribed class of anticoagulants globally, overtaking vitamin K antagonists (VKAs). Compared to VKAs, DOACs have a similar or better efficacy/safety profile, with reduced risk of intracerebral hemorrhage (ICH), while the risk of major bleeding and other bleeding harms may vary depending on the type of DOAC. We have critically reviewed available evidence from randomized controlled trials and observational studies regarding the risk of bleeding complications of DOACs compared to VKAs in patients with AF and VTE. Special patient populations (e.g., elderly, extreme body weights, chronic kidney disease) have specifically been addressed. Management of bleeding complications and possible resumption of anticoagulation, in particular after ICH and gastrointestinal bleeding, are also discussed. Finally, some suggestions are provided to choose the optimal DOAC to minimize adverse events according to individual patient characteristics and bleeding risk.

The new 2022 ESC Guidelines on Cardio-oncology and their impact on the Acute Cardiovascular Care Society

In this perspective piece on the recently published ESC Guidelines on Cardio-oncology and the Consensus Statements from the Acute Cardiovascular Care Association, we summarize key learning points regarding the management of acute cardiovascular disease in patients with cancer. This document outlines where other pre-existing ESC Guidelines can be applied to the management of acute cardiovascular disease in patients with cancer while simultaneously highlighting important gaps in knowledge that require further research.

Cancer and cardiovascular disease share common risk factors and often co-exist, especially in older patients. In addition, patients with cancer undergoing active treatment are exposed to multiple, potentially cardiotoxic drugs, which may manifest as a variety of cardiovascular events, including left-ventricular systolic dysfunction and heart failure, arrhythmias, hypertension, or acute venous and arterial vascular events.

Knowledge about potential causative cancer therapeutics is necessary for rapid recognition and management to improve cardiovascular outcomes and guide ongoing cancer treatment. Specifically, the importance of rapidly interrupting culprit cancer drugs is highlighted, as well as instituting standard guideline-based therapies for conditions such as acute heart failure and acute coronary syndromes [ST-elevation myocardial infarction and high-risk non-ST-elevation acute coronary syndrome (ACS)]. Given the high prevalence of thrombocytopenia and increased bleeding risk in patients with cancer, we are provided with platelet cut-offs for the use of different antiplatelet agents and anticoagulants for patients with ACS and atrial arrhythmias. In contrast, given the hypercoagulable milieu of cancer, we are provided information regarding types of anticoagulants, drug–drug interactions, and duration of anticoagulation in patients with acute venous thromboembolism, as well as for atrial fibrillation. They also discuss the diagnostic and treatment strategies for the unique cardiotoxicities seen with novel cancer therapeutics such as immune checkpoint inhibitors and chimeric receptor antigen T-cell therapy. Last, but not least, the authors emphasize that the care of these patients requires close collaboration between cardiology and oncology to maximize both cardiovascular and cancer outcomes.

Evaluation and management of cancer patients presenting with acute cardiovascular disease: a Clinical Consensus Statement of the Acute CardioVascular Care Association (ACVC) and the ESC council of Cardio-Oncology—part 2: acute heart failure, acute myocardial diseases, acute venous thromboembolic diseases, and acute arrhythmias

Advances in treatment, common cardiovascular (CV) risk factors and the ageing of the population have led to an increasing number of cancer patients presenting with acute CV diseases. These events may be related to cancer itself or cancer treatment. Acute cardiac care specialists must be aware of these acute CV complications and be able to manage them. This may require an individualized and multidisciplinary approach. The management of acute coronary syndromes and acute pericardial diseases in cancer patients was covered in part 1 of a clinical consensus document. This second part focusses on acute heart failure, acute myocardial diseases, venous thromboembolic diseases and acute arrhythmias.

Incidence and Determinants of Spontaneous Cardioversion of Early Onset Symptomatic Atrial Fibrillation

Atrial fibrillation (AF) is the most frequent chronic arrhythmia worldwide, and it is associated with significant morbidity and mortality, making it a considerable burden both to patients and the healthcare system. Nowadays, an early attempt to restore sinus rhythm in acute symptomatic AF through electrical or pharmacological cardioversion is the most common approach in the Emergency Department (ED). However, considering the high percentage of spontaneous cardioversion of paroxysmal AF reported by many studies, this approach may not be the ideal choice for all patients. In this manuscript we performed a review of the most relevant studies found in literature with the aim of identifying the main determinants of spontaneous cardioversion, focusing on those easy to detect in the ED. We have found that the most relevant predictors of spontaneous cardioversion are the absence of Heart Failure (HF), a small atrial size, recent-onset AF, rapid Atrial Fibrillatory Rate and the relationship between a previous AF episode and Heart Rate/Blood Pressure. A number of those are utilized, along with other easily determined parameters, in the recently developed "ReSinus" score which predicts the likelihood of AF spontaneous cardioversion. Such identification may help the physician decide whether immediate cardioversion is necessary, or whether to adopt a "watch-and-wait" strategy in the presence of spontaneous cardioversion determinants.

EHA Guidelines on Management of Antithrombotic Treatments in Thrombocytopenic Patients With Cancer

In cancer patients, thrombocytopenia can result from bone marrow infiltration or from anticancer medications and represents an important limitation for the use of antithrombotic treatments, including anticoagulant, antiplatelet, and fibrinolytic agents. These drugs are often required for prevention or treatment of cancer-associated thrombosis or for cardioembolic prevention in atrial fibrillation in an increasingly older cancer population. Data indicate that cancer remains an independent risk factor for thrombosis even in case of thrombocytopenia, since mild-to-moderate thrombocytopenia does not protect against arterial or venous thrombosis. In addition, cancer patients are at increased risk of antithrombotic drug-associated bleeding, further complicated by thrombocytopenia and acquired hemostatic defects. Furthermore, some anticancer treatments are associated with increased thrombotic risk and may generate interactions affecting the effectiveness or safety of antithrombotic drugs. In this complex scenario, the European Hematology Association in collaboration with the European Society of Cardiology has produced this scientific document to provide a clinical practice guideline to help clinicians in the management of patients with cancer and thrombocytopenia. The Guidelines focus on adult patients with active cancer and a clear indication for anticoagulation, single or dual antiplatelet therapy, their combination, or reperfusion therapy, who have concurrent thrombocytopenia because of either malignancy or anticancer medications. The level of evidence and the strength of the recommendations were discussed according to a Delphi procedure and graded according to the Oxford Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine.

Five Years of Direct Oral Anticoagulants Use in Italy: Adverse Drug Reactions from the Italian National Pharmacovigilance Network

BACKGROUND

Direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) are the preferred anticoagulant drugs for the prevention of atrial fibrillation (AF)-related thromboembolic complications and for the treatment and the prevention of recurrences of venous thromboembolism (VTE). The evaluation of self-reported adverse drug reactions (ADRs) available from databases of drug-regulatory agencies such as the Italian Medicines Agency (AIFA) pharmacovigilance database represents a novel aid to guide decision making.

OBJECTIVE

To assess the safety profile of DOACs by analyzing ADR rates in the real-world Italian scenario.

METHODS

Post-marketing surveillance data recorded by the National Pharmacovigilance Network were retrieved for the time period 2017-2021 from the AIFA online site. The following data were collected for each DOAC: total ADR number, serious ADR number, gastrointestinal (GI) ADR, intracranial hemorrhage events (ICH ADR), and more frequently reported ADR for the study year. The safety profile was expressed by the risk index (RI).

RESULTS

Rivaroxaban use was associated with consistent and stable low rates of serious ADR, GI ADR, and ICH ADR across the 5-year study period. Rivaroxaban and apixaban showed the lowest RI for serious ADR and GI ADR, while rivaroxaban use was associated with significantly lower ICH events as compared to apixaban. Dabigatran was related to the highest RIs for every ADR class, in particular GI ADRs.

CONCLUSIONS

DOACs presented an acceptable safety profile in the current post-market analysis. However, rivaroxaban and apixaban were associated with more favorable safety profiles as compared to dabigatran, while rivaroxaban provoked statistically significantly fewer ICH events as compared to apixaban.

Anticoagulation and Stroke

In 2019, the American Heart Association did not recommend the emergent use of anticoagulation to prevent recurrence or progression of acute ischemic stroke. However, its indication in patients with extracranial artery intraluminal thrombus with artery-to-artery cerebral embolization must be analyzed. In this article, we will also discuss other indications of anticoagulation. This treatment could be indicated in patients with ischemic stroke caused by embolization from cervical artery dissection, catastrophic antiphospholipid antibodies syndrome (APS) and some cases of Covid 19. For secondary prevention, anticoagulation is recommended for Cardioembolic stroke such as nonvalvular atrial fibrillation and other cardiopathies, some patients with cervical artery dissection, stroke associated with cancer, and thrombophilia such as APS. The timing to restart anticoagulation after a large ischemic stroke or after a cerebral hemorrhagic transformation always represent a challenge. Even in patients with high risk of thromboembolism it should be delayed at least two weeks, ideal after four weeks.

Use of oral anticoagulants among individuals with cancer and atrial fibrillation in the United States, 2010-2016

Background

Anticoagulation among patients with cancer and atrial fibrillation is challenging due to elevated risk of bleeding and stroke. We characterized use of oral anticoagulants among patients with cancer and non‐valvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF).

Methods

We used Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER)‐Medicare data and included patients with cancer aged ≥66 years with an incident diagnosis of NVAF from 2010 to 2016. We used a Cox proportional hazard model and multivariable logistic regression to identify factors associated with anticoagulant use versus no use and direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) versus warfarin use, respectively.

Results

Of 27,702 patients with cancer and NVAF, 4469 (16.1%) used DOACs and 3577 (12.9%) used warfarin. Among 8046 anticoagulant users, DOACs use increased from 21.8% in 2011 to 76.2% in 2016, with a corresponding decline in warfarin use from 78.2% to 23.8%. Nearly 7 out of 10 patients with cancer and NVAF did not initiate anticoagulation in 2016. Anticoagulant use was more likely among those with higher CHA₂DS₂‐VASc scores (hazard ratio [HR] 1.55, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.27–1.90 for score ≥6 vs. 1) or with lower HAS‐BLED scores (HR 1.96, 95% CI 1.67–2.30 for score 1 vs. ≥6). Among anticoagulant users, DOAC use was less likely than warfarin in those with higher CHA₂DS₂‐VASc scores (odds ratio [OR] 0.53, 95% CI 0.33–0.84 for score ≥6 vs. 1).

Conclusions

Nearly 7 out of 10 patients with cancer and NVAF did not receive anticoagulation. Use of DOACs increased from 2010 to 2016, with a corresponding decline in warfarin use. DOACs are used less than warfarin among those at higher risk of stroke.

Anticoagulation for atrial fibrillation in active cancer (Review)

Atrial fibrillation (AF) may often pre-exist in patients with newly diagnosed cancer or occur with increased frequency shortly after cancer diagnosis. Patients with active cancer and AF have a particularly high risk of thromboembolic complications, as both conditions carry a risk of thrombosis. Thromboembolic risk is determined by several factors, including advanced age, sex (females), cancer histology (adenocarcinomas), location (e.g., pancreas, stomach), advanced stage, anticancer regimens (e.g., platinum compounds, anti-angiogenic therapies, immune modulators), comorbidities (e.g., obesity, kidney disease) and concurrent therapies (e.g., surgery, central catheters). Physicians are often reluctant to prescribe anticoagulants to patients with active cancer and AF, mainly due to fear of bleeding complications, which is partly related to the paucity of evidence in the field. Decision making regarding anticoagulation for the prevention of ischemic stroke and systemic embolism in patients with active cancer and AF may be challenging and should not simply rely on the risk prediction scores used in the general AF population. By contrast, the administration and choice of anticoagulants should be based on the comprehensive, individualized and periodic evaluation of thromboembolic and bleeding risk, drug-drug interactions, patient preferences and access to therapies.

Hematuria in anticoagulated patients with atrial fibrillation and urologic cancer

BACKGROUND

Based on their renal excretion, direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) may increase the risk of hematuria in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) and urologic cancer compared with vitamin K antagonists.

OBJECTIVES

To examine the risk of bleeding associated with DOAC versus warfarin in patients with AF and urologic cancer.

METHODS

We conducted a Danish nationwide cohort study with individually linked registry data on patients with AF and active or a history of urologic cancer. We calculated crude rates per 100 person-years of hospital episodes of major bleeding and hematuria. We then compared rates of hematuria during the year after initial oral anticoagulation filled prescription by treatment regimen using inverse probability of treatment weighting and Cox regression.

RESULTS

The study population included 2615 patients with AF and urologic cancer (6.1% women; median age, 76 years) initiating a DOAC or warfarin. One-year risk of hematuria was 4.8% in the DOAC group and 4.7% in the warfarin group with a corresponding weighted hazard ratio (HR) of 1.21 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.81-1.81). HRs for hematuria were generally similar in analyses restricted to patients treated with standard-dose DOAC and patients with active cancer. For those with cancer of the kidney, renal pelvis, ureter, and bladder, the HR was 0.82 (95% CI, 0.44-1.54). Results were mirrored for other bleeding events, whereas the risk for intracranial bleeding was lower with DOACs.

CONCLUSION

In patients with AF and urologic cancer, there was a similar risk of hematuria associated with DOAC and warfarin treatment.

A proposed strategy for anticoagulation therapy in noncompaction cardiomyopathy

Noncompaction cardiomyopathy (NCCM) is a rare condition characterized by prominent trabeculae, deep intertrabecular recesses, and a left ventricular myocardium with a two‐layered structure, characterized by a spongy endocardial layer and a thinner and compacted epicardial one. NCCM can be isolated or associated with other congenital heart diseases and complex syndromes involving neuromuscular disorders and facial dysmorphisms. To date, more than 40 genes coding for sarcomeric, cytoskeletal, ion channels, and desmosomal proteins have been identified. Clinical presentation is also highly variable, ranging from no symptoms to end‐stage heart failure (HF), lethal arrhythmias, sudden cardiac death, or thromboembolic events. In particular, the prevalence of thromboembolism in NCCM patients appears to be higher than that of a similar, age‐matched population without NCCM. Thromboembolism has a multifactorial aetiology, which is linked to genetic, as well as traditional cardiovascular risk factors. In previous studies, atrial fibrillation (AF) was observed in approximately 25–30% of adult NCCM patients and embolism had a cardiac source in ~63–69% of cases; therefore, AF represents a strong predictor of adverse events, especially if associated to HF and neuromuscular disorders. Left ventricular dysfunction is another risk factor for thromboembolism, as a result of blood stagnation and local myocardial injury. Moreover, it is not completely clarified if the presence of deep intertrabecular recesses causing stagnant blood flow can constitute per se a thrombogenic substrate even in absence of ventricular dysfunction. For the clinical management of NCCM patients, an appropriate stratification of the thromboembolic risk is of utmost importance for a timely initiation of anticoagulant therapy. The aim of the present study is to review the available literature on NCCM with particular attention on thromboembolic risk stratification and prevention and the current evidence for oral anticoagulation therapy. The use of direct oral anticoagulants vs. vitamin K antagonists is also discussed with important implications for patient treatment and prognosis.

New evidence of direct oral anticoagulation therapy on cardiac valve calcifications, renal preservation and inflammatory modulation

BACKGROUND

Rivaroxaban is a direct inhibitor of activated Factor X (FXa), an anti-inflammatory protein exerting a protective effect on the cardiac valve and vascular endothelium. We compare the effect of Warfarin and Rivaroxaban on inflammation biomarkers and their contribution to heart valve calcification progression and renal preservation in a population of atrial fibrillation (AF) patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD) stage 3b - 4.

METHODS

This was an observational, multicenter, prospective study enrolling 347 consecutive CKD stage 3b - 4 patients newly diagnosed with AF: 247 were treated with Rivaroxaban and 100 with Warfarin. Every 12 months, we measured creatinine levels and cardiac valve calcification via standard trans-thoracic echocardiogram, while plasma levels of inflammatory mediators were quantified by ELISA at baseline and after 24 months.

RESULTS

Over a follow-up of 24 months, long-term treatment with Rivaroxaban was associated with a significative reduction of cytokines. Patients treated with Rivaroxaban experienced a more frequent stabilization/regression of valve calcifications comparing with patients treated with Warfarin. Rivaroxaban use was related with an improvement in kidney function in 87.4% of patients, while in those treated with Warfarin was reported a worsening of renal clearance in 98% of cases. Patients taking Rivaroxaban experienced lower adverse events (3.2% vs 49%, p-value <0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings suggest that Rivaroxaban compared to Warfarin is associated with lower levels of serum markers of inflammation. The inhibition of FXa may exert an anti-inflammatory effect contributing to reduce the risk of cardiac valve calcification progression and worsening of renal function.

Effectiveness and Safety of DOACs vs. VKAs in AF Patients With Cancer: Evidence From Randomized Clinical Trials and Observational Studies

Background: The use of direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) is recommended as the preferred treatment drug in patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation (AF). However, the effectiveness and safety of DOACs compared with vitamin K antagonists (VKAs) in patients with cancer and AF are still controversial. Therefore, we performed a meta-analysis regarding the effectiveness and safety of DOACs vs. VKAs in AF patients with cancer.

Methods: A search of the Pubmed and EMBASE databases until August 2021 was performed. Adjusted risk ratios (RRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were pooled using a random-effects model with an inverse variance method.

Results: Thirteen studies were deemed to meet the criteria. For the effectiveness outcomes, the use of DOACs compared with VKAs use was significantly associated with decreased risks of stroke or systemic embolism (RR = 0.66, 95% CI: 0.54–0.80) and venous thromboembolism (RR = 0.40, 95% CI: 0.26–0.61), but not ischemic stroke (RR = 0.79, 95% CI: 0.56–1.11), myocardial infarction (RR = 0.78, 95% CI: 0.56–1.11), cardiovascular death (RR = 0.76, 95% CI: 0.53–1.09), and all-cause death (RR = 0.82, 95% CI: 0.43–1.56). For the safety outcomes, compared with VKAs use, the use of DOACs was associated with reduced risks of intracranial bleeding (RR = 0.60, 95% CI: 0.50–0.71) and gastrointestinal bleeding (RR = 0.87, 95% CI: 0.80–0.95). There were no significant differences in major bleeding (RR = 0.87, 95% CI: 0.74–1.04), major or nonmajor clinically relevant bleeding (RR = 0.87, 95% CI: 0.74–1.01), and any bleeding (RR = 0.88, 95% CI: 0.76–1.03).

Conclusion: Compared with VKAs, DOACs appeared to have significant reductions in stroke or systemic embolism, venous thromboembolism, intracranial bleeding, and gastrointestinal bleeding, but comparable risks of ischemic stroke, myocardial infarction, cardiovascular death, all-cause death, major bleeding, major or nonmajor clinically relevant bleeding, and any bleeding in patients with AF and cancer.

Myocardial Tissue Characterization in Heart Failure with Preserved Ejection Fraction: From Histopathology and Cardiac Magnetic Resonance Findings to Therapeutic Targets

Heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) is a complex clinical syndrome responsible for high mortality and morbidity rates. It has an ever growing social and economic impact and a deeper knowledge of molecular and pathophysiological basis is essential for the ideal management of HFpEF patients. The association between HFpEF and traditional cardiovascular risk factors is known. However, myocardial alterations, as well as pathophysiological mechanisms involved are not completely defined. Under the definition of HFpEF there is a wide spectrum of different myocardial structural alterations. Myocardial hypertrophy and fibrosis, coronary microvascular dysfunction, oxidative stress and inflammation are only some of the main pathological detectable processes. Furthermore, there is a lack of effective pharmacological targets to improve HFpEF patients' outcomes and risk factors control is the primary and unique approach to treat those patients. Myocardial tissue characterization, through invasive and non-invasive techniques, such as endomyocardial biopsy and cardiac magnetic resonance respectively, may represent the starting point to understand the genetic, molecular and pathophysiological mechanisms underlying this complex syndrome. The correlation between histopathological findings and imaging aspects may be the future challenge for the earlier and large-scale HFpEF diagnosis, in order to plan a specific and effective treatment able to modify the disease's natural course.

Clinical Outcomes in Atrial Fibrillation Patients With a History of Cancer Treated With Non-Vitamin K Antagonist Oral Anticoagulants: A Nationwide Cohort Study

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

Data on clinical outcomes for nonvitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulant (NOACs) and warfarin in patients with atrial fibrillation and cancer are limited, and patients with active cancer were excluded from randomized trials. We investigated the effectiveness and safety for NOACs versus warfarin among patients with atrial fibrillation with cancer.

METHODS

In this nationwide retrospective cohort study from Taiwan National Health Insurance Research Database, we identified a total of 6274 and 1681 consecutive patients with atrial fibrillation with cancer taking NOACs and warfarin from June 1, 2012, to December 31, 2017, respectively. Propensity score stabilized weighting was used to balance covariates across study groups.

RESULTS

There were 1031, 1758, 411, and 3074 patients treated with apixaban, dabigatran, edoxaban, and rivaroxaban, respectively. After propensity score stabilized weighting, NOAC was associated with a lower risk of major adverse cardiovascular events (hazard ratio, 0.63 [95% CI, 0.50-0.80]; P=0.0001), major adverse limb events (hazard ratio, 0.41 [95% CI, 0.24-0.70]; P=0.0010), venous thrombosis (hazard ratio, 0.37 [95% CI, 0.23-0.61]; P<0.0001), and major bleeding (hazard ratio, 0.73 [95% CI, 0.56-0.94]; P=0.0171) compared with warfarin. The outcomes were consistent with either direct thrombin inhibitor (dabigatran) or factor Xa inhibitor (apixaban, edoxaban, and rivaroxaban) use, among patients with stroke history, and among patients with different type of cancer and local, regional, or metastatic stage of cancer (P interaction >0.05). When compared with warfarin, NOAC was associated with lower risk of major adverse cardiovascular event, and venous thrombosis in patients aged <75 but not in those aged ≥75 years (P interaction <0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Thromboprophylaxis with NOACs rather than warfarin should be considered for the majority of the atrial fibrillation population with cancer.

Trends in Stroke Prevention between 2014 and 2018 in Hospitalized Atrial Fibrillation Patients

In recent years, significant changes in stroke prophylaxis in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) have been observed. Non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants (NOACs) are more commonly used in the prevention of thromboembolic complications in patients with AF. The aim of the study was to evaluate recommended stroke prophylaxis in patients with AF and to identify predictors of using NOACs in patients treated with anticoagulant therapy. The present study was a retrospective, observational, single-center study which included consecutively hospitalized patients in the reference cardiology center from January 2014 to December 2018. In the study group of 4027 patients with AF, to prevent thromboembolic complications, OACs were used in 3680 patients (91.4%), an antiplatelet drug(s) was used in 124 patients (3.1%), and 223 patients (5.5%) did not undergo any thromboembolic event prevention. In the group of 3680 patients treated with OACs, 2311 patients (62.8%) received NOACs and 1639 patients (37.2%), VKAs. Independent predictors of the use of NOACs were age (OR, 1.02; 95% CI, 1.01–1.03; P < 0.001), a previous thromboembolic event (OR, 1.29; 95% CI, 1.01–1.65; P=0.04), nonpermanent AF (OR, 1.61; 95% CI, 1.34–1.93; P < 0.001), and eGFR (OR, 1.22; 95% CI, 1.02–1.46; P=0.03). Between 2014 and 2018, an increase of patients treated with OACs, mainly with NOACs, was observed. Age, past thromboembolic complications, nonpermanent AF, and preserved renal function determined the choice of NOACs.

Thromboembolic and Bleeding Risk in Atrial Fibrillation Patients with Chronic Kidney Disease: Role of Anticoagulation Therapy

Atrial fibrillation (AF) and chronic kidney disease (CKD) are strictly related; several independent risk factors of AF are often frequent in CKD patients. AF prevalence is very common among these patients, ranging between 15% and 20% in advanced stages of CKD. Moreover, the results of several studies showed that AF patients with end stage renal disease (ESRD) have a higher mortality rate than patients with preserved renal function due to an increased incidence of stroke and an unpredicted elevated hemorrhagic risk. Direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) are currently contraindicated in patients with ESRD and vitamin K antagonists (VKAs), remaining the only drugs allowed, although they show numerous critical issues such as a narrow therapeutic window, increased tissue calcification and an unfavorable risk/benefit ratio with low stroke prevention effect and augmented risk of major bleeding. The purpose of this review is to shed light on the applications of DOAC therapy in CKD patients, especially in ESRD patients.

Ischemic Heart Disease Pathophysiology Paradigms Overview: From Plaque Activation to Microvascular Dysfunction

Ischemic heart disease still represents a large burden on individuals and health care resources worldwide. By conventions, it is equated with atherosclerotic plaque due to flow-limiting obstruction in large-medium sized coronary arteries. However, clinical, angiographic and autoptic findings suggest a multifaceted pathophysiology for ischemic heart disease and just some cases are caused by severe or complicated atherosclerotic plaques. Currently there is no well-defined assessment of ischemic heart disease pathophysiology that satisfies all the observations and sometimes the underlying mechanism to everyday ischemic heart disease ward cases is misleading. In order to better examine this complicated disease and to provide future perspectives, it is important to know and analyze the pathophysiological mechanisms that underline it, because ischemic heart disease is not always determined by atherosclerotic plaque complication. Therefore, in order to have a more complete comprehension of ischemic heart disease we propose an overview of the available pathophysiological paradigms, from plaque activation to microvascular dysfunction.