The Role of Tinzaparin in Oncology

The effect of tinzaparin on biomarkers in FIGO stages III-IV ovarian cancer patients undergoing neoadjuvant chemotherapy - the TABANETOC trial: study protocol for a randomized clinical multicenter trial

BACKGROUND

Tinzaparin, a low-molecular weight heparin (LMWH), has shown anti-neoplastic properties in animal models and in in vitro studies of human cancer cell lines. The reduction of CA-125 levels during neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT) in patients with epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC) co-varies with the prognosis; the larger the decrease in CA-125, the better the prognosis.

PURPOSE

This study aims to evaluate the potential anti-neoplastic effects of tinzaparin by investigating changes in serum CA-125 levels in advanced EOC patients who receive NACT.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

This is an open randomized multicenter pilot trial. Forty patients with EOC selected to receive NACT will be randomized 1:1 to receive daily addition of tinzaparin or no tinzaparin. The processing and treatment of the patients will otherwise follow the recommendations in the Swedish National Guidelines for Ovarian Cancer. Before every cycle of chemotherapy, preoperatively, and 3 weeks after the last cycle of chemotherapy, a panel of biomarkers, including CA-125, will be measured.

PATIENTS

Inclusion criteria are women aged 18 years or older, World Health Organization performance status 0-1, histologically confirmed high-grade serous, endometrioid or clear cell EOC, International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) stages III-IV. In addition, a CA-125 level of ≥ 250 kIE/L at diagnosis. Exclusion criteria are contraindications to LMWH, ongoing or recent treatment with unfractionated heparin, LMWH, warfarin or non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants.

INTERPRETATION

This study will make an important contribution to the knowledge of the anti-neoplastic effects of tinzaparin in EOC patients and may thus guide the planning of a future study on the impact of tinzaparin on survival in EOC.

The Role of Injectables in the Treatment and Prevention of Cancer-Associated Thrombosis

Cancer-associated thrombosis (CAT) is a leading cause of death among patients with cancer. CAT can manifest itself as venous thromboembolism (VTE), in the form of deep vein thrombosis or pulmonary embolism, or arterial thromboembolism. The pathophysiology of CAT is complex and depends on cancer-, patient-, treatment- and biomarkers-related factors. Treatment of VTE in patients with cancer is complex and includes three major classes of anticoagulant agents: heparin and its derivatives, e.g., low molecular weight heparins, direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs), and vitamin K inhibitors. Given the tremendous heterogeneity of clinical situations in patients with cancer and the challenges of CAT, there is no single universal treatment option for patients suffering from or at risk of CAT. Initial studies suggested that patients seemed to prefer an anticoagulant that would not interfere with their cancer treatment, suggesting the primacy of cancer over VTE, and favoring efficacy and safety over convenience of route of administration. Recent studies show that when the efficacy and safety aspects are similar, patients prefer the oral route of administration. Despite this, injectables are a valid option for many patients with cancer.

Tinzaparin—a review of its molecular profile, pharmacology, special properties, and clinical uses

Purpose

Low molecular weight heparins (LMWHs) are a group of heterogenous moieties, long used in the prevention and treatment of thrombosis. They derive from heparin and since they are prepared by different methods of depolymerization, they differ in pharmacokinetic properties and anticoagulant profiles, and thus are not clinically interchangeable.

Methods

In this review we provide an overview of tinzaparin's main characteristics and uses.

Results

Tinzaparin which is produced by the enzymatic depolymerization of unfractionated heparin (UFH) can be used for the treatment and prevention of deep venous thrombosis (DVT) and pulmonary embolism (PE); it has been also used in special populations such as elders, obese, pregnant women, and patients with renal impairment and/or cancer with favorable outcomes in both safety and efficacy, with a once daily dose regimen. Furthermore, LMWHs are extensively used in clinical practice for both thromboprophylaxis and thrombosis treatment of COVID-19 patients.

Conclusion

Tinzaparin features support the hypothesis for having a role in immunothrombosis treatment (i.e. in the context of cancer ,COVID-19), interfering not only with coagulation cascade but also exhibiting anti-inflammatory potency.

Can thromboprophylaxis build a link for cancer patients undergoing surgical and/or chemotherapy treatment? The MeTHOS cohort study

BACKGROUND

Patients with active cancer have a 4-sevenfold increased risk for venous thromboembolism (VTE) especially during systematic anticancer treatment. Simultaneously, surgery is an additional risk factor.

METHODS

The Metaxas's Hospital THromboprophylaxis program in Oncological & Surgical Patients (MeTHOS) is a prospective, phase IV, observational, non-interventional cohort study, aiming to record the thromboprophylaxis practice patterns in high-risk active cancer patients undergoing surgical and/or chemotherapy treatment.

RESULTS

We are reporting results from 291 ambulatory patients (median age: 67 years, Q1-Q3: 59-73 years, 54.6% males) who received anti-neoplastic treatment and administered thromboprophylaxis. 59.8% had cardiovascular disease (mostly hypertension), 76.6% were reported as having at least one comorbidity, while 27.5% and 15.8% accumulated two and three comorbidities, respectively. 94.9% of the patients were receiving highly thrombogenic agents such as platinum-based agents, 5-FU, immunotherapy, antiangiogenics/anti-VEGF, or erythropoietin. 26.5% of the patients were initially surgically treated. In terms of anticoagulation, all patients were treated with tinzaparin (fixed dose, 10,000 Anti-Xa IU, OD). The median anticoagulation duration was 6.2 months. Six thrombotic events were observed (2.06%, 95% CI: 0.76-4.43%): 5 were DVT, and one PE. With respect to safety, 7 bleeding events occurred (2.6%, 95% CI: 1.0-5.3%); 6 of them were minor.

CONCLUSIONS

Thromboprophylaxis with LMWH in patients with active cancer and high thrombotic burden was safe and effective. Intermediate dose of tinzaparin seems to be an appropriate agent for cancer-associated thromboprophylaxis management.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT04248348.

Cancer-Associated Thrombosis: Not All Low-Molecular-Weight Heparins Are the Same, Focus on Tinzaparin, A Narrative Review

Cancer-associated thrombosis (CAT) is the second main cause of cancer death with high related mortality and morbidity, leading to anticancer agent delays and interruptions. The recommended therapy, low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH), however, is burdensome for patients and costly for society, as treatment should last until cancer is no longer active, even indefinitely. Tinzaparin is a manageable, efficient, safe, and cost-effective option. Compared to the other LMWHs, advantages are single-daily dose and safety in the elderly and those with renal impairment (RI). The purpose of this review is to critically discuss recent data on its efficacy and safety in CAT.

Extended thromboprophylaxis post gynaecological cancer surgery; the effect of weight adjusted and fixed dose LMWH (Tinzaparin)

OBJECTIVE

Gynaecological cancer surgery is associated with high rates of venous thromboembolism (VTE) despite recommended prophylaxis. We sought to investigate the impact of extended prophylaxis with fixed dose and weight based LMWH in patients undergoing gynaecological cancer surgery.

METHODS

VTE rates were recorded in patients who received LMWH prophylaxis (4500 IU Tinzaparin once daily) for the duration of hospital stay (2006-2012) (n = 610) and were compared with VTE rates in patients who underwent surgery after the introduction of extended prophylaxis (3500/4500 IU Tinzaparin for patients with BMI < 40kg/m2 and 75 IU/kg for BMI > 40 kg/m2) (2012-2017) (n = 651). Peak (4 h) anti-Xa levels in a subset of patients were also evaluated.

RESULTS

73 (5.7%) cases of VTE were recorded during 1 year of follow-up. 20 cases occurred during hospital stay. There was no significant difference in the rate of VTE between the extended prophylaxis cohort and the standard prophylaxis cohort. 23/24 patients who developed VTE in the extended prophylaxis cohort received a fixed (4500 units) dose of Tinzaparin. 63% of patients who received a fixed LMWH dose had peak anti-Xa levels below the target range (0.2-0.4 IU/ml). Peak anti-Xa was lower in patients who subsequently developed VTE compared with those who received either fixed dose (P = 0.041) and weight adjusted Tinzaparin (P = 0.0006).

CONCLUSIONS

Extended prophylaxis with Tinzaparin does not significantly reduce VTE rates in gynaecological cancer patients post surgery. Peak anti-Xa levels may be suboptimal in many patients receiving a fixed LMWH dose. Further studies are required to determine whether weight adjusted doses of Tinzaparin may provide more effective prophylaxis following gynaecological cancer surgery.

Tinzaparin inhibits VL30 retrotransposition induced by oxidative stress and/or VEGF in HC11 mouse progenitor mammary cells: Association between inhibition of cancer stem cell proliferation and mammosphere disaggregation

Tinzaparin is an anticoagulant and antiangiogenic drug with inhibitory properties against tumor growth. VEGF stimulates angiogenesis, while an association between reactive oxygen species (ROS) and angiogenesis is involved in tumor progression. The present study aimed to investigate the effect of tinzaparin on VL30 retrotransposition-positive mouse HC11 mammary stem-like epithelial cells, previously reported to be associated with induced mammosphere/cancer stem cell (CSC) generation and tumorigenesis. Under 24 h serum starvation, 15.2% nominal retrotransposition frequency was increased to 29%. Additionally, while treatment with 3–12 ng/ml VEGF further induced retrotransposition frequency in a dose-dependent manner (up to 40.3%), pre-incubation with tinzaparin (2 IU/ml) for 0.5–4 h reduced this frequency to 18.3% in a time-dependent manner, confirmed by analogous results in NIH3T3 fibroblasts. Treatment with 10–40 pg/ml glucose oxidase (GO) for 24 h induced HC11 cell retrotransposition in a dose-dependent manner (up to 82.5%), while a 3 h pre-incubation with tinzaparin (1 or 2 IU/ml) elicited a 13.5 or 25.5% reduction in retrotransposition, respectively. Regarding tumorigenic VL30 retrotransposition-positive HC11 cells, treatment with 2 IU/ml tinzaparin for 5 days reduced proliferation rate in a time-dependent manner (up to ~55%), and after 3 weeks, disaggregated soft agar-formed foci, as well as low-adherent mammospheres, producing single mesenchymal-like cells with a ~50% reduced retrotransposition. With respect to the VL30 retrotransposition mechanism: While 12 ng/ml VEGF increased the level of VL30 and endogenous reverse transcriptase (enRT) transcripts ~1.41- and ~1.16-fold, respectively, subsequent tinzaparin treatment reduced both endogenous/ROS- and VEGF-induced levels 1.15- and 0.40-fold (VL30) and 0.60- and 0.52-fold (enRT), respectively. To the best of our knowledge, these data demonstrate for the first time, the novel inhibition activity of tinzaparin against ROS- and VEGF-induced VL30 retrotransposition, and the proliferation and/or aggregation of mouse HC11 mammosphere/tumor-initiating CSCs, thus contributing to the inhibition of VL30 retrotransposition-induced primary tumor growth.

Platelet-Cancer Interplay: Molecular Mechanisms and New Therapeutic Avenues

Although platelets are critically involved in thrombosis and hemostasis, experimental and clinical evidence indicate that platelets promote tumor progression and metastasis through a wide range of physical and functional interactions between platelets and cancer cells. Thrombotic and thromboembolic events are frequent complications in patients with solid tumors. Hence, cancer modulates platelet function by directly inducing platelet-tumor aggregates and triggering platelet granule release and altering platelet turnover. Also, platelets enhance tumor cell dissemination by activating endothelial cell function and recruiting immune cells to primary and metastatic tumor sites. In this review, we summarize current knowledge on the complex interactions between platelets and tumor cells and the host microenvironment. We also critically discuss the potential of anti-platelet agents for cancer prevention and treatment.

Combinatorial Treatment of Tinzaparin and Chemotherapy Can Induce a Significant Antitumor Effect in Pancreatic Cancer

Pancreatic Cancer (PC) is recognized as a highly thrombogenic tumor; thus, low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) such as tinzaparin is routinely used for PC patients. On the basis of combinatorial therapy approaches to treat highly malignant and refractory cancers such as PC, we hypothesized that tinzaparin can augment the effectiveness of traditional chemotherapeutic drugs and induce efficient antitumor activity. PANC-1 and MIAPaCa-2 were incubated alone or in combination with tinzaparin, nab-paclitaxel and gemcitabine. In vivo evaluation of these compounds was performed in a NOD/SCID mouse using a model injected with PANC-1. Tinzaparin enhances the anti-tumor effects of nab-paclitaxel and gemcitabine in mtKRAS PC cell lines via apoptosis in in vitro experiments. The triple combination power acts through the induction of apoptosis, reduction of the proliferative potential and angiogenesis; hence, contributing to a decrease in tumor volume observed in vivo. The triple regimen provided an extra 24.3% tumor reduction compared to the double combination (gemcitabine plus nab-paclitaxel). Combinatorial strategies can create novel therapeutic approaches for the treatment of patients with PC, achieving a better clinical outcome and prolonged survival. Further prospective randomized research is needed and the investigation of various concentrations of tinzaparin above 150 UI/Kg, would potentially provide a valuable synergistic effect to the conventional therapeutic compounds.

The Impact of Thromboprophylaxis on the Survival of Patients with Advanced Pancreatic Cancer. The Pancreatic Cancer and Tinzaparin (PaCT) Study

Simple Summary

Pancreatic cancer (PaC) induces a prothrombotic and hypercoagulable state. Thrombosis occurs in 20% of PaC patients and is associated with worse prognosis and reduced progression-free survival (PFS). The aim of this retrospective observational study (PaCT) was to investigate the effect of thromboprophylaxis with an intermediate dose of tinzaparin on the PFS of patients treated with nab-paclitaxel and gemcitabine. Data obtained from 110 patients with active PaC administered prophylaxis with tinzaparin during the study resulted in median PFS of 7.9 months; data for the PFS of patients without simultaneous anticoagulation were obtained bibliographically from 14 studies, and after applying meta-analysis was 5.6 months. Patients receiving anticoagulation with tinzaparin had 39.5% higher PFS than patients without such thromboprophylaxis (p < 0.05). During follow-up, three (2.7%) thrombotic events and two (1.9%) clinically relevant non-major bleeding events occurred. Concluding, PFS in advanced PaC patients undergoing chemotherapy was positively impacted by thromboprophylaxis with intermediate dose tinzaparin.

Abstract

Pancreatic cancer (PaC) induces a prothrombotic and hypercoagulable state. The aim of this study was to investigate the effect of tinzaparin in combination with chemotherapy. The PaCT (pancreatic cancer and tinzaparin) study was a retrospective observational study that collected data regarding progression free survival (PFS) in advanced or metastatic PaC patients who received thromboprophylaxis with tinzaparin during chemotherapy with nab-paclitaxel (N) and gemcitabine (G). The primary end point was to compare, from already published data, the PFS of patients receiving thromboprophylaxis with tinzaparin with the PFS of patients receiving chemotherapy with N–G but no thromboprophylaxis. Secondary end points were efficacy and safety of anticoagulation. In total, 110 PaC patients, 93% with advanced or metastatic disease, treated with N–G and tinzaparin (10,291 ± 1176 Anti-Xa IU, OD, median duration 8.7, IQR: 5.6–11.9 months) were enrolled. Of these, 52% were males and; the median age was 68 (40–86 years). The tumor was located to in the pancreatic head at in 45% of the patients. The median PFS was 7.9 months (IQR: 5.0–11.8 months). Out of 14 similar studies (involving 2994 patients) identified via systematic search, it was determined that the weighted PFS of patients receiving N–G but no anticoagulation was 5.6 months. Therefore, patients receiving tinzaparin had 39.54% higher PFS than patients without thromboprophylaxis (p < 0.05). During the follow-up period of 18.3 ± 11.7 months, three (2.7%) thrombotic events were recorded while two clinically relevant non-major bleeding events occurred (1.9%). In conclusion, PFS in advanced PaC patients undergoing chemotherapy is positively impacted by anticoagulation. Thromboprophylaxis with tinzaparin in treatment dose is efficient and safe.

Tinzaparin Safety in Patients With Cancer and Renal Impairment: A Systematic Review

Low-molecular-weight heparins are approved for primary and secondary venous thromboembolism prevention. Tinzaparin is the low-molecular-weight heparin with the highest average molecular weight. The purpose of this systematic review is to provide an update regarding the safety profile of tinzaparin, prescribed either as a prophylactic or as a therapeutic regimen for venous thromboembolism in special populations, including cancer patients and patients with renal impairment. We identified prospective studies up to August 2020 reporting safety outcomes for cancer patients and patients with renal impairment on tinzaparin regimens. In patients with cancer major bleeding rates fluctuated between 0.8% and 7%. Patients on tinzaparin exhibited significantly lower rates of clinically relevant nonmajor bleeding events in comparison with those on vitamin K antagonists. Bioaccumulation of tinzaparin was not correlated with age, body weight or creatinine clearance. Periodic administration of either prophylactic or therapeutic doses of tinzaparin did not result in bioaccumulation, even in patients with severe renal impairment and creatinine clearance < 20 ml/min. Major bleeding rates for non-cancer patients with renal impairment on prophylactic tinzaparin regimens were 0%. Non-cancer patients with renal impairment on therapeutic tinzaparin regimens exhibited major bleeding in 0 to 3.4% of cases; major bleeding rates were higher for cancer patients with renal impairment on therapeutic tinzaparin regimens (4.3 to 10%). Tinzaparin can be used without dose adjustment in patients with severe renal impairment and creatinine clearance > 20 ml/min. Tinzaparin represents a safe choice for special populations at increased risk for thrombosis and bleeding.

The old but new: Can unfractioned heparin and low molecular weight heparins inhibit proteolytic activation and cellular internalization of SARS-CoV2 by inhibition of host cell proteases?

Currently, our world is facing the 2019 Novel Coronavirus (COVID-19) outbreak and tremendous efforts are made for developing drugs to treat and vaccines to prevent the disease. At present, there is no specific antiviral drug or vaccine for COVID-19. The pathogenic infectivity of the virus requires the S1 subunit of the spike (S) protein to bind the host cell receptor, angiontensin converting enzyme (ACE2). While the binding to host cell receptor is the first step of infection, the entrance of the virus into the cell needs the cleavage of S1–S2 subunits to expose S2 for fusion to cell membrane via host proteases including cathepsins, cell surface transmembrane protease/serine (TMPRSS) proteases, furin, trypsin and factor Xa. Previous in vitro studies have shown that factor Xa inhibition can decrease viral infectivity. We suppose that host cell proteases including furin (as expressed highly in lungs), factor Xa and cathepsin are possible targets to decrease viral burden, therefore unfractioned heparin and low molecular weight heparin-LMWH (specifically dalteparin and tinzaparin for their anti inflammatory action) can be potential inhibitors of multiple endoproteases involved in virus infectivity. Our hypothesis needs to be tested in in vitro and clinical studies, however as we are in an urgent situation as the burden of SARS-CoV2 is increasing all around the world, we recommend the usage of unfractioned heparin or LMWH in intensive care unit (ICU) and non-ICU hospitalized patients with the risk–benefit judgement of the clinician. Whether our hypothesis is clinically applicable and successful in decreasing viral infection will be evaluated for further studies.

Mechanisms of the Antitumor Activity of Low Molecular Weight Heparins in Pancreatic Adenocarcinomas

Immune checkpoint inhibitors have revolutionized cancer treatment in the last decade. Despite the progress in immunotherapy, most pancreatic cancer patients still do not derive benefit when receiving immune-based therapies. Recently, resistance mechanisms to immune therapies have been mainly focused on tumor microenvironment properties. Pancreatic cancer is considered one of the most lethal and difficult to treat tumors due to its highly immunosuppressive and desmoplastic microenvironment. Low molecular weight heparins (LMWHs) have been used for the treatment and prevention of thromboembolic disease in these patients. However, many nonanticoagulant properties attributed to LMWHs have been described. Exploiting LMWH properties in a combined treatment modality with immune checkpoint inhibition and chemotherapy could provide a new approach in the management of pancreatic adenocarcinoma patients. The ability of LMWH to interfere with various aspects of the tumor microenvironment could result in both the alleviation of immunosuppression and improvement in drug delivery within the tumor, leading to higher cancer cell destruction rates and more potent immune system activity that would, ultimately, lead to better patient outcomes.