Prediction of venous thromboembolism in newly diagnosed patients treated for lymphoid malignancies: validation of the Khorana Risk Score

Accuracy of the COMPASS-CAT thrombosis risk assessment scale in predicting venous thromboembolism in cancer patients: a meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

This systematic review aims to assess the accuracy of the COMPASS-CAT tool in predicting venous thromboembolism (VTE) among cancer patients.

METHODS

Relevant studies were searched in PubMed, Web of Science, The Cochrane Library, Embase, CINAHL, OVID, CBM, CNKI, WanFang Data, and VIP database from their inception up to April 19, 2023. The quality of studies was appraised using the diagnostic test accuracy study bias assessment tool (QUADAS-2). Quantitative analysis was performed using Stata MP 17.0.

RESULTS

Thirteen studies involving 8,665 patients were included. Meta-analysis indicated that the COMPASS-CAT score had a pooled sensitivity of 0.76 [95%CI (0.61, 0.86)], specificity of 0.67 [95%CI (0.52, 0.79)], positive likelihood ratio of 2.3 [95%CI (1.7, 3.1)], negative likelihood ratio of 0.36 [95%CI (0.23, 0.54)], diagnostic odds ratio of 6 [95%CI (4, 10)], and an area under the Summary Receiver Operating Characteristic (SROC) curve (AUC) of 0.77 [95%CI (0.74, 0.81)]. Funnel plots indicated no publication bias. Meta-regression and subgroup analysis suggested that country and diagnostic setting might be potential sources of heterogeneity. The sensitivity of the COMPASS-CAT assessment tool in international outpatient settings was 0.94 with an AUC of 0.86, while in domestic inpatient settings, the sensitivity was 0.65 with an AUC of 0.78.

CONCLUSION

The COMPASS-CAT score had a certain diagnostic value for VTE in cancer patients and can effectively identify patients at risk of VTE. Most studies focus on patients with lung cancer. Future research should investigate more tumor types, and high-quality, large-sample, multi-center prospective studies on larger populations with cancers are warranted.

Thrombosis risk prediction in lymphoma patients: A multi-institutional, retrospective model development and validation study

Venous thromboembolism (VTE) poses a significant risk to cancer patients receiving systemic therapy. The generalizability of pan-cancer models to lymphomas is limited. Currently, there are no reliable risk prediction models for thrombosis in patients with lymphoma. Our objective was to create a risk assessment model (RAM) specifically for lymphomas. We performed a retrospective cohort study to develop Fine and Gray sub-distribution hazard model for VTE and pulmonary embolism (PE)/ lower extremity deep vein thrombosis (LE-DVT) respectively in adult lymphoma patients from the Veterans Affairs national healthcare system (VA). External validations were performed at the Harris Health System (HHS) and the MD Anderson Cancer Center (MDACC). Time-dependent c-statistic and calibration curves were used to assess discrimination and fit. There were 10,313 (VA), 854 (HHS), and 1858 (MDACC) patients in the derivation and validation cohorts with diverse baseline. At 6 months, the VTE incidence was 5.8% (VA), 8.2% (HHS), and 8.8% (MDACC), respectively. The corresponding estimates for PE/LE-DVT were 3.9% (VA), 4.5% (HHS), and 3.7% (MDACC), respectively. The variables in the final RAM included lymphoma histology, body mass index, therapy type, recent hospitalization, history of VTE, history of paralysis/immobilization, and time to treatment initiation. The RAM had c-statistics of 0.68 in the derivation and 0.69 and 0.72 in the two external validation cohorts. The two models achieved a clear differentiation in risk stratification in each cohort. Our findings suggest that easy-to-implement, clinical-based model could be used to predict personalized VTE risk for lymphoma patients.

Cancer-associated thrombosis in hematologic malignancies

Patients with hematologic malignancies are often complicated not only by severe bleeding due to thrombocytopenia and disseminated intravascular coagulation but also by thromboembolic events, just like in patients with solid cancers, and these events can negatively impact patient outcomes. Nevertheless, the prevention and treatment of cancer-associated thrombosis (CAT) in hematologic malignancies has not been adequately investigated due to the limited size, heterogeneity, and unique pathophysiology of the patient population. This article summarizes the current understanding, risk factors, prediction models, and optimal prevention and treatment strategies of CAT in hematologic malignancies on a disease-by-disease basis, including acute leukemia, lymphoma, myeloma, and myeloproliferative neoplasms. Specific considerations of novel molecular targeted therapeutics introduced in recent years, such as immunomodulatory drugs and tyrosine kinase inhibitors, are also discussed based on the latest clinical trials.

Incidence of venous thromboembolism and predictive ability of age-adjusted international prognostic index for prediction of venous thromboembolism in Asian patients with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma

Diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) is one of the malignancies at high risk for the development of venous thromboembolism (VTE). We aimed to evaluate the incidence of VTE and the predictive ability of the age-adjusted international prognostic index (aaIPI) for the prediction of VTE among DLBCL patients. This was a retrospective cohort study including adult patients with newly diagnosed DLBCL. Differences in VTE occurrence within one year after diagnosis of DLBCL were estimated across aaIPI groups using the Kaplan-Meier model, Cox's model, and Gray's model with deaths regarded as competing events. Five hundred and ninety-one newly diagnosed DLBCL patients with a median age of 58 (range 16-93) years were included in this study. At a median follow-up time of 365 (range 2-365) days, VTE events were objectively diagnosed in 32 patients, giving a one-year cumulative incidence of VTE of 5.4% (95% confidence interval [CI], 3.7-7.6). Patients with aaIPI ≥ 2 had a significantly higher risk of VTE than patients with aaIPI < 2 (hazard ratio, 3.5; 95% CI, 1.6-7.8; p = 0.001 based on Cox's model and sub-distribution hazard ratio, 3.0; 95% CI, 1.3-6.7; p = 0.007 using Gray's model). The C-statistic of aaIPI was 0.65 (95% CI, 0.58-0.72). We demonstrated that the incidence of VTE in Asian DLBCL patients was not uncommon. The aaIPI was effective in determining the risk of VTE in DLBCL patients, even when including death as a competing event. aaIPI may be helpful in identifying patients at higher risk of VTE in DLBCL patients.

Validation of venous thromboembolism predictive model in hematologic malignancies

Although several scores stratify venous thromboembolism (VTE) risk in solid tumors, hematologic malignancies (HM) are underrepresented. To develop an internal and external validation of a logistic regression model to predict VTE risk in hospitalized HM patients. Validation of the existing VTE predictive model was performed through a prospective case-control study in 496 hospitalized HM patients between December 2010 and 2020 at the Arnaldo Milián University Hospital, Cuba. The predictive model designed with data from 285 patients includes 5 predictive factors: hypercholesterolemia, tumoral activity, use of thrombogenic drugs, diabetes mellitus, and immobilization. The model was internally validated using bootstrap analysis. External validation was realized in a prospective cohort of 211 HM patients. The predictive model had a 76.4% negative predictive value (NPV) and an 81.7% positive predictive value (PPV) in the bootstrapping validation. The area under curve (AUC) in the bootstrapping set was 0.838. Accuracy was 80.1% and 82.9% in the internal and external validation, respectively. In the external validation, the model produced 89.7% of NPV, 67.7% of PPV, 74.6% of sensitivity, and 86.2% of specificity. The AUC in the external validation was 0.900. VTE predictive model is a reproducible and simple tool with good accuracy and discrimination.

Prevention of Venous Thrombosis of Lower Limbs after Cesarean Section Based on Smart Medical Air Pressure Therapy Instrument

Affected by the environment, the incidence of lower extremity venous thrombosis after cesarean section is gradually increasing, and postoperative nursing is becoming more and more important. The intelligent medical air pressure therapy instrument is a common and effective postpartum nursing method. This paper studies the role of pneumatic therapeutic apparatus in the prevention of lower extremity venous thrombosis after cesarean section in smart medicine, describes its importance in nursing, and analyzes the role of pneumatic therapeutic apparatus and smart medicine combined with the postoperative nursing situation of patients with cesarean section in our hospital. In this paper, we aggregate the description text of six levels of hospital intelligent service grading evaluation. In order to show the characteristics of each level and the requirements of each level of hospital intelligent service, we can roughly see the differences between different levels. Research shows that with the construction of medical information platform, more and more medical processes rely on hospital information system, which promotes the integration of medical platform and the interconnection of medical equipment, provides convenient services for patients, and provides patients with easier access to services. At the same time, the massive data generated by appointment, nursing, treatment, and other activities will be recorded, and the pneumatic therapeutic instrument can avoid the occurrence of 60% lower extremity venous thrombosis. The data of air pressure therapeutic instrument is dynamic, and its performance is mainly reflected in the recording of dynamic index data.

Retrospective analysis of the safety of peripherally inserted catheters versus implanted port catheters during first-line treatment for patients with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma

Objectives

Both peripherally inserted central catheters (PICCs) and implanted port catheters (PORTs) are commonly used for the delivery of immunochemotherapy. We compared the safety of the two types of devices in a homogeneous and monocentric population of diffuse large B‐cell lymphoma (DLBCL) patients who were treated with first‐line immunochemotherapy by evaluating the numbers of catheter‐related venous thromboses (VTs) and infections that occurred in the six months after implantation according to the type of device.

Methods

Using a propensity score, the adjusted relative risk (ARR) between the type of catheter and the occurrence of catheter‐related complications (infection and/or VT) of interest was retrospectively determined.

Results

479 patients were enrolled (266 PORTs/213 PICCs), and 26 VTs (5.4%) and 30 infections (6.3%) were identified in the period following PICC/PORT implantation. The adjusted relative risk (ARR) of catheter‐related complications (infection and/or VT) according to the type of device was 2.6 (95% CI =1.3–5.9, p = .0075). This risk increase associated with the PICC device was significant for both infections (ARR = 3.2; 95% CI = 1.3–10.9) and thrombosis (ARR = 4; 95% CI = 1.5–11.6).

Conclusion

Our study supports the preferential use of PORTs for the first line of treatment for DLBCL patients.

Characteristics and Predictors of Venous Thromboembolism Among Lymphoma Patients Undergoing Chemotherapy: A Cohort Study in China

Background: Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is a potential complication among lymphoma patients. We evaluated the incidence rate and predictors of VTE in lymphoma patients undergoing chemotherapy.

Methods: The present study retrospectively studied 1,069 patients with lymphoma who were treated with chemotherapy from 2018 to 2020. We investigated clinical predictors of VTE among all patients. The follow-up results were obtained via telephone communication and from inpatient and outpatient records.

Results: A total of 1,069 patients underwent chemotherapy for lymphoma. During a mean follow-up of 23.1 months, 52 (4.9%) patients developed VTE. According to a multivariate analysis, the five variables found to be independently associated with VTE were male sex (HR 2.273, 95% CI 1.197–4.316, p = 0.012), age >64-years-old (HR 2.256, 95% CI 1.017–5.005, p = 0.045), the number of cycles of chemotherapy (HR 4.579, 95% CI 1.173–17.883, p = 0.029), platelet count ≥350 × 10⁹/L (HR 2.533, 95% CI 1.187–5.406, p = 0.016), and D-dimer >0.5 mg/L (HR 4.367, 95% CI 2.124–8.981, p < 0.001).

Conclusion: This population-based study confirms the risk factors for VTE among patients with lymphoma who underwent chemotherapy and confirms that targeted thromboprophylaxis may reduce the burden of VTE in this population.

Immune activation and inflammatory biomarkers as predictors of venous thromboembolism in lymphoma patients

Background

Lymphomas are characterized by elevated synthesis of inflammatory soluble mediators that could trigger the development of venous thromboembolism (VTE). However, data on the relationship between specific immune dysregulation and VTE occurrence in patients with lymphoma are scarce. Therefore, this study aimed to assess the association between inflammatory markers and the risk of VTE development in patients with lymphoma.

Methods

The erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR), C-reactive protein (CRP), neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR), platelet-to-lymphocyte ratio (PLR), lactate dehydrogenase (LDH), total protein (TP), and albumin were assessed in 706 patients with newly diagnosed or relapsed lymphoma. Data were collected for all VTE events, while the diagnosis of VTE was established objectively based on radiographic studies. ROC (receiver operating characteristic) curve analysis was performed to define the optimal cutoff values for predicting VTE.

Results

The majority of patients was diagnosed with aggressive non-Hodgkin lymphoma (58.8%) and had advanced stage disease (59.9%). Sixty-nine patients (9.8%) developed VTE. The NLR, PLR, ESR, CRP, and LDH were significantly higher in the patients with lymphoma with VTE, whereas the TP and albumin were significantly lower in those patients. Using the univariate regression analysis, the NLR, PLR, TP, albumin, LDH, and CRP were prognostic factors for VTE development. In the multivariate regression model, the NLR and CRP were independent prognostic factors for VTE development. ROC curve analysis demonstrated acceptable specificity and sensitivity of the parameters: NLR, PLR, and CRP for predicting VTE.

Conclusion

Inflammatory dysregulation plays an important role in VTE development in patients with lymphoma. Widely accessible, simple inflammatory parameters can classify patients with lymphoma at risk of VTE development.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12959-022-00381-3.

Venous-thromboembolism and associated health care utilization in elderly patients with diffuse large B cell lymphoma

BACKGROUND

Patients with lymphoma have an increased risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE). The authors examined the risk of VTE and subsequent health care utilization in elderly patients with diffuse large B cell lymphoma (DLBCL).

METHODS

A total of 5537 DLBCL patients ≥66 years old enrolled in Medicare from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results registry and a noncancer control group of Medicare beneficiaries (n = 5537) were identified. Cumulative incidence function to examine the risk of VTE 12 months after DLBCL diagnosis was used. Fine and Gray method was used to examine the risk factors associated with VTE risk in multivariable models. Total number of hospitalizations, outpatient visits, and Medicare spending were compared in DLBCL patients with and without VTE.

RESULTS

VTE was diagnosed in 8.3% DLBCL patients and 1.5% controls, yielding an 8.6-fold higher risk of VTE in DLBCL in adjusted analysis (95% confidence interval [CI], 6.62-11.20; P < .001). Multivariable regression analysis showed that precancer VTE history was associated with an increased risk of developing VTE after a DLBCL diagnosis (hazard ratio [HR], 5.39; 95% CI, 4.39-6.63), and Asian individuals were associated with a lower risk (HR, 0.54; 95% CI, 0.29-1.00). Patients newly diagnosed with VTE after lymphoma had a 1.7-fold higher rate of hospitalization and a 1.2-fold higher rate of outpatient visits compared to those without, resulting in excess Medicare spending of $22,208 in the first year after DLBCL diagnosis.

CONCLUSIONS

Elderly patients with DLBCL have an elevated risk of VTE resulting in excess health care utilization. VTE history before DLBCL was associated with increased risk of post-DLBCL VTE, and Asian individuals were associated with a lower risk of VTE.

Prevention of venous thromboembolism in hematologic neoplasms: an expert consensus from SEHH-SETH

Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is a serious complication in hematologic neoplasms, so finding adequate prevention strategies is an urgent requirement. However, prospective studies with large enough cohorts are scarce, limiting the development of evidence-based thromboprophylaxis guidelines. The present position paper is addressed to all hematologists treating patients affected by hematologic neoplasms with the aim to provide clinicians with a useful tool for the prevention of VTE.

Incorporating genetic and clinical data into the prediction of thromboembolism risk in patients with lymphoma

Background

The incorporation of genetic variables into risk scores for predicting venous thromboembolic events (VTE) could improve their capacity to identify those patients for whom thromboprophylaxis would be most beneficial. Proof‐of‐concept of this is provided by the TiC‐ONCO score for predicting the risk of VTE in patients with solid tumours. Our aim was to develop a similarly improved tool—the TiC‐LYMPHO score—for predicting VTE in patients with lymphoma.

Methods

In a retrospective observational study of 208 patients with lymphoma, 31 (14.9%) were found to have experienced an episode of VTE either at the time of diagnosis or over the next 6 months. Clinical variables associated with VTE, determined via logistic regression analysis, plus the same genetic variables included in the TiC‐ONCO score, were used to build the TiC‐LYMPHO score algorithm. The sensitivity, specificity, predictive values and AUC of the TiC‐LYMPHO, the Khorana and ThroLy scores were compared in the same population.

Results

The TiC‐LYMPHO score showed a significantly higher AUC, sensitivity and NPV (0.783, 95.35% and 97.98% respectively) than the other scores. The ThroLy score showed a significantly higher specificity (96.43% vs. 54.49%; p < 0.0001) and PPV (37.50% vs. 26.36%; p = 0.0147) than the TiC‐LYMPHO score, whereas its AUC, sensitivity and NPV were significantly lower (0.579, 19.35% and 86.48%, respectively).

Conclusion

These results show that by incorporating genetic and clinical data into VTE risk assessment, the TiC‐LYMPHO score can categorize patients with lymphoma better in terms of their risk of VTE and allow individualized thromboprophylaxis to be prescribed.

The Application of the ThroLy Risk Assessment Model to Predict Venous Thromboembolism in Patients with Diffuse Large B-Cell Lymphoma

Background

Patients with aggressive lymphomas are at higher risk for venous thromboembolism (VTE). ThroLy is a risk assessment model (RAM) derived to predict the occurrence of VTE in various types of lymphomas. In this study, we assess the clinical application of ThroLy RAM in a unified group of patients with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL).

Methods

Hospital databases were searched for patients with DLBCL and radiologically-confirmed VTE. Items in the ThroLy RAM, including prior VTE, reduced mobility, obesity, extranodal disease, mediastinal involvement, neutropenia and hemoglobin < 10.0 g/dL, were retrospectively reviewed.

Results

A total of 524 patients, median age 49 (range: 18-90) years were included. Patients had high disease burden; 57.3% with stage III/IV and 34.0% with bulky disease. All were treated on unified guidelines; 63 (12.0%) had primary refractory disease. Venous thromboembolic events were reported in 71 (13.5%) patients. Among 121 patients with high (> 3) ThroLy score, 22.3% developed VTE compared to 8.4% and 12.4% in those with low and intermediate risk scores, respectively (P = .014). Simplifying the ThroLy model into two risk groups; high-risk (score ≥ 3) and low risk (score < 3) can still segregate patients; VTE developed in 44 (17.2%) high-risk patients (n = 256) compared to 27 (10.1%) in the low-risk group (n = 268), P = .038. Neutropenia, a component of the ThroLy, was encountered in only 14 (2.7%) patients.

Conclusions

ThroLy RAM can identify patients with DLBCL at high risk for VTE. Model can be modified by dividing patients into two, rather than three risk groups, and further simplified by omitting neutropenia.

How I treat and prevent venous thrombotic complications in patients with lymphoma

Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is a common complication occurring in 5-10% of patients with lymphoma. As the complexity of lymphoma management has increased with novel therapies, so too has the treatment of VTE. Therapeutic options for the treatment of cancer-associated VTE have expanded from only warfarin and low-molecular-weight heparins (LMWHs) to include the direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) apixaban, edoxaban and rivaroxaban. There have been no head-to-head trials comparing different DOACs in this setting and randomized trials comparing a DOAC with LMWH dalteparin differ in trial design and results. Drug-drug interactions, drug-specific side effects and patient selection are important considerations when prescribing anticoagulant therapy. In all patients, the relative risks of thrombosis and bleeding, the availability of the anticoagulant, and the life expectancy of the patient are vital elements in selecting the most appropriate anticoagulant (which can vary over time) for the individual patient. We describe the intricacies and challenges of treating thrombotic complications in patients with lymphoma with an emphasis on evidence and guideline-based care.

Cancer-Associated Thrombosis: A Clinical Scoping Review of the Risk Assessment Models Across Solid Tumours and Haematological Malignancies

Cancer-associated thrombosis (CAT) is a leading cause of death in cancer patients receiving outpatient chemotherapy. The latest guidelines emphasize stratifying the patients in terms of CAT risks periodically. Multiple risk assessment models (RAMs) were developed to classify patients and guide thromboprophylaxis to high-risk patients. This study aimed to discuss and highlight different RAMs across various malignancy types with their related advantages and disadvantages. A scoping review was conducted using predefined search terms in three scientific databases, including Google Scholar, Science Direct, and PubMed. The search for studies was restricted to original research articles that reported risk assessment models published in the last thirteen years (between 2008 and 2021) to cover the most recently published evidence following the development of the principal risk assessment score in 2008. Data charting of the relevant trials, scores, advantages, and disadvantages were done iteratively considering the malignancy type. Of the initially identified 1115 studies, 39 studies with over 67,680 patients were included in the review. In solid organ malignancy, nine risk assessment scores were generated. The first and most known Khorana risk score still offers the best available risk assessment model when used for high-risk populations with a threshold of 2 and above. However, KRS has a limitation of failure to stratify low-risk patients. The COMPASS-CAT score showed the best performance in the lung carcinoma patients who have a higher prevalence of thrombosis than other malignancy subtypes. In testicular germ cell tumours, Bezan et al RAM is a validated good discriminatory RAM for this malignancy subtype. CAT in haematological malignancy seems to be under-investigated and has multiple disease-related, and treatment-related confounding factors. AL-Ani et al score performed efficiently in acute leukemia. In multiple myeloma, both SAVED and IMPEDED VTE scores showed good performance. Despite the availability of different disease-specific scores in lymphoma-related thrombosis, the standard of care needs to be redefined.

[Predicting the Incidence of Venous Thromboembolism Using the Khorana Score: A Literature Review]

Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is the second most common cause of cancer-related deaths globally. The Khorana score, a VTE prediction model, is calculated using the site of cancer, white blood cell count, hemoglobin level, platelet count, and body mass index. This study aimed to investigate the usefulness of the Khorana score, using data available in the literature. On July 28, 2020, we collected papers using the following keywords: "cancer", "venous thromboembolism", "deep vein thrombosis", "pulmonary embolism", and "Khorana score" on PubMed. Papers published after 2016 were eligible. The selection criteria were as follows: "English or Japanese", "original paper", "abstract and full text", and "comply with the clinical question". There were 131 papers that matched the keywords, and 15 of them complied with the selection criteria. In 15 papers, Khorana score was calculated in 8047 patients. In the low- and intermediate-risk groups, 532 of 6812 patients developed VTE [7.8%, 95%confidence intervals (CI) 7.2-8.5], whereas in the high-risk group, 127 of 1235 patients developed VTE (10.3%, 95% CI 8.7-12.1) [odds ratio (OR) 1.3, 95% CI 1.0-1.6] (I²=0%, τ²=0, p=0.50). Venous thromboembolism prediction using the Khorana score might be useful. However, most of the number of VTE patients are in the low- and intermediate-risk groups. Therefore, a comprehensive evaluation according to clinical conditions is required, regardless of the risk classification using the Khorana score.

Overview of risk assessment models for venous thromboembolism in ambulatory patients with cancer

A B S T R A C T Important progress has been made in the development of risk assessment models (RAM) for the identification of outpatients on anticancer treatment at risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE). Since the breakthrough publication of the original Khorana risk score (KRS) more than 10 years ago, a new generation of KRS-based scores have been developed, including the Vienna Cancer and Thrombosis Study, PROTECHT, CONKO, ONCOTEV, TicOnco and the CATS/MICA score. Among these the CATS/MICA score showed that a simplified score composed of only two calibrated predictors, the type of cancer and the D-dimer levels, offers a user-friendly tool for the evaluation of cancer-associated thrombosis (CAT) risk. The COMPASS-CAT score is the first that introduced a more synthetic approach of risk evaluation by combining cancer-related predictors with patient comorbidity in a score which is designed for the types of cancer frequently seen in the community (i.e. breast, lung colon or ovarian cancers) and has been externally validated in independent studies. The Throly score is registered as part of the same group as it has a similar structure to the COMPASS-CAT score and is applicable in patients with lymphoma. The incorporation of specific biomarkers of hypercoagulability to the RAM for CAT offers the possibility to perform a precision medicine approach in the prevention of CAT. The improvement of RAM for CAT with artificial intelligence methodologies and deep learning techniques is the challenge in the near future.

The risk of venous thromboembolism in cancer patients receiving chemotherapy: a meta-analysis with systematic review

Background

The Khorana score was developed to predict the risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE) in cancer patients receiving chemotherapy. However, the utility of the Khorana score remains controversial since different studies report varying results. This meta-analysis aims to analyze the incidence of VTE with different risk stratifications using the Khorana score for overall follow-up time, incidence of deep-vein thrombosis (DVT), incidence of pulmonary embolism (PE) and bleeding in cancer patients receiving chemotherapy.

Methods

A systemic search was performed using PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library and Web of Science for studies describing VTE incidence in cancer patients undergoing chemotherapy. The incidence of VTE was calculated using R computing software.

Results

We included 13 studies in this meta-analysis, with a total of 5,852 cancer patients and 424 VTE cases. Results revealed that overall incidence of low, intermediate and high-risk groups were 2% (95% CI: 1–6%), 11% (95% CI: 6–18%) and 14% (95% CI: 9–20%), respectively. The overall incidence of DVT and PE were 6% (95% CI: 4–10%) and 4% (95% CI: 2–7%), respectively. Lastly, bleeding rate was 4% (95% CI: 2–8%).

Conclusions

According to this meta-analysis, the Khorana score is suitable for cancer patients receiving chemotherapy in a 3–6-month timeframe rather than “forever”. The incidence of PE in this population was significantly greater than what was observed for non-cancer patients. More than half of VTE events occurred within 6 months of commencing chemotherapy.

Prevention of Venous Thromboembolism in 2020 and Beyond

Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is the third most common cause of vascular mortality worldwide and comprises deep-vein thrombosis (DVT) and pulmonary embolism (PE). In this review, we discuss how an understanding of VTE epidemiology and the results of thromboprophylaxis trials have shaped the current approach to VTE prevention. We will discuss modern thromboprophylaxis as it pertains to genetic risk factors, exogenous hormonal therapies, pregnancy, surgery, medical hospitalization, cancer, and what is known thus far about VTE in COVID-19 infection.

Venous Thromboembolism in Lymphoma: Risk Stratification and Antithrombotic Prophylaxis

Lymphoma is listed among the neoplasias with a high risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE). Risk factors for VTE appear to differ from risk factors in solid tumors. We review the literature of the last 20 years for reports identifying these risk factors in cohorts consisting exclusively of lymphoma patients. We selected 25 publications. The most frequent studies were analyses of retrospective single-center cohorts. We also included two reports of pooled analyses of clinical trials, two meta-analyses, two analyses of patient registries, and three analyses of population-based databases. The VTE risk is the highest upfront during the first two months after lymphoma diagnosis and decreases over time. This upfront risk may be related to tumor burden and the start of chemotherapy as contributing factors. Factors consistently reported as VTE risk factors are aggressive histology, a performance status ECOG ≥ 2 leading to increased immobility, more extensive disease, and localization to particular sites, such as central nervous system (CNS) and mediastinal mass. Association between laboratory values that are part of risk assessment models in solid tumors and VTE risk in lymphomas are very inconsistent. Recently, VTE risk scores for lymphoma were developed that need further validation, before they can be used for risk stratification and primary prophylaxis. Knowledge of VTE risk factors in lymphomas may help in the evaluation of the individual risk-benefit ratio of prophylaxis and help to design prospective studies on primary prophylaxis in lymphoma.

Validation of the Khorana Score to Assess Venous Thromboembolism and Its Association with Mortality in Cancer Patients: A Retrospective Community-based Observational Experience

INTRODUCTION

Khorana score (KS) stratifies patients into low, intermediate, and high risk groups for venous thromboembolism (VTE). We examined the generalizability of the KS to risk of VTE and association with mortality.

METHODS

A retrospective cohort study was conducted at Mount Auburn Hospital, Cambridge, Massachusetts. Patients aged 18 years or older undergoing chemotherapy were included. All patients were evaluated for a six-month period. Primary study endpoints were VTE or mortality.

RESULTS

Some 277 participants were included with a mean age of 63.95 (standard deviation, SD ± 12.47). The incidence proportion was 6.13% and a total of 17 VTE events were reported over a 2.5-year period. Compared to those with a low KS (0), those with a high KS (3 or above) had 6.4 times (p=0.032) while with an intermediate KS (1-2) had 2.6 times the odds of having a VTE event (p=0.22). Those who had a VTE had 4.03 times the odds of death compared to those who did not have a VTE (p=0.006). Compared to those with a low KS, those with a high KS had 5.7 times (p=0.02) the odds of six-month mortality and 5.04 odds (p=0.001) of mortality at any time.

CONCLUSION

High KS was associated with increased odds of VTE and mortality in our study.

The effectiveness and safety of thromboprophylaxis in cancer patients based on Khorana score: a meta-analysis and systematic review of randomized controlled trials

INTRODUCTION

Cancer patients receiving chemotherapy are a high risk of VTE, yet the importance of thromboprophylaxis for cancer patients that are at high risk of developing VTE is still controversial.

AIM

To calculate the benefits and harms of thromboprophylaxis, compared to placebo, in ambulatory high-risk cancer patients that are receiving chemotherapy.

METHODS

We searched PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, the Cochrane Library, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Chinese Biomedical Literature Database, WANFANG Data, Chinese National Knowledge Infrastructure and Chinese Scientific Journal Database for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) describing benefits and harms of thromboprophylaxis. Statistical analysis was performed using Stata software (version 15.1).

RESULTS

We included six studies, which contained a total of 3240 cancer patients with thromboprophylaxis and 2874 cancer patients without thromboprophylaxis. Thromboprophylaxis was effective in high-risk patients with two points or higher (RR 0.51, 95% CI 0.36-0.71, I² = 0.0%, P = 0.526). It was associated with an increase in bleeding events (RR 1.65, 95% CI 1.14-2.40, I² = 0.0%, P = 0.498) and was mainly efficient in reducing the risk of pulmonary embolism (RR 0.56, 95% CI 0.33-0.96, I² = 0.0%, P = 0.263). The risk of major (RR 1.85, 95% CI 0.87-3.94, I² = 0.0%, P = 0.888) and non-major (RR 1.59, 95% CI 0.96-2.62, I² = 16.3%, P = 0.303) bleeding showed no significant difference with or without thromboprophylaxis. There was no reduction in all-cause mortality with thromboprophylaxis (RR 0.95, 95% CI 0.78-1.18, I² = 22.0%, P = 0.277).

CONCLUSION

Thromoboprophylaxis is effective and safe in cancer patients that are at high risk for developing VTE with chemotherapy.

The Incidence of Venous Thromboembolism and Impact on Survival in Hodgkin Lymphoma

BACKGROUND

Thrombosis increase the acute and long-term morbidity and mortality in malignancy patients. We analyzed venous thromboembolism (VTE) in patients with Hodgkin lymphoma, the impact of VTE on survival, predisposing factors for VTE, and predicting value of Khorana and ThroLy score models.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We included 150 adult patients with Hodgkin lymphoma between January 2010 and 2018 at our university hospital.

RESULTS

VTE was observed in 31 patients (20.7%). The types of VTE were 18 upper and 3 lower extremity deep vein thrombosis and 10 pulmonary embolism (1 with lower extremity deep vein thrombosis). Twenty-nine patients developed VTE during the treatment with a median time of episode as 5 months. In logistic regression analysis, a body mass index of >32 kg/m², high fibrinogen levels, initial thrombocytosis and leukocytosis, splenic and extranodal involvement, presence of a central venous line, advanced stage, line of treatment status of thromboprophylaxis, VTE timing, and better Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance scores were observed to be related with VTE. Kaplan Meier survival analysis showed a negative impact of VTE on survival. Khorana and ThroLy risk assessment models were found predictive for VTE (P = .000 and P = .003, respectively), although only ThroLy score was associated with the survival.

CONCLUSION

Thromboprophylaxis and precautions for VTE in patients with Hodgkin lymphoma according to validated risk assessment models can improve prognosis and quality of life owing to the impact of VTE on survival in the study.

Venous thromboembolic complications in lymphoma patients

Lymphomas represent a heterogeneous group of malignant hematological diseases with high risk for development of venous thromboembolic complications (VTE). Consequently, VTE significantly impacts morbidity and mortality in these patients. Another concern is the financial burden of the healthcare system caused by diagnostic and therapeutic procedures of cancer-associated thrombosis (CAT). The complex biology of lymphoma, in conjunction with patient and treatment related risk factors for the development of VTE, results in a procoagulant hemostatic dysregulation. Considering the incidence of VTE in patients with lymphoma, there is an emerging demand for both reliable risks assessment model (RAM) for prediction of VTE, as well as for effective VTE prophylaxis and treatment. The clinical course of patients with malignant diseases is accompanied by a wide range of potential treatment complications, making the task of prevention and treatment of VTE even more challenging. In recent years, great progress has been achieved in understanding the pathophysiological mechanisms of thrombotic complications, while the significant number of randomized controlled trials (RCT) have provided standards of prophylaxis and treatment of VTE complications in patients with malignancy. In comparison to previous recommendations and guidelines for CAT, the use of direct oral anticoagulants (DOAC) has been gradually approaching low molecular weight heparins (LMWH) in terms of efficacy and safety profile in these indications. This systematic review is focused on the latest pathophysiological advances, risk factors assessment, prophylactic and therapeutic recommendations and guidelines concerning VTE in patients with lymphoma.

Clinical utility of rotational thromboelastometry in detecting hemostatic disorders

Hemostasis represents an equilibrium between procoagulant and anticoagulant processes, but once this balance is shifted to one side, it leads to coagulopathy presented by pathological bleeding or thrombosis. Many conditions could cause coagulopathy. The most common are sepsis, severe traumas and malignancies. Widely used conventional coagulation tests (CCTs), focused only on clot initiation, are primary used to detect hypocoagulability. Viscoelastographic tests (VET), like rotational thromboelastometry (ROTEM), can detect problems in different stages of coagulation, from initiation thought clot elongation and propagation, to the clot lysis and might reveal both, hypercoagulability and hypocoagulability. Rotational thromboelastometry have gained popularity in the care of patients with TIC, as a tool to guide transfusion support. Nowadays it is widely used in other medical specialties, as well. Several studies in septic patients pointed out hypocoagulable ROTEM pattern as a predictor of poor prognosis. Additionally, there is great interest of ROTEM usage in malignancies, although limited research is currently available. It suggests ROTEM have the ability to identify a patient in high risk of thrombosis. Further investigation trough randomized studies is needed to confirm ROTEM utility and to help in making a consensus about its use in different medical occasions.

Incidence and characteristics of venous thromboembolism in Asian patients with primary central nervous system lymphoma undergoing chemotherapy

BACKGROUND

Venous thromboembolism (VTE) may lead to diminished quality of life and ultimately worse prognosis in cancer patients, but there is limited data on the incidence, risk factors and mortality impact of VTE in Asian primary central nervous system lymphoma (PCNSL) patients.

OBJECTIVES

To report the incidence, risk factors and mortality impact of VTE in Asian PCNSL patients.

METHODS

From 7 academic centers in Korea, 235 newly diagnosed PCNSL patients undergoing chemotherapy were retrospectively identified during period of January 2004 to September 2018.

RESULTS

All patients but 12 (6 T-cell, 6 other B-cell) had diffuse large B-cell lymphoma. During the median follow-up of 21 months, 33 patient (14.0%) developed VTE. Of the VTE events, 11 (33.3%) were deep vein thrombosis (DVT), 15 (45.5%) were pulmonary thromboembolism (PTE), and 7 (21.2%) were DVT with PTE. The median time to VTE was 2 months and the one-year actuarial incidence was 11.7%. On multivariate analysis, ECOG performance ≥2, age >60 years, female sex, and Hb <10 g/dL were independently associated with VTE. The patients with VTE were associated with shorter disease specific survival (P = 0.046) and overall survival (P = 0.022).

CONCLUSION

Overall, the incidence of VTE in Asian PCNSL seems to be lower compared to Western population. As VTE development is associated with overall survival and indicative of relapse, careful close monitoring is warranted.

Risk of venous thromboembolism in patients with non-Hodgkin lymphoma surviving blood or marrow transplantation

BACKGROUND

Patients with non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL) have an increased risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE), particularly when they are receiving treatment. Blood or marrow transplantation (BMT) is recommended for relapsed/refractory NHL, and the risk of VTE after these patients undergo BMT is uncertain.

METHODS

Patients with NHL who survived 2 years or longer after BMT were surveyed for long-term health outcomes, including VTE. The median follow-up was 8.1 years (interquartile range, 5.6-12.9 years). The risk of VTE in 734 patients with NHL versus 897 siblings without a history of cancer and the risk factors associated with VTE were analyzed.

RESULTS

BMT survivors of NHL were at increased risk for VTE in comparison with siblings (odds ratio for allogeneic BMT survivors, 4.61; P < .0001; odds ratio for autologous BMT survivors, 1.75; P = .035). The cumulative incidence of VTE was 6.3% ± 0.9% at 5 years after BMT and 8.1% ± 1.1% at 10 years after BMT. In allogeneic BMT recipients, an increased body mass index (BMI; hazard ratio [HR] for BMI of 25-30 kg/m² , 3.52; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.43-8.64; P = .006; HR for BMI > 30 kg/m² , 3.44; 95% CI, 1.15-10.23; P = .027) and a history of chronic graft-versus-host disease (HR, 3.33; 95% CI, 1.59-6.97; P = .001) were associated with an increased risk of VTE. Among autologous BMT recipients, a diagnosis of coronary artery disease (HR, 5.94; 95% CI, 1.7-20.71; P = .005) and prior treatment with carmustine (HR, 4.91; 95% CI, 1.66-14.51; P = .004) were associated with increased VTE risk.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with NHL who survive BMT are at risk for developing late occurring VTE, and ongoing vigilance for this complication is required. Future studies assessing the role of thromboprophylaxis in high-risk patients with NHL are needed.

Venous Thromboembolism Prophylaxis and Treatment in Patients With Cancer: ASCO Clinical Practice Guideline Update

PURPOSE

To provide updated recommendations about prophylaxis and treatment of venous thromboembolism (VTE) in patients with cancer.

METHODS

PubMed and the Cochrane Library were searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and meta-analyses of RCTs published from August 1, 2014, through December 4, 2018. ASCO convened an Expert Panel to review the evidence and revise previous recommendations as needed.

RESULTS

The systematic review included 35 publications on VTE prophylaxis and treatment and 18 publications on VTE risk assessment. Two RCTs of direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) for the treatment of VTE in patients with cancer reported that edoxaban and rivaroxaban are effective but are linked with a higher risk of bleeding compared with low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) in patients with GI and potentially genitourinary cancers. Two additional RCTs reported on DOACs for thromboprophylaxis in ambulatory patients with cancer at increased risk of VTE.

RECOMMENDATIONS

Changes to previous recommendations: Clinicians may offer thromboprophylaxis with apixaban, rivaroxaban, or LMWH to selected high-risk outpatients with cancer; rivaroxaban and edoxaban have been added as options for VTE treatment; patients with brain metastases are now addressed in the VTE treatment section; and the recommendation regarding long-term postoperative LMWH has been expanded. Re-affirmed recommendations: Most hospitalized patients with cancer and an acute medical condition require thromboprophylaxis throughout hospitalization. Thromboprophylaxis is not routinely recommended for all outpatients with cancer. Patients undergoing major cancer surgery should receive prophylaxis starting before surgery and continuing for at least 7 to 10 days. Patients with cancer should be periodically assessed for VTE risk, and oncology professionals should provide patient education about the signs and symptoms of VTE.Additional information is available at www.asco.org/supportive-care-guidelines.

Validation of the Khorana score in acute myeloid leukemia patients: a single-institution experience

BACKGROUND

Although patients with acute myeloid leukemia (AML) were shown to have an increased risk of thrombosis, no thrombosis risk assessment scoring system has been developed for AML patients. The Khorana Risk Score (KRS), which has been widely used for thrombosis risk assessment in the clinical setting, was developed on the basis of solid tumor data and has not been validated among AML patients. This study aims to validate the use of the KRS as a thrombosis risk-scoring system among patients with AML.

METHODS

Using data from H. Lee Moffitt Cancer Center and Research Institution's Total Cancer Care Research Study, we retrospectively identified patients who were histologically confirmed with AML from 2000 to 2018. Clinical and laboratory variables at the time of AML diagnosis were characterized and analyzed. The thrombotic event rate was estimated with the Kaplan-Meier method and compared using the log-rank test.

RESULTS

A total of 867 AML patients were included in the analysis. The median age at AML diagnosis was 75 years (range, 51-96), and the majority were male (65%, n = 565). A total of 22% (n = 191), 51% (n = 445), 24% (n = 207), and 3% (n = 24) of patients had a KRS of 0, 1, 2, and 3, respectively. A total of 42 thrombotic events (3% [n = 6/191] with a KRS of 1; 5% [n = 23/445] with a KRS of 2; 6.3% [n = 13/207] with a KRS of 3) were observed, with a median follow-up of 3 months (range, 0.1-307). There was no statistical difference in the risk of thrombosis between these groups (P = .1949).

CONCLUSIONS

Although there was an increased risk of thrombosis associated with a higher KRS among AML patients with a KRS of 1 to 3, the difference was not statistically significant. Furthermore, only a few patients were found to have a KRS > 3, and this was largely due to pancytopenia, which is commonly associated with AML. These results indicate the need for a better thrombotic risk-scoring system for AML patients.

The Khorana score for prediction of venous thromboembolism in cancer patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis

We aimed to evaluate the performance of the Khorana score in predicting venous thromboembolic events in ambulatory cancer patients. Embase and MEDLINE were searched from January 2008 to June 2018 for studies which evaluated the Khorana score. Two authors independently screened studies for eligibility, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias. Additional data on the 6-month incidence of venous thromboembolism were sought by contacting corresponding authors. The incidence in each Khorana score risk group was estimated with random effects meta-analysis. A total of 45 articles and eight abstracts were included, comprising 55 cohorts enrolling 34,555 ambulatory cancer patients. For 27,849 patients (81%), 6-month follow-up data were obtained. Overall, 19% of patients had a Khorana score of 0 points, 64% a score of 1 or 2 points, and 17% a score of 3 or more points. The incidence of venous thromboembolism in the first six months was 5.0% (95%CI: 3.9-6.5) in patients with a low-risk Khorana score (0 points), 6.6% (95%CI: 5.6-7.7) in those with an intermediate-risk Khorana score (1 or 2 points), and 11.0% (95%CI: 8.8-13.8) in those with a high-risk Khorana score (3 points or higher). Of the patients with venous thromboembolism in the first six months, 23.4% (95%CI: 18.4-29.4) had been classified as high risk according to the Khorana score. In conclusion, the Khorana score can be used to select ambulatory cancer patients at high risk of venous thromboembolism for thromboprophylaxis; however, most events occur outside this high-risk group.

Evaluation of the ThroLy score for the prediction of venous thromboembolism in newly diagnosed patients treated for lymphoid malignancies in clinical practice

The utility in clinical practice of a recently developed and validated predictive model for venous thromboembolism (VTE) events in lymphoma patients, known as the thrombosis lymphoma (ThroLy) score, is unknown. We evaluated the association of ThroLy with VTE in patients treated for diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) or Hodgkin lymphoma (HL) undergoing ambulatory first-line chemotherapy. Retrospective analyses were performed on 428 patients (median age 50), 241 were newly diagnosed DLBCL, and 187 had HL. During initial chemotherapy, 64 (15%) patients developed VTE. According to the ThroLy, 322 (75.2%) patients were considered low risk, 88 (20.6%) patients had intermediate risk and 18 (4.2%) patients high risk for VTE development. Patients with DLBCL were more often in the high-risk ThroLy group and had more VTE events than HL. VTE occurred in; 38.9% (n = 7) high-risk patients, 29.5% (n = 26) intermediate risk, and 9.6% (n = 31) low risk according to the ThroLy score. However, in multivariate analysis, high ThroLy (OR 5.13; 95% CI: 1.83-14.36, P = .002), intermediate ThroLy (OR 3.96; 95% CI: 2.19-7.17, P < .001), and aggressive lymphoma-DLBCL (OR 1.91; 95% CI: 1.05-3.47, P = .034) were all significantly associated with development of VTE, 48% of the VTE events occurred in the low-risk ThroLy score group (the ROC AUC (95% CI) 0.40-0.70 and C statistic-0.55). In our study, the ThroLy score was not a suitably accurate model for predicting VTE events in patients at higher risk of VTE. Further research should be conducted to identify new biomarkers that will predict these events and to establish a new VTE risk assessment model.