Venous Thromboembolism in Patients with Cancer Receiving Specialist Palliative Care

[Translation into French and republication of: "Treatment of cancer-associated venous thromboembolism in patients under palliative care"]

Many patients with cancer require palliative care at some stage and the vast majority of people followed in palliative care are cancer patients. Patients with cancer are at high risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE), and this is particularly true during the advanced palliative phase when mobility is limited or absent. Patients with cancer in palliative care are at higher bleeding risk compared to non-cancer patients. Decisions to treat VTE or withhold anticoagulation for these patients have proven to be difficult and depend largely on an individual clinician's judgment. For this reason, we have developed a consensus proposal for appropriate management of cancer-associated thromboembolism (CAT) in patients in palliative care, which is presented in this article. The proposal was informed by the recent scientific literature retrieved through a systematic literature review. In cancer patients in advanced palliative care, the benefit/risk ratio of anticoagulation seems unfavourable with a higher haemorrhagic risk than the benefit associated with prevention of CAT recurrence and, above all, in the absence of any benefit on quality of life. For this reason, we recommend that patients should be prescribed anticoagulants on a case-by-case basis. The choice of whether to treat, and with which type of treatment, should take into account anticipated life expectancy and patient preferences, as well as clinical factors such as the estimated bleeding risk, the type of VTE experienced and the time since the VTE event.

Treatment of cancer-associated venous thromboembolism in patients under palliative care

Many patients with cancer require palliative care at some stage and the vast majority of people followed in palliative care are cancer patients. Patients with cancer are at high risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE), and this is particularly true during the advanced palliative phase when mobility is limited or absent. Patients with cancer in palliative cancer are at higher bleeding risk compared to non-cancer patients. Decisions to treat VTE or withhold anticoagulation for these patients have proven to be difficult and depend largely on an individual clinician's judgment. For this reason, we have developed a consensus proposal for appropriate management of cancer-associated thromboembolism (CAT) in patients in palliative care, which is presented in this article. The proposal was informed by the recent scientific literature retrieved through a systematic literature review. In cancer patients in advanced palliative care, the benefit-risk ratio of anticoagulation seems unfavourable with a higher haemorrhagic risk than the benefit associated with prevention of CAT recurrence and, above all, in the absence of any benefit on quality of life. For this reason, we recommend that patients should be prescribed anticoagulants on a case-by-case basis. The choice of whether to treat, and with which type of treatment, should take into account anticipated life expectancy and patient preferences, as well as clinical factors such as the estimated bleeding risk, the type of VTE experienced and the time since the VTE event.

Towards optimal use of antithrombotic therapy of people with cancer at the end of life: A research protocol for the development and implementation of the SERENITY shared decision support tool

BACKGROUND

Even though antithrombotic therapy has probably little or even negative effects on the well-being of people with cancer during their last year of life, deprescribing antithrombotic therapy at the end of life is rare in practice. It is often continued until death, possibly resulting in excess bleeding, an increased disease burden and higher healthcare costs.

METHODS

The SERENITY consortium comprises researchers and clinicians from eight European countries with specialties in different clinical fields, epidemiology and psychology. SERENITY will use a comprehensive approach combining a realist review, flash mob research, epidemiological studies, and qualitative interviews. The results of these studies will be used in a Delphi process to reach a consensus on the optimal design of the shared decision support tool. Next, the shared decision support tool will be tested in a randomised controlled trial. A targeted implementation and dissemination plan will be developed to enable the use of the SERENITY tool across Europe, as well as its incorporation in clinical guidelines and policies. The entire project is funded by Horizon Europe.

RESULTS

SERENITY will develop an information-driven shared decision support tool that will facilitate treatment decisions regarding the appropriate use of antithrombotic therapy in people with cancer at the end of life.

CONCLUSIONS

We aim to develop an intervention that guides the appropriate use of antithrombotic therapy, prevents bleeding complications, and saves healthcare costs. Hopefully, usage of the tool leads to enhanced empowerment and improved quality of life and treatment satisfaction of people with advanced cancer and their care givers.