Patterns of Anticoagulation Use in Patients With Cancer With Atrial Fibrillation and/or Atrial Flutter

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.

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.

Coexisting atrial fibrillation and cancer: time trends and associations with mortality in a nationwide Dutch study

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Coexisting atrial fibrillation (AF) and cancer challenge the management of both. The aim of the study is to comprehensively provide the epidemiology of coexisting AF and cancer.

METHODS

Using Dutch nationwide statistics, individuals with incident AF (n = 320 139) or cancer (n = 472 745) were identified during the period 2015-19. Dutch inhabitants without a history of AF (n = 320 135) or cancer (n = 472 741) were matched as control cohorts by demographic characteristics. Prevalence of cancer/AF at baseline, 1-year risk of cancer/AF diagnosis, and their time trends were determined. The association of cancer/AF diagnosis with all-cause mortality among those with AF/cancer was estimated by using time-dependent Cox regression.

RESULTS

The rate of prevalence of cancer in the AF cohort was 12.6% (increasing from 11.9% to 13.2%) compared with 5.6% in the controls; 1-year cancer risk was 2.5% (stable over years) compared with 1.8% in the controls [adjusted hazard ratio (aHR) 1.52, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.46-1.58], which was similar by cancer type. The rate of prevalence of AF in the cancer cohort was 7.5% (increasing from 6.9% to 8.2%) compared with 4.3% in the controls; 1-year AF risk was 2.8% (stable over years) compared with 1.2% in the controls (aHR 2.78, 95% CI 2.69-2.87), but cancers of the oesophagus, lung, stomach, myeloma, and lymphoma were associated with higher hazards of AF than other cancer types. Both cancer diagnosed after incident AF (aHR 7.77, 95% CI 7.45-8.11) and AF diagnosed after incident cancer (aHR 2.55, 95% CI 2.47-2.63) were associated with all-cause mortality, but the strength of the association varied by cancer type.

CONCLUSIONS

Atrial fibrillation and cancer were associated bidirectionally and were increasingly coexisting, but AF risk varied by cancer type. Coexisting AF and cancer were negatively associated with survival.

Characteristics and Management of Patients With Cancer and Atrial Fibrillation: The BLITZ-AF Cancer Registry

Background

Atrial fibrillation (AF) is a frequent cardiovascular (CV) comorbidity in cancer.

Objectives

The purpose of this study was to examine clinical characteristics and contemporary management of patients with AF and cancer with a specific focus on antithrombotic treatments.

Methods

This was a prospective, multicenter, observational study of patients with a recent cancer diagnosis and electrocardiographically confirmed AF (the BLITZ-AF Cancer Registry). CHA2DS2VASc scores were calculated for study participants.

Results

Overall, 1,514 individuals were enrolled from June 2019 to September 2021 (mean age 74 ± 9 years, 47.5% of participants >75 years of age; 63.5% males). CV diseases were common: 20.9% had heart failure, 18.1% had coronary artery disease, 38.5% had valvular heart disease, and 9.8% had peripheral artery disease. Previous thromboembolic and hemorrhagic events occurred in 13.9% and 10.4% of subjects, respectively. The most common cancer types were lung (14.9%), colorectal (14.1%), prostate (8.8%), and non-Hodgkin lymphoma (8.1%). In total, 41.5% of the patients had a CHA2DS2VASc score ≥4. Before admission or prior to cardiologist consultation, 16.6% of subjects were not taking any antithrombotic therapy and 22.7% were receiving antiplatelet agents and/or low-molecular-weight heparin. At discharge or after cardiologic assessment, these percentages dropped to 7.7% and 16.6%, respectively. This trend was paralleled by an increase in the use of direct-acting oral anticoagulant, while the proportion of vitamin K antagonist declined.

Conclusions

This study demonstrates that there is underuse of appropriate antithrombotic therapy for AF in cancer patients highlighting the need to integrate early CV assessment in the management of these patients. (Non-interventional Study on Patients With Atrial Fibrillation and Cancer [BLITZ-AF Cancer]; NCT03909386).

Transition of management strategies and long-term outcomes in cancer-associated venous thromboembolism from the warfarin era to the direct oral anticoagulant era

BACKGROUND

There have been still limited data on the transition of management strategies and clinical outcomes after introduction of direct oral anticoagulant (DOAC) for cancer-associated venous thromboembolism (VTE) in the real-world clinical practice.

METHODS

Using the 2 series of multicenter COMMAND VTE registries in Japan enrolling consecutive patients with acute symptomatic VTE, we compared 695 patients with cancer-associated VTE in the Registry-1 of the warfarin era and 1507 patients in the Registry-2 of the DOAC era.

RESULTS

Regarding oral anticoagulation therapy, 576 patients (82.9 %) in the Registry-1 received warfarin, whereas 1119 patients (79.6 %) in the Registry-2 received DOACs. The cumulative 3-year incidence of discontinuation of anticoagulation was not significantly different between the 2 registries (56.7 % vs. 62.7 %, P = 0.11). The cumulative 5-year incidence of recurrent VTE was significantly lower in the Registry-2 than in the Registry-1 (17.7 % vs. 10.1 %, P < 0.001). The cumulative 5-year incidence of major bleeding was significantly lower in the Registry-2 than in the Registry-1 (26.6 % vs. 20.4 %, P = 0.045). The proportion of gastrointestinal bleeding numerically increased from the Registry-1 to the Registry-2 (46.7 % and 49.5 %), whereas that of intracranial bleeding numerically decreased from the Registry-1 to the Registry-2 (17.1 % and 14.1 %).

CONCLUSIONS

In the current historical comparison of cancer-associated VTE between the 2 large real-world registries, there was a striking change in the treatment strategies with decreased risks of recurrent VTE and major bleeding in the DOAC era compared with those in the warfarin era, while there seemed to be unmet needs of DOAC-related gastrointestinal bleeding.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

URL: http://www.umin.ac.jp/ctr/index.htm UNIQUE IDENTIFIER: UMIN000044816.

Oral anticoagulant prescribing among patients with cancer and atrial fibrillation in England, 2009-2019

BACKGROUND

Anticoagulation of patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) and cancer is challenging because of their high risk for stroke and bleeding. Little is known of the variations of oral anticoagulant (OAC) prescribing in patients with AF with and without cancer.

METHODS

Patients with first-time AF during 2009-2019 from the Clinical Practice Research Datalink were included. Cancer diagnosis was defined as a history of breast, prostate, colorectal, lung, or hematological cancer. Competing-risk analysis was used to assess the risk of OAC prescribing in patients with AF and cancer adjusted for clinical and sociodemographic factors.

RESULTS

Of 177,065 patients with AF, 11.7% had cancer. Compared to patients without cancer, patients with cancer were less likely to receive OAC: prostate cancer (subhazard ratio [SHR], 0.95; 95% CI, 0.91-0.99), breast cancer (SHR, 0.93; 95% CI, 0.89-0.98), colorectal cancer (SHR, 0.93; 95% CI, 0.88-0.99), hematological cancer (SHR, 0.70; 95% CI, 0.65-0.75), and lung cancer (SHR, 0.44; 95% CI, 0.38-0.50). The cumulative incidence function (CIF) of OAC prescribing was lowest for patients with lung cancer and hematological cancer compared with patients without cancer. The difference between the CIF of OAC prescribing in patients with and without cancer becomes narrower in the most deprived areas. Elderly patients (aged ≥85 years) overall had the lowest CIF of OAC prescribing regardless of cancer status.

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with AF, underprescribing of OAC is independently associated with certain cancer types. Patients with hematological and lung cancer are the least likely to receive anticoagulation therapy compared with patients without cancer. Underprescribing of OAC in cancer is linked to old age. Further studies of patients with AF and cancer are warranted to assess the net clinical benefit of anticoagulation in certain cancer types.

Benefit and risk of oral anticoagulant initiation strategies in patients with atrial fibrillation and cancer: a target trial emulation using the SEER-Medicare database

Oral anticoagulants (OACs) are recommended for patients with atrial fibrillation (AFib) having CHA2DS2-VASc score ≥ 2. However, the benefits of OAC initiation in patients with AFib and cancer at different levels of CHA2DS2-VASc is unknown. We included patients with new AFib diagnosis and a record of cancer (breast, prostate, or lung) from the 2012-2019 Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER)-Medicare database (n = 39,915). Risks of stroke and bleeding were compared between 5 treatment strategies: (1) initiated OAC when CHA2DS2-VASc ≥ 1 (n = 6008), (2) CHA2DS2-VASc ≥ 2 (n = 8694), (3) CHA2DS2-VASc ≥ 4 (n = 20,286), (4) CHA2DS2-VASc ≥ 6 (n = 30,944), and (5) never initiated OAC (reference group, n = 33,907). Confounders were adjusted using inverse probability weighting through cloning-censoring-weighting approach. Weighted pooled logistic regressions were used to estimate treatment effect [hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence interval (95% CIs)]. We found that only patients who initiated OACs at CHA2DS2-VASc ≥ 6 had lower risk of stroke compared without OAC initiation (HR 0.64, 95% CI 0.54-0.75). All 4 active treatment strategies had reduced risk of bleeding compared to non-initiators, with OAC initiation at CHA2DS2-VASc ≥ 6 being the most beneficial strategy (HR = 0.49, 95% CI 0.44-0.55). In patients with lung cancer or regional/metastatic cancer, OAC initiation at any CHA2DS2-VASc level increased risk of stroke and did not reduce risk of bleeding (except for Regimen 4). In conclusion, among cancer patients with new AFib diagnosis, OAC initiation at higher risk of stroke (CHA2DS2-VASc score ≥ 6) is more beneficial in preventing ischemic stroke and bleeding. Patients with advanced cancer or low life-expectancy may initiate OACs when CHA2DS2-VASc score ≥ 6.

Patterns of Anticoagulation Use and All-Cause of Mortality in Cancer Patients with Atrial Fibrillation

BACKGROUND

There is uncertainty regarding the clinical benefit of anticoagulant (AC) treatment in patients with cancer with atrial fibrillation (AF). We aimed to evaluate the distribution and patterns of AC use and its impact on all-cause mortality in cancer patients with AF.

METHODS

A total of 1,653 patients with cancer diagnosed with AF were included in this retrospective cohort analysis. Multivariable logistic regression was applied to identify the clinical predictors of anticoagulant prescription. Kaplan-Meier curve with a log-rank test was used to compare the probability of survival between the AC and non-AC groups. Multivariate Cox proportional hazard regression models were implemented to evaluate the influences of various variables on all-cause death.

RESULTS

Of 1,653 patients with cancer with AF, 971 (58.7%) did not receive a prescription for AC. Among patients with CHA2DS2-VASC ≥2 in men or ≥3 in women and HAS-BLED <3, 56.5% were not prescribed AC. Rivaroxaban and warfarin are more frequently used than dabigatran, mainly in patients with lung and breast cancer. Over a median follow-up of 36 months, 776 deaths were identified. The Kaplan-Meier curve suggested that patients with AC prescriptions had better clinical outcomes. On multivariate Cox proportional risk regression analysis, AC prescription was significantly associated with a lower risk of all-cause mortality (hazard ratio, 0.78; 95% confidence interval, 0.66-0.91; P = 0.002).

CONCLUSIONS

The prescription of anticoagulants in patients with cancer with AF was suboptimal. AC prescription at discharge was associated with a decreased risk of all-cause mortality.

IMPACT

This study highlights the importance of AC prescriptions in patients with cancer with AF.

The risk vs. benefit calculus of anticoagulation in patients with ibrutinib-related atrial fibrillation

For ibrutinib-related atrial fibrillation (IRAF), guidelines for anticoagulation do not exist. We sought to describe stroke, bleeding, and anticoagulation rates among patients with IRAF. We performed a single-center retrospective review of 168 patients treated with ibrutinib followed from 2013 to 2022. Over a median follow-up of 6.4 years, 44 (26.0%) patients developed IRAF of which 38 (86.4%) had a CHA2DS2-VASc ≥2 and 7 (15.9%) had a HAS-BLED ≥3. Anticoagulation was initiated in 20 (45.5%) without a clear pattern in scores, risk factors, or cumulative dose, besides having another reason for anticoagulation. Few patients with IRAF developed non-hemorrhagic CVA (n = 3, 6.8%) or significant bleeding (n = 3, 6.8%). Among those with each adverse outcome, 2 in each group were anticoagulated and all were older than 65 years old. In conclusion, decisions for anticoagulation vary widely and patients who are elderly or with HTN may be most at risk for CVA or significant bleed.

Clinical outcomes and mortality in patients with atrial fibrillation and recently diagnosed lung cancer in oncology outpatient settings

INTRODUCTION

Our aim was to investigate the prevalence of atrial fibrillation (AF) and recently diagnosed lung cancer in the outpatient oncology clinic and to describe the clinical profile, management and outcomes of this population.

METHODS

Among 6984 patients visited at the outpatient oncology clinics attending lung cancer patients in five university hospitals from 2017 to 2019, all consecutive subjects with recently diagnosed (<1 year) disease and AF were retrospectively selected and events in follow up were registered.

RESULTS

A total of 269 patients (3.9 % of all attended, 71 ± 8 years, 91 % male) were included. Charlson, CHA2DS2-VASc and HAS-BLED indexes were 6.7 ± 2.9, 2.9 ± 1.5 y 2.5 ± 1.2, respectively. Tumour stage was I, II, III and IV in 11 %, 11 %, 33 % and 45 % of them, respectively. Anticoagulants were prescribed to 226 patients (84 %): direct anticoagulants (n = 99;44 %), low molecular weight heparins (n = 69;30 %) and vitamin K antagonists (n = 58;26 %). After 46 months of maximum follow-up, 186 patients died (69 %). Cumulative incidences of events at 3 years were 3.3 ± 1.3 % for stroke/systemic embolism (n = 7); 8.9 ± 2.2 % for thrombotic events (n = 18); 9.9 ± 2.6 % for major bleeding (n = 16), and 15.9 ± 3,0 % for cardiovascular events (n = 33). In patients with early stages of cancer (I-II), 2-year mortality was significantly higher in those with cardiovascular events or major bleeding (85 % vs 25 %, p = 0.01).

CONCLUSION

Nearly 4 % or all outpatients in the oncology clinic attending lung cancer present recently diagnosed disease and AF. Major bleeding and cardiovascular event rates are high in this population, with an impact on mortality in early stages of cancer.

Association between cancer, CHA2DS2VASc risk, and in-hospital ischaemic stroke in patients hospitalized for atrial fibrillation

BACKGROUND

Atrial fibrillation (AF) is commonly encountered in cancer patients. We investigated the CHA2DS2VASc score, and its association with in-hospital ischaemic stroke in patients with cancer who were hospitalized for AF.

METHODS AND RESULTS

Using the United States National Inpatient Sample, all hospitalizations with principal diagnosis of AF between October 2015 and December 2018 were stratified by cancer diagnosis, type, and CHA2DS2VASc risk categories (low risk, low-moderate risk, moderate-high risk). In-hospital ischaemic stroke and its association with the CHA2DS2VASc risk score was assessed across the groups using hierarchical multivariable logistic regression with adjusted odds ratios (aOR) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CI). Discrimination of CHA2DS2VASc score for in-hospital ischaemic stroke was evaluated with Receiver Operating Characteristic and Area Under the Curve (AUC). Among 1 341 870 included hospitalizations, 71 965 (5.4%) had comorbid cancer. Cancer patients had a higher proportion of moderate-high CHA2DS2VASc risk compared with their non-cancer counterparts (86.5% vs. 82.3%, P < 0.001). Compared with their low CHA2DS2VASc risk counterparts, cancer patients in low-moderate and moderate-high risk scores had similar odds of developing stroke (aOR 1.28 95% CI 0.22-7.63 and aOR 1.78 95% CI 0.41-7.66, respectively). The CHA2DS2VASc risk score had poor discrimination for ischaemic stroke in the cancer group (AUC 0.538 95% CI 0.477-0.598).

CONCLUSION

Cancer patients with AF have high CHA2DS2VASc risk. Discrimination of CHA2DS2VASc for ischaemic stroke is lower in cancer than non-cancer patients, and CHA2DS2VASc may not be adequate in determining ischaemic risk in cancer population.

Screening for clinically relevant drug-drug interactions between direct oral anticoagulants and antineoplastic agents: a pharmacovigilance approach

BACKGROUND

Use of direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) in patients with cancer remains suboptimal due to the concern regarding potential drug-drug interactions (DDIs) with antineoplastic treatments. However, the clinical relevance of these DDIs is unknown.

METHODS

We conducted a pharmacovigilance study of adverse event (AE) reports from the US Food and Drug Administration Adverse Event Reporting System from 1/1/2004 to 12/31/2021. AE reports containing DOACs and antineoplastic agents with CYP3A4/P-gp inhibitory or inducing activity suggested by published pharmacokinetic studies were included (n = 36,066). The outcomes of interest were bleeding or stroke, identified by MedDRA dictionary version 25.0. We used disproportionality analyses (DPA), logistic regression models (LR), and Multi-item Gamma-Poisson Shrinker (MGPS) (Empirical Bayes Geometric Means (EBGM) and 90% credible intervals (90% CIs)) algorithms to identify the safety signal of DDIs.

RESULTS

The highest bleeding reporting rates for each drug class were the combination of DOACs with neratinib (39.08%, n = 34), tamoxifen (21.22%, n = 104), irinotecan (20.54%, n = 83), and cyclosporine (19.17%, n = 227). The highest rate of stroke was found for prednisolone (2.43%, n = 113). In the primary analysis, no signal of DDIs by the antineoplastic therapeutic class was detected by MGPS, DPA, and LR approaches. By individual antineoplastic drug, DOACs-neratinib was the only signal detected [EBGM (EB05-EB95) = 2.71 (2.03-3.54)].

CONCLUSION

No signal of DDIs between DOACs and antineoplastic agents was detected, except for DOAC-neratinib. Most DDIs between DOACs and antineoplastic agents may not be clinically relevant. The DDIs between DOACs and neratinib should be further examined in future research.

Relationships, Current Issues, Safety and Efficacy of Oral Anticoagulation in Cancer Patients with Atrial Fibrillation

A relationship between malignancy and impaired hemostasis has been proven, and balancing clotting and bleeding risks can be challenging. Half of cancer patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) do not receive any oral anticoagulation (OAC). Using PubMed on the relationship between cancer and AF and their association with hemostasis, targeting studies comparing vitamin K antagonists (VKAs) and direct OAC (DOAC) strategies in AF cancer patients, three RCTs (>3000 patients) and eight observational studies (>250,000 patients) comparing different OACs were retrieved. The VKA prescribed was always warfarin. Dabigatran was the only DOAC not analyzed in the RCTs but the most used in non-randomized studies, whereas edoxaban-treated patients were the majority in the RCTs. Overall, the DOAC patients showed similar or lower rates of efficacy (thromboembolic) and safety (bleeding) outcomes compared to the VKA patients. DOACs are subject to fewer interactions with antineoplastic agents. DOACs may be preferable to VKAs as a thromboembolic prophylaxis in cancer patients with non-valvular AF.

Impact of type of anticoagulant on clinical outcomes in cancer patients who had atrial fibrillation

To date, evidence on optimal anticoagulant options in patients with AF who concurrently have active cancer remains elusive. To describe anticoagulant patterns and clinical outcomes among patients with a concomitant diagnosis of AF and cancer. Data were obtained from the University of Utah and Huntsman Cancer Institute (HCI) Hospitals. Patients were included if they had diagnosis of AF and cancer. Outcome was type and pattern of anticoagulant. Clinical outcomes were stroke, bleeding and all-cause mortality. From October 1999 to December 2020, there were 566 AF patients who concurrently had active cancer. Mean age ± standard deviation was 76.2 ± 10.7 and 57.6% were males. Comparing to warfarin, patients who received direct oral anticoagulant (DOACs) were associated with similar risk of stroke (adjusted hazard ratio, aHR 0.8, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.2-2.7, P = 0.67). On contrary, those who received low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) were associated with significantly higher risk of stroke comparing to warfarin (aHR 2.4, 95% CI 1.0-5.6, P = 0.04). Comparing to warfarin, DOACs and LMWH was associated with similar risk of overall bleeding with aHR 1.1 (95% CI 0.7-1.6, P = 0.73) and aHR 1.1 (95% CI 0.6-1.7, P = 0.83), respectively. Patients who received LMWH but not DOACs were associated with increased risk of death as compared to warfarin, aHR 4.5 (95% CI 2.8-7.2, P < 0.001) and 1.2 (95% CI 0.7-2.2, P = 0.47). In patients with active cancer and AF, LMWH, compared to warfarin, was associated with an increased risk of stroke and all-cause mortality. Furthermore, DOACs was associated with similar risk of stroke, bleeding and death as compared to warfarin.

Bleeding and embolic risk in patients with atrial fibrillation and cancer

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES

The impact of cancer on clinical outcomes in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) is unclear. The aim of this study was to assess how cancer influences the prediction and risk of embolic and hemorrhagic events in patients with AF.

METHODS

The study population comprised 16 056 patients from a Spanish health area diagnosed with AF between 2014 and 2018. Of these, 1137 (7.1%) had a history of cancer. During a median follow-up of 4.9 years, we assessed the relationship between cancer and bleeding and embolic events by competing risk analysis, considering death as a competing risk.

RESULTS

No association was detected between an increased risk of embolic events and cancer overall (sHR, 0.73; 95%CI, 0.41-1.26), active cancer, or any subgroup of cancer. However, cancer was associated with an increased risk of bleeding, although only in patients with active cancer (sHR, 1.42; 95%CI, 1.20-1.67) or prior radiotherapy (sHR, 1.40; 95%CI, 1.19-1.65). Both the CHA₂DS₂-VASc and HAS-BLED scores showed suboptimal performance to predict embolic and bleeding risk (c-statistic <0.50), respectively, in nonanticoagulated patients with active cancer. The ratio between the increase in bleeding and the decrease in embolisms with anticoagulation was similar in patients with and without cancer (5.6 vs 7.8; P <.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Cancer was not associated with an increased risk of embolic events in AF patients, only with an increased risk of bleeding. However, active cancer worsened the ability of the CHA₂DS₂-VASc and HAS-BLED scores to predict embolic and bleeding events, respectively, in nonanticoagulated patients.

Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Oral Anticoagulant Therapy in Atrial Fibrillation Cancer Patients

(1) Introduction: Cancer and atrial fibrillation (AF) are increasingly coexisting medical challenges. These two conditions share an increased thrombotic and bleeding risk. Although optimal regimens of the most suitable anti-thrombotic therapy are now affirmed in the general population, cancer patients are still particularly understudied on the matter; (2) Aims And Methodology: This metanalysis (11 studies (incl. 266,865 patients)) aims at evaluating the ischemic-hemorrhagic risk profile of oncologic patients with AF treated with oral anticoagulants (vitamin K antagonists vs. direct oral anticoagulants); (3) Results: In the oncological population, DOACs confer a benefit in terms of the reduction in ischemic, hemorrhagic and venous thromboembolic events. However, ischemic prevention has a non-insignificant bleeding risk, lower than Warfarin but significant and higher than the non-oncological patients; (4) Conclusions: Anticoagulation with DOACs provides a higher safety profile with respect to VKAs in terms of stroke reduction and a relative bleeding reduction risk. Further studies are needed to better assess the optimal anticoagulation strategy in cancer patients with AF.

Atrial Fibrillation and Cancer Patients: Mechanisms and Management

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Cancer-related mortality has significantly declined over the past several decades as a result of improved screening, diagnostics, and therapeutics. Although cancer patients and survivors are living longer, there is increased risk of both short-term and long-term cardiovascular complications, including arrhythmia. In this review, we highlight the current evidence detailing the connections between atrial fibrillation and cancer, provide insight into the mechanisms driving this relationship, and share practical considerations for the management of atrial fibrillation in cancer patients and cancer survivors.

RECENT FINDINGS

Atrial fibrillation is an increasingly recognized condition among cancer patients, with epidemiological data showing increased incidence and worse outcomes in patients with cancer. Studies also describe a bidirectional relationship between cancer and atrial fibrillation, attributable in part to shared risk factors but also potentially due to shared biology. Cancer treatment-associated arrhythmia is an active area of investigation, with ongoing research to identify the mechanisms and pathophysiology behind this phenomenon. Furthermore, management of atrial fibrillation in patients with cancer presents unique challenges, particularly in management of anti-coagulation. Cancer patients have increased risk of developing atrial fibrillation due to the shared risk factors and biology of the two conditions. Moreover, various cancer therapeutics are known to be arrhythmogenic; however, mechanisms remain unclear. Further research is needed to better understand the pathophysiology of atrial fibrillation in cancer patient in order to establish prevention and treatment strategies specific to this population.

Arrhythmic Complications Associated with Cancer Therapies

Over the last several decades, advancements in cancer screening and treatment have significantly improved cancer mortality and overall quality of life. Unfortunately, non-cancer-related side effects, including cardiovascular toxicities can impact the continued delivery of these treatments. Arrhythmias are an increasingly recognized class of cardiotoxicity that can occur as a direct consequence of the treatment or secondary to another type of toxicity such as heart failure, myocarditis, or ischemia. Atrial arrhythmias, particularly atrial fibrillation (AF) are most commonly encountered, however, ventricular- and bradyarrhythmias can also occur, albeit at lower rates. Treatment strategies tailored to patients with cancer are essential to allow for the safe delivery of the cancer treatment without affecting short- or long-term oncologic or cardiovascular outcomes.

Length of stay and cost of care associated with admissions for atrial fibrillation among patients with cancer

BACKGROUND

The aim of this study is to assess the burden of AF-related hospitalizations inclusive of inflation-adjusted cost-of-care and length-of-stay (LOS) among cancer patients and the impact of direct current cardioversion (DCCV) on these outcomes.

METHODS

Using the National Inpatient Sample (NIS), patients hospitalized with either a primary or secondary diagnosis of AF and comorbid cancer were identified and both cost of hospitalization and LOS were evaluated for each group. Subgroup analyses were performed for specific cancer types (breast, lung, colon, prostate and lymphoma), and those receiving DCCV.

RESULTS

The prevalence of co-morbid AF was 8.2 million (16%) and 35.5 million (10%) among those with vs. those without cancer, respectively (odds ratio = 1.6, 95% confidence interval = 1.5-1.7; P < 0.001). Over time, both primary and prevalent AF admissions among those with comorbid cancer increased from 1.1% and 12.3% in 2003 to 1.5% and 21% in 2015, respectively. The total cost of hospitalization increased 94.4% among those with AF and comorbid cancer compared to 23.9% among those without cancer. Among the subgroup of patients with comorbid cancer and primary admission for AF undergoing DCCV, length of stay (2.7 vs. 2.2 days; P < 0.001, model 1) and cost of care ($7,093 vs. 6,152; P < 0.001) were both significantly higher.

CONCLUSIONS

AF related admissions are increasing for all populations especially amongst those patients with a comorbid diagnosis of cancer, including all cancer subtypes evaluated. Among those patients who underwent DCCV, cancer patients had longer length of stay and increased health care costs.

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.

Recognition, Prevention, and Management of Arrhythmias and Autonomic Disorders in Cardio-Oncology: A Scientific Statement From the American Heart Association

With the advent of novel cancer therapeutics and improved screening, more patients are surviving a cancer diagnosis or living longer with advanced disease. Many of these treatments have associated cardiovascular toxicities that can manifest in both an acute and a delayed fashion. Arrhythmias are an increasingly identified complication with unique management challenges in the cancer population. The purpose of this scientific statement is to summarize the current state of knowledge regarding arrhythmia identification and treatment in patients with cancer. Atrial tachyarrhythmias, particularly atrial fibrillation, are most common, but ventricular arrhythmias, including those related to treatment-induced QT prolongation, and bradyarrhythmias can also occur. Despite increased recognition, dedicated prospective studies evaluating true incidence are lacking. Moreover, few studies have addressed appropriate prevention and treatment strategies. As such, this scientific statement serves to mobilize the cardio-oncology, electrophysiology, and oncology communities to develop clinical and scientific collaborations that will improve the care of patients with cancer who have arrhythmias.

Thromboembolism, mortality, and bleeding in 2,435,541 atrial fibrillation patients with and without cancer: A nationwide cohort study

BACKGROUND

The number of patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) and cancer is rapidly increasing in clinical practice. The impact of cancer on clinical outcomes in this patient population is unclear, as is the performance of the HAS-BLED (Hypertension, Abnormal Renal/Liver Function, Stroke, Bleeding History or Predisposition, Labile INR, Elderly, Drugs/Alcohol) and CHA₂ DS₂ -VASc (Congestive Heart Failure, Hypertension, Age ≥ 75 years, Diabetes Mellitus, Stroke or Transient Ischemic Attack, Vascular Disease, Age 65 to 74 Years, Sex Category) scores.

METHODS

This was an observational, retrospective cohort study including 2,435,541 adults hospitalized with AF. The authors investigated the incidence rates (IRs) of all-cause and cardiovascular mortality, ischemic stroke, major bleeding, and intracranial hemorrhage (ICH) according to the presence of cancer and cancer types.

RESULTS

Overall, 399,344 (16.4%) had cancer, with the most common cancers being metastatic, prostatic, colorectal, lung, breast, and bladder. During a mean follow-up of 2.0 years, cancer increased all-cause mortality (hazard ratio [HR], 2.00; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.99-2.01). The IR of ischemic stroke was higher with pancreatic cancer (2.8%/y), uterine cancer (2.6%/y), and breast cancer (2.6%/y), whereas it was lower with liver/lung cancer (1.9%/y) and leukemia/myeloma (2.0%/y), in comparison with noncancer patients (2.4%/y). Cancer increased the risk of major bleeding (HR, 1.27; 95% CI, 1.26-1.28) and ICH (HR, 1.07; 95% CI, 1.05-1.10). Leukemia, liver cancer, myeloma, and metastatic cancers showed the highest IRs for major bleeding/ICH. Major bleeding and ICH rates progressively increased with the HAS-BLED score, which showed generally good predictivity with C indexes > 0.70 for all cancer types. The CHA₂ DS₂ -VASc score's predictivity was slightly lower in AF patients with cancer.

CONCLUSIONS

Cancer increased all-cause mortality, major bleeding, and ICH risk in AF patients. The association between cancer and ischemic stroke differed among cancer types, and in some types, the risk of bleeding seemed to exceed the thromboembolic risk.