Non–Vitamin K Antagonist Oral Anticoagulants in Patients With Atrial Fibrillation and Thrombocytopenia

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

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

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

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

Anticoagulation in cancer patients with atrial fibrillation and grade 3-4 thrombocytopenia

INTRODUCTION

Atrial fibrillation or flutter (AF) is prevalent in cancer patients. Many of these patients have an indication for anticoagulation (AC) but are also at risk for developing chemotherapy-induced thrombocytopenia. There are scarce data regarding management of AC and risk of bleeding and thrombosis in cancer patients with AF and thrombocytopenia.

AIM

To assess anticoagulation management and incidence of bleeding and arterial thromboembolism (ATE) in cancer patients with AF and grade 3-4 thrombocytopenia (platelets <50 × 109/L).

METHODS

A retrospective cohort study included adults with active cancer, grade 3-4 thrombocytopenia and AF with CHA2DS2-VASc score ≥ 1. Patients were stratified according to AC discontinuation (No-AC) or continuation (Continue-AC) when platelets dropped below 50 × 109/L and followed for 30 days. The study outcomes were ATE (ischemic stroke, transient ischemic attack or systemic emboli) and major bleeding. Cox proportional hazards model was used to calculate hazard ratios (HR) with death as a competing risk (Fine and Gray model).

RESULTS

The cohort included 131 patients; 90 in the No-AC group and 41 in the Continue-AC group. Patient characteristics were balanced between the groups. The 30-day cumulative incidence of ATE was 2 % [95 % CI 0.4 %-7 %] in the No-AC group and 2 % [0.2 %-11 %] in the Continue-AC group (HR 0.92 [95 % CI 0.09-9.88]). The 30-day cumulative incidence of major bleeding was 7.8 % [95 % CI 3.40 %-14.52 %] and 2.44 % [95 % CI 0.18 %-11.22 %] in the No-AC and Continue-AC groups, respectively (HR 3.29 [95 % CI 0.42-26.04]).

CONCLUSIONS

The high rate of bleeding and low rate of ATE in thrombocytopenic cancer patients with AF suggests that holding AC during time-limited periods may be a reasonable approach.

A retrospective evaluation of direct oral anticoagulant (DOAC) management strategies in patients with cancer on active chemotherapy

Use of direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) in patients with cancer on active chemotherapy is challenging due to changes in renal or hepatic function, thrombocytopenia, chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV), and drug-drug interactions (DDIs) attributed to disease or treatment. The purpose of this retrospective cohort analysis was to characterize DOAC management through various interventions and evaluate the efficacy and safety of DOAC use in this patient population. A total of 58 patients with 97 unique index periods in which a patient was concomitantly on a DOAC and chemotherapy were identified. Several instances were observed in which an intervention should be made based on manufacturer guidance or clinical judgment. Of 37 instances attributed to changes in renal function, the following interventions were employed: dose adjustments (10/37), holding DOAC therapy until renal function improved (held 3/37, restarted 4/37), changing to an alternative anticoagulant (5/37), DOAC discontinuation (2/37), or no change (13/37). One change was made in response to decreased hepatic function (1/15). DOACs were held in the setting of platelet counts below 50 K/mm³ (8/20) and restarted when platelets improved above this threshold (5/20). In patients with CINV, DOAC therapy was continued (26/32) with few changes made. To manage DOAC-chemotherapy DDIs, changes in DOAC agents (4/6) and dose reductions in chemotherapy agents (2/6) were made. Thrombotic and bleeding events did not strongly correlate with renal or hepatic impairment, thrombocytopenia, CINV, or DDIs. Further guidance regarding the use of these agents in this patient population is warranted to address management strategies, efficacy, and safety. Use of direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) in patients with cancer on active chemotherapy is challenging due to changes in renal or hepatic function, thrombocytopenia, chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV), and drug-drug interactions (DDIs) attributed to disease or treatment. The purpose of this retrospective cohort analysis was to characterize DOAC management and evaluate the efficacy and safety of DOAC use in this patient population. A total of 58 patients with 97 unique index periods in which a patient was concomitantly on a DOAC and chemotherapy were identified. Several instances were observed in which an intervention should be made based on manufacturer guidance or clinical judgment. Interventions employed are summarized graphically. Thrombotic and bleeding events did not strongly correlate with renal or hepatic impairment, thrombocytopenia, CINV, or DDIs. CINV chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting, DDIs drug-drug interactions, DOAC direct oral anticoagulant, OAC oral anticoagulant.

A Challenging Case of a Patient With Immune Thrombocytopenic Purpura on Eltrombopag Who Developed Atrial Fibrillation: An Anticoagulation Dilemma

A 61-year-old female, who was a known case of immune thrombocytopenic purpura (ITP) on eltrombopag, was admitted for atrial fibrillation (AF). Labs showed a platelet count of 116 × 10³/µL. AF reverted to sinus rhythm by cardioversion. Therapeutic enoxaparin was started for two days. She was discharged on dabigatran for four weeks. The choice of anticoagulation in these cases (ITP and AF) is not straightforward and needs further research.

Thrombocytopenia Induced by Direct Oral Anticoagulants: a Clinical Case and Literature Review

The last decade has dramatically changed the strategy of anticoagulant therapy in patients with atrial fibrillation. Direct oral anticoagulants have replaced vitamin K antagonists: either direct thrombin blockers (dabigatran) or factor IIa blockers (apixaban, rivaroxaban, edoxaban). According to the regulatory domestic and foreign documents, the use of direct oral anticoagulants in patients with atrial fibrillation has priority in comparison with vitamin K antagonists, since they have a predictable anticoagulant effect, the possibility of taking fixed doses without the need for routine anticoagulant monitoring, rapid onset and termination of action, relatively low potential for food and drug interactions. Direct oral anticoagulants are used for the prevention of thromboembolic complications in patients with atrial fibrillation, for the prevention of deep vein thrombosis in patients who have undergone surgery on the knee or hip joints, for emergency treatment and secondary prevention of deep vein thrombosis and pulmonary embolism. Alertness to side effects tends to focus on the likelihood of bleeding, with the possibility of other side effects of direct oral anticoagulants receiving less attention or going unnoticed. These mainly include liver damage, kidney damage and a number of other rare adverse reactions. The finding of isolated thrombocytopenia in patients taking direct oral anticoagulants may be associated with a high risk of life-threatening bleeding. The article analyzes published data on the occurrence of thrombocytopenia associated with the intake of direct oral anticoagulants, and presents a clinical case of thrombocytopenia while taking apixaban.

Percutaneous left atrial appendage closure in patients with primary hemostasis disorders and atrial fibrillation

BACKGROUND OR PURPOSE

We report our single-center experience with percutaneous left atrial appendage closure (LAAC) in patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF) and primary hemostasis disorders (HD).

METHODS

Consecutive patients with primary HD who underwent a percutaneous LAAC were included. Baseline characteristics, procedural data, and clinical outcomes were prospectively collected and compared with the overall LAAC cohort without HD.

RESULTS

Since 2013, among 229 LAAC, 17 patients (7%) had a primary HD: thrombocytopenia (n = 5), myelodysplastic syndrome (n = 6), von Willebrand syndrome (n = 4), type A hemophilia (n = 1), and dysfibrinogenemia (n = 1). The HD population's age ranged from 61 to 87 years, and the median CHA₂DS₂VASc was 5. Periprocedural plasmatic management was required in 47% of patients. The immediate LAAC implantation success rate was 100%. Patients received a direct oral anticoagulant (DOA) (n = 9), dual antiplatelet (n = 6), aspirin (n = 1), or no therapy (n = 1) during the first six postoperative weeks, followed with single antiplatelet (n = 16) or no therapy (n = 1) during lifelong. After 20 months, the technical success rate and procedural success rate were 100% and 94%. Zero device-/procedure-related complication and only one life-threatening bleeding occurred. Compared to patients without HD (n = 212), a baseline history of bleeding was less frequent (53% vs 91%, p < 0.001), and more patients received a perioperative blood transfusion (47% vs 4%, p < 0.001) in the HD group. The efficacy and safety outcomes did not differ between HD and non-HD cohorts.

CONCLUSIONS

Percutaneous LAAC in primary HD carriers appeared as safe and as effective as in overall LAAC population for stroke and bleeding prevention at midterm follow-up. Percutaneous left atrial appendage closure in patients with atrial fibrillation and primary hemostasis disorders. The percutaneous LAAC in primary hemostasis disorders and AF carriers requires a multidisciplinary approach. Cardiologist, anesthesiologist, and hematologist discussion is a cornerstone to assess anticoagulant contraindication, LAAC feasibility, periprocedural management, and follow-up (high). This multidisciplinary care is illustrated by the case of a 61-year-old male with hemophilia type A and recurrent hemarthrosis. Pre-LAAC assessment confirmed procedural indication and cactus LAA anatomy (left). After plasmatic management with factor VIII infusion, a WATCHMAN™ no. 21 was successfully implanted (middle). During follow-up, without antithrombotic regime, no ischemic or hemorrhagic complication occurred (right). LAA, left atrial appendage; LAAC, left atrial appendage closure; TEE, transesophageal echocardiography. Percutaneous LAAC in primary HD carriers appeared as safe and as effective as in overall LAAC population for stroke and bleeding prevention at midterm follow-up.

Anticoagulation in Patients with Platelet Disorders

Platelet disorders comprise heterogeneous diseases featured by reduced platelet counts and/or impaired platelet function causing variable bleeding symptoms. Despite their bleeding diathesis, patients with platelet disorders can develop transient or permanent prothrombotic conditions that necessitate prophylactic or therapeutic anticoagulation. Anticoagulation in patients with platelet disorders is a matter of concern because the bleeding risk could add to the hemorrhagic risk related to the platelet defect. This review provides an overview on the evidence on anticoagulation in patients with acquired and inherited thrombocytopenia and/or platelet dysfunction. We summarize tools to evaluate and balance bleeding- and thrombotic risks and describe a practical approach on how to manage these patients if they have an indication for prophylactic or therapeutic anticoagulation.

A Review of the Incidence Diagnosis and Treatment of Spontaneous Hemorrhage in Patients Treated with Direct Oral Anticoagulants

Anticoagulation carries a tremendous therapeutic advantage in reducing morbidity and mortality with venous thromboembolism and atrial fibrillation. For over six decades, traditional anticoagulants like low molecular weight heparin and vitamin K antagonists like warfarin have been used to achieve therapeutic anticoagulation. In the past decade, multiple new direct oral anticoagulants have emerged and been approved for clinical use. Since their introduction, direct oral anticoagulants have changed the landscape of anticoagulants. With increasing indications and use in various patients, they have become the mainstay of treatment in venous thromboembolic diseases. The safety profile of direct oral anticoagulants is better or at least similar to warfarin, but several recent reports are focusing on spontaneous hemorrhages with direct oral anticoagulants. This narrative review aims to summarize the incidence of spontaneous hemorrhage in patients treated with direct oral anticoagulants and also offers practical management strategies for clinicians when patients receiving direct oral anticoagulants present with bleeding complications.

Stroke and Bleeding Risk Assessments in Patients With Atrial Fibrillation: Concepts and Controversies

Risk assessments are an important element in the management of patients with atrial fibrillation (AF). In this review, we aim to discuss the concepts and controversies surrounding the various risk factors for stroke and bleeding in AF. Indeed, there are a variety of clinical, electrical, biological, and genetic markers to guide stroke and bleeding risk assessments in AF. The more common factors have been used to formulate risk stratification scores. Some risk factors have shown promise, but others remain less well-defined. Our aim is to discuss concepts and controversies surrounding current evidence of risk factors for stroke and bleeding assessments in AF.

Thrombocytopenia and thrombocytosis are associated with different outcome in atrial fibrillation patients on anticoagulant therapy

Background

Information regarding the significance of platelet (PLT) count on outcome of atrial fibrillation (AF) patients who are treated with anticoagulants is limited.

Methods

We conducted a monocentric observational retrospective cohort study of AF patients treated with either warfarin (n = 6287) or non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants (NOACs) (n = 5240). Patient were divided into 3 subgroups; low, normal and high PLT for counts < 150 K/ μl, 150–450 K/ μl and > 450 K/ μl, respectively. A multivariate Cox-regression was used to evaluate the association between PLT subgroups and clinical outcomes.

Results

During follow-up [median = 40.6 months (IQR 17.6–60)], mortality (HR 1.36, 95 CI 1.1–1.74, p = 0.01) and rate of myocardial infarction (MI) (HR 2.4, 95 CI 1.28–4.57, p = 0.007) were higher in patients with high compared to normal PLT. Transient ischemic attack or cerebrovascular accident (TIA/CVA) rate was lower in patients with low compared to normal PLT (HR 0.69, 95 CI 0.51–0.93, p = 0.02). A comparison between NOACs and warfarin demonstrated a significantly better clinical outcome for patients on NOACs in both the low (lower mortality rates) and normal PLT subgroup (lower mortality, TIA/CVA and systemic emboli rates). For patients on NOACs, low and high compared to normal PLT were associated with a higher combined outcome (HR 1.12, 95 CI 1–1.38, p = 0.047), and a higher systemic emboli rate (HR 7.07, 95 CI 1.66–30.25, p = 0.008), respectively.

Conclusions

Abnormal PLT count is associated with different clinical outcome of AF patients on anticoagulants. Further studies are needed in order assess whether PLT level should influence strategies of anticoagulation.