LMWH in cancer patients with renal impairment – better than warfarin?

Therapeutic anticoagulation complications in the elderly: a case report

Background

The demographic transition leads to a continuously growing number of elderly patients who receive therapeutic anticoagulation by reason of several comorbidities. Though therapeutic anticoagulation may reduce the number of embolic complications in these patients, major complications such as bleeding complications need to be kept in mind when considering such therapy. However, evidence regarding the choice of anticoagulation agents in chronic kidney disease patients of higher age is limited. In this report, a guideline-based anticoagulation treatment which led to a fulminant atraumatic bleeding complication is discussed.

Case presentation

We present the case of an 85-year-old female stage V chronic kidney disease patient who suffered from a diffuse arterial, subcutaneous bleeding in her lower left leg due a therapeutic anticoagulation using low molecular weight heparin (LMWH). Anticoagulation was started in accordance with general recommendations for patients with atrial fibrillation, and the dosage was adapted for the patient’s renal function. Nevertheless, the above-mentioned complication occurred, and the bleeding led to a hemorrhagic shock and an acute kidney injury on top of a chronic kidney disease. The hematoma required surgical evacuation and local coagulation in the operating room. In the further course, the patient underwent additional four surgical interventions due to a superinfected skin necrosis, including skin grafting. Furthermore, the patient needed continuous renal replacement therapy, as well as intensive care unit treatment, for a total of 47 days followed by 36 days of geriatric rehabilitation. Afterwards, she was discharged from the hospital to her previous nursing home.

Discussion and conclusions

Although therapeutic anticoagulation may sufficiently protect patients at cardiovascular risk, major complications such as bleeding complications may occur at any time. Therefore, physicians need to regularly re-evaluate any prior indication for therapeutic anticoagulation. With this case report, we hope to draw attention to the cohort of geriatric patients and the need for more and well differentiated study settings to preferably prevent any potentially avoidable complications.

Venous Thromboembolism In Cancer Patients: "From Evidence to Care"

This article seeks to review the current status of treatment and prevention of venous thromboembolic disease (VTE) in cancer patients after the addition of direct oral anticoagulants (DOAC) to the therapeutic arsenal available. The suitability of DOAC use in complex clinical situations, poorly represented in clinical trials, is controversial and difficult for care activity, making the recommendations in clinical practice guidelines the focus of special attention in this area. Recently, several randomized trials have compared low molecular weight heparin (LMWH) to DOAC for the management of CAT. Potential drug interactions with DOACs or the increased risk of bleeding in intraluminal tumors require special precautions, as do metastatic or primary brain disease and comorbid conditions, such as renal or liver failure, which are not suitably represented in pivotal studies. Furthermore, few data are available for situations involving elevated bleeding risk, with thrombocytopenia levels below the inclusion criterion of clinical trials, or recurrence during active anticoagulant therapy. Similarly, it is less clear that patients and physicians accept the presumption that oral DOAC administration is more convenient than subcutaneous LMWH, particularly when drug absorption may be compromised. The non-inclusion or under-representation of patients at higher risk for complications with anticoagulation in randomized clinical trials, makes their use complex in certain situations in health care. This paper provides a practical review of current clinical guideline recommendations regarding LMWH and/ or DOAC to treat and prevent CAT, as well as the most controversial clinical conditions for their use.

Anticoagulation in Cancer Patients: a Summary of Pitfalls to Avoid

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is a leading cause of morbidity and mortality in cancer patients, and its management is often associated with complications including risk of recurrent VTE and bleeding. Here, we review the current data on pitfalls during anticoagulation in cancer patients and measures necessary to avoid them.

RECENT FINDINGS

Although low-molecular-weight heparin monotherapy has been the standard of treatment for several years, emerging data for direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) are leading to new paradigms in treatment. Reports of recent randomized trials suggest a lower risk of recurrent thrombosis but higher risk of bleeding, particularly in gastrointestinal cancer patients, with DOACs. Careful patient selection and individualization of therapy based on risk of bleeding as well as recurrent VTE are keys. Problems like bleeding, recurrence, thrombocytopenia, drug-drug interactions, renal impairment, nausea-vomiting along with concerns about adherence arise during anticoagulation in cancer patients. However, with adequate pre-treatment assessment, correct anticoagulant selection and proper monitoring during anticoagulation, these issues can be addressed safely and effectively.

Venous thromboembolic events in lymphoma patients: Actual relationships between epidemiology, mechanisms, clinical profile and treatment

Venous thromboembolic events (VTE) are an underestimated health problem in patients with lymphoma. Many factors contribute to the pathogenesis of thromboembolism and the interplay between various mechanisms that provoke VTE is still poorly understood. The identification of parameters that are associated with an increased risk of VTE in lymphoma patients led to the creation of several risk-assessment models. The models that evaluate potential VTE risk in lymphoma patients in particular are quite limited, and have to be validated in larger study populations. Furthermore, the VTE prophylaxis in lymphoma patients is largely underused, despite the incidence of VTE. The lack of adequate guidelines for the prophylaxis and treatment of VTE in lymphoma patients, together with a cautious approach due to an increased risk of bleeding, demands great efforts to ensure the implementation of current knowledge in order to reduce the incidence and complications of VTE in lymphoma patients.