FRAGMATIC: a randomised phase III clinical trial investigating the effect of fragmin added to standard therapy in patients with lung cancer

The incidence and clinical characteristics of pulmonary embolism in oncologic patients

Background

For various types of cancer in oncologic patients, the clinical features of pulmonary embolism (PE) are unknown. The purpose of the study is to identify pulmonary embolism incidence and type among oncologic patients along with evaluating any associated clinical variables.

Patients and methods

A prospective cohort study was conducted on 540 patients who had various types of cancers and attended to a 1-day care unit of oncology in King Fahd Hospital, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. Chest CT with contrast and CT pulmonary angiography was applied when indicated.

Results

This study was conducted on 540 patients who have different types of cancers; among them, 24 (4.44%) developed PE. Pulmonary embolism was reported in 50% of patients who had seminoma and germ cell tumor, while in cancer larynx, it was represented in 33.4% of them. Moreover, PE was less common among patients who had cancer colon, prostate, and breast (6.68%, 4.7%, and 2.54%, respectively). Seven patients with PE (1.3%) were diagnosed incidentally during cancer staging, while 17 patients (3.14%) had symptomatic PE. Eighty-four percent of the PE cases were diagnosed within the first 6 months of cancer diagnosis, while 4/24 (16%) of the PE cases were diagnosed throughout patient follow-up within the first year of diagnosis. Chest pain and dyspnea were the common presentations in confirmed PE either symptomatic or incidental group.

Conclusions

Low-risk PE was the most frequent degree; massive and sub-massive PE was uncommon in oncologic patients. Dyspnea and chest discomfort are concerning signs of PE in cancer. Meticulous care during the first 6 months for cancer patients to pick up pulmonary embolism is recommended.

Anticoagulation for the initial treatment of venous thromboembolism in people with cancer

BACKGROUND

Compared with people without cancer, people with cancer who receive anticoagulant treatment for venous thromboembolism (VTE) are more likely to develop recurrent VTE.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the efficacy and safety of three types of parenteral anticoagulants (i.e. fixed-dose low molecular weight heparin (LMWH), adjusted-dose unfractionated heparin (UFH), and fondaparinux) for the initial treatment of VTE in people with cancer.

SEARCH METHODS

We performed a comprehensive search in the following major databases: Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE (via Ovid) and Embase (via Ovid). We also handsearched conference proceedings, checked references of included studies, and searched for ongoing studies. This update of the systematic review is based on the findings of a literature search conducted on 14 August 2021.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) assessing the benefits and harms of LMWH, UFH, and fondaparinux in people with cancer and objectively confirmed VTE.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Using a standardised form, we extracted data - in duplicate - on study design, participants, interventions, outcomes of interest, and risk of bias. Outcomes of interest included all-cause mortality, symptomatic VTE, major bleeding, minor bleeding, postphlebitic syndrome, quality of life, and thrombocytopenia. We assessed the certainty of evidence for each outcome using the GRADE approach.

MAIN RESULTS

Of 11,484 identified citations, 3073 were unique citations and 15 RCTs fulfilled the eligibility criteria, none of which were identified in the latest search. These trials enrolled 1615 participants with cancer and VTE: 13 compared LMWH with UFH; one compared fondaparinux with UFH and LMWH; and one compared dalteparin with tinzaparin, two different types of low molecular weight heparin. The meta-analyses showed that LMWH may reduce mortality at three months compared to UFH (risk ratio (RR) 0.66, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.40 to 1.10; risk difference (RD) 57 fewer per 1000, 95% CI 101 fewer to 17 more; low certainty evidence) and may reduce VTE recurrence slightly (RR 0.69, 95% CI 0.27 to 1.76; RD 30 fewer per 1000, 95% CI 70 fewer to 73 more; low certainty evidence). There were no data available for bleeding outcomes, postphlebitic syndrome, quality of life, or thrombocytopenia. The study comparing fondaparinux with heparin (UFH or LMWH) found that fondaparinux may increase mortality at three months (RR 1.25, 95% CI 0.86 to 1.81; RD 43 more per 1000, 95% CI 24 fewer to 139 more; low certainty evidence), may result in little to no difference in recurrent VTE (RR 0.93, 95% CI 0.56 to 1.54; RD 8 fewer per 1000, 95% CI 52 fewer to 63 more; low certainty evidence), may result in little to no difference in major bleeding (RR 0.82, 95% CI 0.40 to 1.66; RD 12 fewer per 1000, 95% CI 40 fewer to 44 more; low certainty evidence), and probably increases minor bleeding (RR 1.53, 95% CI 0.88 to 2.66; RD 42 more per 1000, 95% CI 10 fewer to 132 more; moderate certainty evidence). There were no data available for postphlebitic syndrome, quality of life, or thrombocytopenia. The study comparing dalteparin with tinzaparin found that dalteparin may reduce mortality slightly (RR 0.86, 95% CI 0.43 to 1.73; RD 33 fewer per 1000, 95% CI 135 fewer to 173 more; low certainty evidence), may reduce recurrent VTE (RR 0.44, 95% CI 0.09 to 2.16; RD 47 fewer per 1000, 95% CI 77 fewer to 98 more; low certainty evidence), may increase major bleeding slightly (RR 2.19, 95% CI 0.20 to 23.42; RD 20 more per 1000, 95% CI 14 fewer to 380 more; low certainty evidence), and may reduce minor bleeding slightly (RR 0.82, 95% CI 0.30 to 2.21; RD 24 fewer per 1000, 95% CI 95 fewer to 164 more; low certainty evidence). There were no data available for postphlebitic syndrome, quality of life, or thrombocytopenia.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Low molecular weight heparin (LMWH) is probably superior to UFH in the initial treatment of VTE in people with cancer. Additional trials focusing on patient-important outcomes will further inform the questions addressed in this review. The decision for a person with cancer to start LMWH therapy should balance the benefits and harms and consider the person's values and preferences.

Primary prophylaxis for venous thromboembolism in ambulatory cancer patients receiving chemotherapy

BACKGROUND

Venous thromboembolism (VTE) often complicates the clinical course of cancer. The risk is further increased by chemotherapy, but the trade-off between safety and efficacy of primary thromboprophylaxis in cancer patients treated with chemotherapy is uncertain. This is the third update of a review first published in February 2012.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the efficacy and safety of primary thromboprophylaxis for VTE in ambulatory cancer patients receiving chemotherapy compared with placebo or no thromboprophylaxis, or an active control intervention.

SEARCH METHODS

For this update, the Cochrane Vascular Information Specialist searched the Cochrane Vascular, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase and CINAHL databases and World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform and ClinicalTrials.gov trials registers to 3 August 2020. We also searched the reference lists of identified studies and contacted content experts and trialists for relevant references.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials comparing any oral or parenteral anticoagulant or mechanical intervention to no thromboprophylaxis or placebo, or comparing two different anticoagulants.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We extracted data on risk of bias, participant characteristics, interventions, and outcomes including symptomatic VTE and major bleeding as the primary effectiveness and safety outcomes, respectively. We applied GRADE to assess the certainty of evidence.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified six additional randomised controlled trials (3326 participants) for this update, bringing the included study total to 32 (15,678 participants), all evaluating pharmacological interventions and performed mainly in people with locally advanced or metastatic cancer. The certainty of the evidence ranged from high to very low across the different outcomes and comparisons. The main limiting factors were imprecision and risk of bias. Thromboprophylaxis with direct oral anticoagulants (direct factor Xa inhibitors apixaban and rivaroxaban) may decrease the incidence of symptomatic VTE (risk ratio (RR) 0.43, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.18 to 1.06; 3 studies, 1526 participants; low-certainty evidence); and probably increases the risk of major bleeding compared with placebo (RR 1.74, 95% CI 0.82 to 3.68; 3 studies, 1494 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). When compared with no thromboprophylaxis, low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) reduced the incidence of symptomatic VTE (RR 0.62, 95% CI 0.46 to 0.83; 11 studies, 3931 participants; high-certainty evidence); and probably increased the risk of major bleeding events (RR 1.63, 95% CI 1.12 to 2.35; 15 studies, 7282 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). In participants with multiple myeloma, LMWH resulted in lower symptomatic VTE compared with the vitamin K antagonist warfarin (RR 0.33, 95% CI 0.14 to 0.83; 1 study, 439 participants; high-certainty evidence), while LMWH probably lowers symptomatic VTE more than aspirin (RR 0.51, 95% CI 0.22 to 1.17; 2 studies, 781 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). Major bleeding was observed in none of the participants with multiple myeloma treated with LMWH or warfarin and in less than 1% of those treated with aspirin. Only one study evaluated unfractionated heparin against no thromboprophylaxis, but did not report on VTE or major bleeding. When compared with placebo or no thromboprophylaxis, warfarin may importantly reduce symptomatic VTE (RR 0.15, 95% CI 0.02 to 1.20; 1 study, 311 participants; low-certainty evidence) and may result in a large increase in major bleeding (RR 3.82, 95% CI 0.97 to 15.04; 4 studies, 994 participants; low-certainty evidence). One study evaluated antithrombin versus no antithrombin in children. This study did not report on symptomatic VTE but did report any VTE (symptomatic and incidental VTE). The effect of antithrombin on any VTE and major bleeding is uncertain (any VTE: RR 0.84, 95% CI 0.41 to 1.73; major bleeding: RR 0.78, 95% CI 0.03 to 18.57; 1 study, 85 participants; very low-certainty evidence).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

In ambulatory cancer patients, primary thromboprophylaxis with direct factor Xa inhibitors may reduce the incidence of symptomatic VTE (low-certainty evidence) and probably increases the risk of major bleeding (moderate-certainty evidence) when compared with placebo. LMWH decreases the incidence of symptomatic VTE (high-certainty evidence), but increases the risk of major bleeding (moderate-certainty evidence) when compared with placebo or no thromboprophylaxis. Evidence for the use of thromboprophylaxis with anticoagulants other than direct factor Xa inhibitors and LMWH is limited. More studies are warranted to evaluate the efficacy and safety of primary prophylaxis in specific types of chemotherapeutic agents and types of cancer, such as gastrointestinal or genitourinary cancer.

Rivaroxaban does not affect growth of human pancreatic tumors in mice

BACKGROUND

Some clinical studies have shown that low-molecular-weight heparins (LMWHs) prolong the survival of cancer patients. In addition, various anticoagulants have been shown to reduce growth of tumors in mice. However, there are no studies on the effect of the factor Xa inhibitor rivaroxaban on growth of human pancreatic tumors in nude mice.

OBJECTIVES

To test the hypothesis that the factor Xa inhibitor rivaroxaban reduces the growth of tissue factor (TF)-positive pancreatic tumors but not TF-negative pancreatic tumors in mice.

METHODS

The TF-positive human pancreatic cancer cell line BxPc-3 and the TF-negative human pancreatic cancer cell line MIA PaCa-2 were injected subcutaneously into nude mice and tumors grown to a mean volume of ~100 mm3 . Mice were then divided into two groups. One group was fed chow containing rivaroxaban (0.5 g/kg chow) whereas the other group was fed chow without rivaroxaban.

RESULTS

Rivaroxaban significantly prolonged prothrombin time in tumor-bearing mice. Rivaroxaban did not affect cell proliferation or growth of either BxPc-3 or MIA PaCa-2 tumors grown subcutaneously in nude mice.

CONCLUSION

Our results indicate that inhibition of factor Xa with rivaroxaban does not affect the growth of two human pancreatic tumors in nude mice.

Coagulation Factor Xa Promotes Solid Tumor Growth, Experimental Metastasis and Endothelial Cell Activation

Hypercoagulable state is linked to cancer progression; however, the precise role of the coagulation cascade is poorly described. Herein, we examined the contribution of a hypercoagulative state through the administration of intravenous Coagulation Factor Xa (FXa), on the growth of solid human tumors and the experimental metastasis of the B16F10 melanoma in mouse models. FXa increased solid tumor volume and lung, liver, kidney and lymph node metastasis of tail-vein injected B16F10 cells. Concentrating on the metastasis model, upon coadministration of the anticoagulant Dalteparin, lung metastasis was significantly reduced, and no metastasis was observed in other organs. FXa did not directly alter proliferation, migration or invasion of cancer cells in vitro. Alternatively, FXa upon endothelial cells promoted cytoskeleton contraction, disrupted membrane VE-Cadherin pattern, heightened endothelial-hyperpermeability, increased inflammatory adhesion molecules and enhanced B16F10 adhesion under flow conditions. Microarray analysis of endothelial cells treated with FXa demonstrated elevated expression of inflammatory transcripts. Accordingly, FXa treatment increased immune cell infiltration in mouse lungs, an effect reduced by dalteparin. Taken together, our results suggest that FXa increases B16F10 metastasis via endothelial cell activation and enhanced cancer cell-endothelium adhesion advocating that the coagulation system is not merely a bystander in the process of cancer metastasis.

Single cell coagulomes as constituents of the oncogene-driven coagulant phenotype in brain tumours

Molecular profiling of human cancers revealed a startling diversity in disease-causing mechanisms superseding histological and anatomical commonalities. The emerging molecular subtypes and disease entities are often driven by distinct oncogenic pathways and their effectors, including those acting extracellularly on the vascular and coagulation systems. Indeed, several oncogenic mutations such as those affecting protein-coding genes (RAS, EGFR, PTEN, TP53) and non-coding RNA (microRNA) regulate multiple effectors of the coagulation system (coagulome), including tissue factor, protease activated receptors, clotting factors, mediators of platelet function and fibrinolysis. This is exemplified by differential coagulome profiles in the molecular subtypes of glioblastoma, medulloblastoma and other human tumours. There is mounting clinical evidence that the mutational status of cancer driver genes such as KRAS or IDH1 may influence the risk of venous thromboembolism in patients with colorectal, lung or brain cancers. Notably, single cell sequencing in glioblastoma revealed a remarkable intra-tumoural heterogeneity of cancer cell populations with regard to their individual coagulomes, suggesting a combinatorial and dynamic nature of the global pro-thrombotic phenotype. We suggest that the cellular complexity of specific cancers may define their mechanisms of interactions with the coagulation system, and the risks of thrombosis. Thus, more biologically- based, disease-specific and personalized approaches may be needed to diagnose and manage cancer-related thrombosis.

Anticoagulation for perioperative thromboprophylaxis in people with cancer

BACKGROUND

The choice of the appropriate perioperative thromboprophylaxis for people with cancer depends on the relative benefits and harms of different anticoagulants.

OBJECTIVES

To systematically review the evidence for the relative efficacy and safety of anticoagulants for perioperative thromboprophylaxis in people with cancer.

SEARCH METHODS

This update of the systematic review was based on the findings of a comprehensive literature search conducted on 14 June 2018 that included a major electronic search of Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL, 2018, Issue 6), MEDLINE (Ovid), and Embase (Ovid); handsearching of conference proceedings; checking of references of included studies; searching for ongoing studies; and using the 'related citation' feature in PubMed.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that enrolled people with cancer undergoing a surgical intervention and assessed the effects of low-molecular weight heparin (LMWH) to unfractionated heparin (UFH) or to fondaparinux on mortality, deep venous thrombosis (DVT), pulmonary embolism (PE), bleeding outcomes, and thrombocytopenia.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Using a standardized form, we extracted data in duplicate on study design, participants, interventions outcomes of interest, and risk of bias. Outcomes of interest included all-cause mortality, PE, symptomatic venous thromboembolism (VTE), asymptomatic DVT, major bleeding, minor bleeding, postphlebitic syndrome, health related quality of life, and thrombocytopenia. We assessed the certainty of evidence for each outcome using the GRADE approach (GRADE Handbook).

MAIN RESULTS

Of 7670 identified unique citations, we included 20 RCTs with 9771 randomized people with cancer receiving preoperative prophylactic anticoagulation. We identified seven reports for seven new RCTs for this update.The meta-analyses did not conclusively rule out either a beneficial or harmful effect of LMWH compared with UFH for the following outcomes: mortality (risk ratio (RR) 0.82, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.63 to 1.07; risk difference (RD) 9 fewer per 1000, 95% CI 19 fewer to 4 more; moderate-certainty evidence), PE (RR 0.49, 95% CI 0.17 to 1.47; RD 3 fewer per 1000, 95% CI 5 fewer to 3 more; moderate-certainty evidence), symptomatic DVT (RR 0.67, 95% CI 0.27 to 1.69; RD 3 fewer per 1000, 95% CI 7 fewer to 7 more; moderate-certainty evidence), asymptomatic DVT (RR 0.86, 95% CI 0.71 to 1.05; RD 11 fewer per 1000, 95% CI 23 fewer to 4 more; low-certainty evidence), major bleeding (RR 1.01, 95% CI 0.69 to 1.48; RD 0 fewer per 1000, 95% CI 10 fewer to 15 more; moderate-certainty evidence), minor bleeding (RR 1.01, 95% CI 0.76 to 1.33; RD 1 more per 1000, 95% CI 34 fewer to 47 more; moderate-certainty evidence), reoperation for bleeding (RR 0.93, 95% CI 0.57 to 1.50; RD 4 fewer per 1000, 95% CI 22 fewer to 26 more; moderate-certainty evidence), intraoperative transfusion (mean difference (MD) -35.36 mL, 95% CI -253.19 to 182.47; low-certainty evidence), postoperative transfusion (MD 190.03 mL, 95% CI -23.65 to 403.72; low-certainty evidence), and thrombocytopenia (RR 3.07, 95% CI 0.32 to 29.33; RD 6 more per 1000, 95% CI 2 fewer to 82 more; moderate-certainty evidence). LMWH was associated with lower incidence of wound hematoma (RR 0.70, 95% CI 0.54 to 0.92; RD 26 fewer per 1000, 95% CI 39 fewer to 7 fewer; moderate-certainty evidence). The meta-analyses found the following additional results: outcomes intraoperative blood loss (MD -6.75 mL, 95% CI -85.49 to 71.99; moderate-certainty evidence); and postoperative drain volume (MD 30.18 mL, 95% CI -36.26 to 96.62; moderate-certainty evidence).In addition, the meta-analyses did not conclusively rule out either a beneficial or harmful effect of LMWH compared with Fondaparinux for the following outcomes: any VTE (DVT or PE, or both; RR 2.51, 95% CI 0.89 to 7.03; RD 57 more per 1000, 95% CI 4 fewer to 228 more; low-certainty evidence), major bleeding (RR 0.74, 95% CI 0.45 to 1.23; RD 8 fewer per 1000, 95% CI 16 fewer to 7 more; low-certainty evidence), minor bleeding (RR 0.83, 95% CI 0.34 to 2.05; RD 8fewer per 1000, 95% CI 33 fewer to 52 more; low-certainty evidence), thrombocytopenia (RR 0.35, 95% CI 0.04 to 3.30; RD 14 fewer per 1000, 95% CI 20 fewer to 48 more; low-certainty evidence), any PE (RR 3.13, 95% CI 0.13 to 74.64; RD 2 more per 1000, 95% CI 1 fewer to 78 more; low-certainty evidence) and postoperative drain volume (MD -20.00 mL, 95% CI -114.34 to 74.34; low-certainty evidence) AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: We found no difference between perioperative thromboprophylaxis with LMWH versus UFH and LMWH compared with fondaparinux in their effects on mortality, thromboembolic outcomes, major bleeding, or minor bleeding in people with cancer. There was a lower incidence of wound hematoma with LMWH compared to UFH.

Anticoagulation for the long-term treatment of venous thromboembolism in people with cancer

BACKGROUND

Cancer increases the risk of thromboembolic events, especially in people receiving anticoagulation treatments.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the efficacy and safety of low molecular weight heparins (LMWHs), direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) and vitamin K antagonists (VKAs) for the long-term treatment of venous thromboembolism (VTE) in people with cancer.

SEARCH METHODS

We conducted a literature search including a major electronic search of the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL; 2016, Issue 1), MEDLINE (Ovid), and Embase (Ovid); handsearching conference proceedings; checking references of included studies; use of the 'related citation' feature in PubMed and a search for ongoing studies in trial registries. As part of the living systematic review approach, we run searches continually, incorporating new evidence after it is identified. Last search date 14 May 2018.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) assessing the benefits and harms of long-term treatment with LMWHs, DOACs or VKAs in people with cancer and symptomatic VTE.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We extracted data in duplicate on study characteristics and risk of bias. Outcomes included: all-cause mortality, recurrent VTE, major bleeding, minor bleeding, thrombocytopenia, and health-related quality of life (QoL). We assessed the certainty of the evidence at the outcome level following the GRADE approach (GRADE handbook).

MAIN RESULTS

Of 15,785 citations, including 7602 unique citations, 16 RCTs fulfilled the eligibility criteria. These trials enrolled 5167 people with cancer and VTE.Low molecular weight heparins versus vitamin K antagonistsEight studies enrolling 2327 participants compared LMWHs with VKAs. Meta-analysis of five studies probably did not rule out a beneficial or harmful effect of LMWHs compared to VKAs on mortality up to 12 months of follow-up (risk ratio (RR) 1.00, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.88 to 1.13; risk difference (RD) 0 fewer per 1000, 95% CI 45 fewer to 48 more; moderate-certainty evidence). Meta-analysis of four studies did not rule out a beneficial or harmful effect of LMWHs compared to VKAs on major bleeding (RR 1.09, 95% CI 0.55 to 2.12; RD 4 more per 1000, 95% CI 19 fewer to 48 more, moderate-certainty evidence) or minor bleeding (RR 0.78, 95% CI 0.47 to 1.27; RD 38 fewer per 1000, 95% CI 92 fewer to 47 more; low-certainty evidence), or thrombocytopenia (RR 0.94, 95% CI 0.52 to 1.69). Meta-analysis of five studies showed that LMWHs probably reduced the recurrence of VTE compared to VKAs (RR 0.58, 95% CI 0.43 to 0.77; RD 53 fewer per 1000, 95% CI 29 fewer to 72 fewer, moderate-certainty evidence).Direct oral anticoagulants versus vitamin K antagonistsFive studies enrolling 982 participants compared DOACs with VKAs. Meta-analysis of four studies may not rule out a beneficial or harmful effect of DOACs compared to VKAs on mortality (RR 0.93, 95% CI 0.71 to 1.21; RD 12 fewer per 1000, 95% CI 51 fewer to 37 more; low-certainty evidence), recurrent VTE (RR 0.66, 95% CI 0.33 to 1.31; RD 14 fewer per 1000, 95% CI 27 fewer to 12 more; low-certainty evidence), major bleeding (RR 0.77, 95% CI 0.38 to 1.57, RD 8 fewer per 1000, 95% CI 22 fewer to 20 more; low-certainty evidence), or minor bleeding (RR 0.84, 95% CI 0.58 to 1.22; RD 21 fewer per 1000, 95% CI 54 fewer to 28 more; low-certainty evidence). One study reporting on DOAC versus VKA was published as abstract so is not included in the main analysis.Direct oral anticoagulants versus low molecular weight heparinsTwo studies enrolling 1455 participants compared DOAC with LMWH. The study by Raskob did not rule out a beneficial or harmful effect of DOACs compared to LMWH on mortality up to 12 months of follow-up (RR 1.07, 95% CI 0.92 to 1.25; RD 27 more per 1000, 95% CI 30 fewer to 95 more; low-certainty evidence). The data also showed that DOACs may have shown a likely reduction in VTE recurrence up to 12 months of follow-up compared to LMWH (RR 0.69, 95% CI 0.47 to 1.01; RD 36 fewer per 1000, 95% CI 62 fewer to 1 more; low-certainty evidence). DOAC may have increased major bleeding at 12 months of follow-up compared to LMWH (RR 1.71, 95% CI 1.01 to 2.88; RD 29 more per 1000, 95% CI 0 fewer to 78 more; low-certainty evidence) and likely increased minor bleeding up to 12 months of follow-up compared to LMWH (RR 1.31, 95% CI 0.95 to 1.80; RD 35 more per 1000, 95% CI 6 fewer to 92 more; low-certainty evidence). The second study on DOAC versus LMWH was published as an abstract and is not included in the main analysis.Idraparinux versus vitamin K antagonistsOne RCT with 284 participants compared once-weekly subcutaneous injection of idraparinux versus standard treatment (parenteral anticoagulation followed by warfarin or acenocoumarol) for three or six months. The data probably did not rule out a beneficial or harmful effect of idraparinux compared to VKAs on mortality at six months (RR 1.11, 95% CI 0.78 to 1.59; RD 31 more per 1000, 95% CI 62 fewer to 167 more; moderate-certainty evidence), VTE recurrence at six months (RR 0.46, 95% CI 0.16 to 1.32; RD 42 fewer per 1000, 95% CI 65 fewer to 25 more; low-certainty evidence) or major bleeding (RR 1.11, 95% CI 0.35 to 3.56; RD 4 more per 1000, 95% CI 25 fewer to 98 more; low-certainty evidence).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

For the long-term treatment of VTE in people with cancer, evidence shows that LMWHs compared to VKAs probably produces an important reduction in VTE and DOACs compared to LMWH, may likely reduce VTE but may increase risk of major bleeding. Decisions for a person with cancer and VTE to start long-term LMWHs versus oral anticoagulation should balance benefits and harms and integrate the person's values and preferences for the important outcomes and alternative management strategies.Editorial note: this is a living systematic review (LSR). LSRs offer new approaches to review updating in which the review is continually updated, incorporating relevant new evidence as it becomes available. Please refer to the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews for the current status of this review.

Anticoagulation for people with cancer and central venous catheters

BACKGROUND

Central venous catheter (CVC) placement increases the risk of thrombosis in people with cancer. Thrombosis often necessitates the removal of the CVC, resulting in treatment delays and thrombosis-related morbidity and mortality. This is an update of the Cochrane Review published in 2014.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the efficacy and safety of anticoagulation for thromboprophylaxis in people with cancer with a CVC.

SEARCH METHODS

We conducted a comprehensive literature search in May 2018 that included a major electronic search of Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE (Ovid), and Embase (Ovid); handsearching of conference proceedings; checking of references of included studies; searching for ongoing studies; and using the 'related citation' feature in PubMed. This update of the systematic review was based on the findings of a literature search conducted on 14 May 2018.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) assessing the benefits and harms of unfractionated heparin (UFH), low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH), vitamin K antagonists (VKA), or fondaparinux or comparing the effects of two of these anticoagulants in people with cancer and a CVC.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Using a standardized form, we extracted data and assessed risk of bias. Outcomes included all-cause mortality, symptomatic catheter-related venous thromboembolism (VTE), pulmonary embolism (PE), major bleeding, minor bleeding, catheter-related infection, thrombocytopenia, and health-related quality of life (HRQoL). We assessed the certainty of evidence for each outcome using the GRADE approach (Balshem 2011).

MAIN RESULTS

Thirteen RCTs (23 papers) fulfilled the inclusion criteria. These trials enrolled 3420 participants. Seven RCTs compared LMWH to no LMWH (six in adults and one in children), six RCTs compared VKA to no VKA (five in adults and one in children), and three RCTs compared LMWH to VKA in adults.LMWH versus no LMWHSix RCTs (1537 participants) compared LMWH to no LMWH in adults. The meta-analyses showed that LMWH probably decreased the incidence of symptomatic catheter-related VTE up to three months of follow-up compared to no LMWH (risk ratio (RR) 0.43, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.22 to 0.81; risk difference (RD) 38 fewer per 1000, 95% CI 13 fewer to 52 fewer; moderate-certainty evidence). However, the analysis did not confirm or exclude a beneficial or detrimental effect of LMWH on mortality at three months of follow-up (RR 0.82, 95% CI 0.53 to 1.26; RD 14 fewer per 1000, 95% CI 36 fewer to 20 more; low-certainty evidence), major bleeding (RR 1.49, 95% CI 0.06 to 36.28; RD 0 more per 1000, 95% CI 1 fewer to 35 more; very low-certainty evidence), minor bleeding (RR 1.35, 95% CI 0.62 to 2.92; RD 14 more per 1000, 95% CI 16 fewer to 79 more; low-certainty evidence), and thrombocytopenia (RR 1.03, 95% CI 0.80 to 1.33; RD 5 more per 1000, 95% CI 35 fewer to 58 more; low-certainty evidence).VKA versus no VKAFive RCTs (1599 participants) compared low-dose VKA to no VKA in adults. The meta-analyses did not confirm or exclude a beneficial or detrimental effect of low-dose VKA compared to no VKA on mortality (RR 0.99, 95% CI 0.64 to 1.55; RD 1 fewer per 1000, 95% CI 34 fewer to 52 more; low-certainty evidence), symptomatic catheter-related VTE (RR 0.61, 95% CI 0.23 to 1.64; RD 31 fewer per 1000, 95% CI 62 fewer to 51 more; low-certainty evidence), major bleeding (RR 7.14, 95% CI 0.88 to 57.78; RD 12 more per 1000, 95% CI 0 fewer to 110 more; low-certainty evidence), minor bleeding (RR 0.69, 95% CI 0.38 to 1.26; RD 15 fewer per 1000, 95% CI 30 fewer to 13 more; low-certainty evidence), premature catheter removal (RR 0.82, 95% CI 0.30 to 2.24; RD 29 fewer per 1000, 95% CI 114 fewer to 202 more; low-certainty evidence), and catheter-related infection (RR 1.17, 95% CI 0.74 to 1.85; RD 71 more per 1000, 95% CI 109 fewer to 356; low-certainty evidence).LMWH versus VKAThree RCTs (641 participants) compared LMWH to VKA in adults. The available evidence did not confirm or exclude a beneficial or detrimental effect of LMWH relative to VKA on mortality (RR 0.94, 95% CI 0.56 to 1.59; RD 6 fewer per 1000, 95% CI 41 fewer to 56 more; low-certainty evidence), symptomatic catheter-related VTE (RR 1.83, 95% CI 0.44 to 7.61; RD 15 more per 1000, 95% CI 10 fewer to 122 more; very low-certainty evidence), PE (RR 1.70, 95% CI 0.74 to 3.92; RD 35 more per 1000, 95% CI 13 fewer to 144 more; low-certainty evidence), major bleeding (RR 3.11, 95% CI 0.13 to 73.11; RD 2 more per 1000, 95% CI 1 fewer to 72 more; very low-certainty evidence), or minor bleeding (RR 0.95, 95% CI 0.20 to 4.61; RD 1 fewer per 1000, 95% CI 21 fewer to 95 more; very low-certainty evidence). The meta-analyses showed that LMWH probably increased the risk of thrombocytopenia compared to VKA at three months of follow-up (RR 1.69, 95% CI 1.20 to 2.39; RD 149 more per 1000, 95% CI 43 fewer to 300 more; moderate-certainty evidence).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The evidence was not conclusive for the effect of LMWH on mortality, the effect of VKA on mortality and catheter-related VTE, and the effect of LMWH compared to VKA on mortality and catheter-related VTE. We found moderate-certainty evidence that LMWH reduces catheter-related VTE compared to no LMWH. People with cancer with CVCs considering anticoagulation should balance the possible benefit of reduced thromboembolic complications with the possible harms and burden of anticoagulants.

Pharmacodynamic properties and bioequivalence of dalteparin sodium subcutaneous injection in healthy Chinese male subjects

1. Dalteparin sodium (DS) is a low molecular weight heparin that is widely used in the treatment of thromboembolism. The purpose of this study was to compare the pharmacodynamic properties and bioequivalence of the two formulations of DS with subcutaneous injection in healthy Chinese male subjects. 2. In this randomized, open-label, two-period crossover study, a total of 24 male subjects were recruited to receive single subcutaneous doses of test and reference DS injection in two different sequences (12 subjects each) with a seven-day washout period. Plasma samples were obtained at different time points after administration of the injection and measured by chromogenic substrate assay. The pharmacodynamic parameters including E_max, AUEC_0-T, AUEC_0-∞ and T_max were analyzed to evaluate the bioequivalence of two DS formulations. 3. The relative bioequivalence was 107.7 ± 15.5 and 106.6 ± 29.8 for Anti-Xa and Anti-IIa, two major active metabolites of DS, respectively. The 90% confidence intervals (CIs) of the geometric mean ratio (test/reference) of E_max, AUEC_0-T and AUEC_0-∞ were 98.71-104.40%, 101.95-112.13% and 102.38-112.10% for Anti-Xa, and 100.88-110.42%, 95.76-112.62% and 92.24-111.32% for Anti-IIa, respectively, and all of the 90% CIs were within 80-125%. The T_1/2 of reference and test were 2.88 ± 1.21 h and 2.76 ± 0.97 h for Anti-Xa, 1.87 ± 0.62 h and 1.96 ± 1.52 h for Anti-IIa. 4. Based on the pharmacodynamic parameters and FDA Guidance on DS and regulatory criteria for bioequivalence, the test and reference formulations were bioequivalent in healthy Chinese male subjects.

Anticoagulation for the initial treatment of venous thromboembolism in people with cancer

BACKGROUND

Compared with people without cancer, people with cancer who receive anticoagulant treatment for venous thromboembolism (VTE) are more likely to develop recurrent VTE.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the efficacy and safety of three types of parenteral anticoagulants (i.e. fixed-dose low molecular weight heparin (LMWH), adjusted-dose unfractionated heparin (UFH), and fondaparinux) for the initial treatment of VTE in people with cancer.

SEARCH METHODS

A comprehensive search included a major electronic search of the following databases: Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (2018, Issue 1), MEDLINE (via Ovid) and Embase (via Ovid); handsearching of conference proceedings; checking of references of included studies; use of the 'related citation' feature in PubMed; and a search for ongoing studies. This update of the systematic review was based on the findings of a literature search conducted on 14 January 2018.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) assessing the benefits and harms of LMWH, UFH, and fondaparinux in people with cancer and objectively confirmed VTE.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Using a standardized form, we extracted data in duplicate on study design, participants, interventions outcomes of interest, and risk of bias. Outcomes of interested included all-cause mortality, symptomatic VTE, major bleeding, minor bleeding, postphlebitic syndrome, quality of life, and thrombocytopenia. We assessed the certainty of evidence for each outcome using the GRADE approach.

MAIN RESULTS

Of 15440 identified citations, 7387 unique citations, 15 RCTs fulfilled the eligibility criteria. These trials enrolled 1615 participants with cancer and VTE: 13 compared LMWH with UFH enrolling 1025 participants, one compared fondaparinux with UFH and LMWH enrolling 477 participants, and one compared dalteparin with tinzaparin enrolling 113 participants. The meta-analysis of mortality at three months included 418 participants from five studies and that of recurrent VTE included 422 participants from 3 studies. The findings showed that LMWH likely decreases mortality at three months compared to UFH (risk ratio (RR) 0.66, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.40 to 1.10; risk difference (RD) 57 fewer per 1000, 95% CI 101 fewer to 17 more; moderate certainty evidence), but did not rule out a clinically significant increase or decrease in VTE recurrence (RR 0.69, 95% CI 0.27 to 1.76; RD 30 fewer per 1000, 95% CI 70 fewer to 73 more; moderate certainty evidence).The study comparing fondaparinux with heparin (UFH or LMWH) did not exclude a beneficial or detrimental effect of fondaparinux on mortality at three months (RR 1.25, 95% CI 0.86 to 1.81; RD 43 more per 1000, 95% CI 24 fewer to 139 more; moderate certainty evidence), recurrent VTE (RR 0.93, 95% CI 0.56 to 1.54; RD 8 fewer per 1000, 95% CI 52 fewer to 63 more; moderate certainty evidence), major bleeding (RR 0.82, 95% CI 0.40 to 1.66; RD 12 fewer per 1000, 95% CI 40 fewer to 44 more; moderate certainty evidence), or minor bleeding (RR 1.53, 95% CI 0.88 to 2.66; RD 42 more per 1000, 95% CI 10 fewer to 132 more; moderate certainty evidence)The study comparing dalteparin with tinzaparin did not exclude a beneficial or detrimental effect of dalteparin on mortality (RR 0.86, 95% CI 0.43 to 1.73; RD 33 fewer per 1000, 95% CI 135 fewer to 173 more; low certainty evidence), recurrent VTE (RR 0.44, 95% CI 0.09 to 2.16; RD 47 fewer per 1000, 95% CI 77 fewer to 98 more; low certainty evidence), major bleeding (RR 2.19, 95% CI 0.20 to 23.42; RD 20 more per 1000, 95% CI 14 fewer to 380 more; low certainty evidence), or minor bleeding (RR 0.82, 95% CI 0.30 to 2.21; RD 24 fewer per 1000, 95% CI 95 fewer to 164 more; low certainty evidence).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

LMWH is possibly superior to UFH in the initial treatment of VTE in people with cancer. Additional trials focusing on patient-important outcomes will further inform the questions addressed in this review. The decision for a person with cancer to start LMWH therapy should balance the benefits and harms and consider the person's values and preferences.

Oral anticoagulation in people with cancer who have no therapeutic or prophylactic indication for anticoagulation

BACKGROUND

Oral anticoagulants may improve the survival of people with cancer through both an antitumor effect and antithrombotic effect, yet increase the risk of bleeding.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the efficacy and safety of oral anticoagulants in ambulatory people with cancer undergoing chemotherapy, hormonal therapy, immunotherapy or radiotherapy, but otherwise have no standard therapeutic or prophylactic indication for anticoagulation.

SEARCH METHODS

We conducted a comprehensive literature search in February 2016 that included a major electronic search of Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (2016, Issue 1), MEDLINE (Ovid) and Embase (Ovid); handsearching of conference proceedings; checking of references of included studies; a search for ongoing studies; and using the 'related citation' feature in PubMed. As part of the living systematic review approach, we are running continual searches and will incorporate new evidence rapidly after it is identified. This update of the systematic review is based on the findings of a literature search conducted on 14 December 2017.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) assessing the benefits and harms of vitamin K antagonist (VKA) or direct oral anticoagulants (DOAC) in ambulatory people with cancer. These participants are typically undergoing systemic anticancer therapy, possibly including chemotherapy, target therapy, immunotherapy or radiotherapy, but otherwise have no standard therapeutic or prophylactic indication for anticoagulation.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Using a standardized form, we extracted data in duplicate on study design, participants, intervention outcomes of interest and risk of bias. Outcomes of interest included all-cause mortality, symptomatic venous thromboembolism (VTE), symptomatic deep vein thrombosis (DVT), pulmonary embolism (PE), major bleeding, minor bleeding and health-related quality of life (HRQoL). We assessed the certainty of evidence for each outcome using the GRADE approach (GRADE Handbook).

MAIN RESULTS

Of 8545 identified citations, including 7668 unique citations, 16 papers reporting on 7 RCTs fulfilled the inclusion criteria. These trials enrolled 1486 participants. The oral anticoagulant was warfarin in six of these RCTs and apixaban in the seventh RCT. The comparator was either placebo or no intervention. The meta-analysis of the studies comparing VKA to no VKA did not rule out a clinically significant increase or decrease in mortality at one year (risk ratio (RR) 0.95, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.87 to 1.03; risk difference (RD) 29 fewer per 1000, 95% CI 75 fewer to 17 more; moderate certainty evidence). One study assessed the effect of VKA on thrombotic outcomes. The study did not rule out a clinically significant increase or decrease in PE when comparing VKA to no VKA (RR 1.05, 95% CI 0.07 to 16.58; RD 0 fewer per 1000, 95% CI 6 fewer to 98 more; very low certainty evidence), but found that VKA compared to no VKA likely decreases the incidence of DVT (RR 0.08, 95% CI 0.00 to 1.42; RD 35 fewer per 1000, 95% CI 38 fewer to 16 more; low certainty evidence). VKA increased both major bleeding (RR 2.93, 95% CI 1.86 to 4.62; RD 107 more per 1000, 95% CI 48 more to 201 more; moderate certainty evidence) and minor bleeding (RR 3.14, 95% CI 1.85 to 5.32; RD 167 more per 1000, 95% CI 66 more to 337 more; moderate certainty evidence).The study assessing the effect of DOAC compared to no DOAC did not rule out a clinically significant increase or decrease in mortality at three months (RR 0.24, 95% CI 0.02 to 2.56; RD 51 fewer per 1000, 95% CI 65 fewer to 104 more; low certainty evidence), PE (RR 0.16, 95% CI 0.01 to 3.91; RD 28 fewer per 1000, 95% CI 33 fewer to 97 more; low certainty evidence), symptomatic DVT (RR 0.07, 95% CI 0.00 to 1.32; RD 93 fewer per 1000, 95% CI 100 fewer to 32 more; low certainty evidence), major bleeding (RR 0.16, 95% CI 0.01 to 3.91; RD 28 fewer per 1000, 95% CI 33 fewer to 97 more; low certainty evidence); and minor bleeding (RR 4.43, 95% CI 0.25 to 79.68; RD 0 fewer per 1000, 95% CI 0 fewer to 8 more; low certainty evidence).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The existing evidence does not show a mortality benefit from oral anticoagulation in people with cancer but suggests an increased risk for bleeding.Editorial note: this is a living systematic review. Living systematic reviews offer a new approach to review updating in which the review is continually updated, incorporating relevant new evidence, as it becomes available. Please refer to the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews for the current status of this review.

Parenteral anticoagulation in ambulatory patients with cancer

BACKGROUND

Anticoagulation may improve survival in patients with cancer through a speculated anti-tumour effect, in addition to the antithrombotic effect, although may increase the risk of bleeding.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the efficacy and safety of parenteral anticoagulants in ambulatory patients with cancer who, typically, are undergoing chemotherapy, hormonal therapy, immunotherapy or radiotherapy, but otherwise have no standard therapeutic or prophylactic indication for anticoagulation.

SEARCH METHODS

A comprehensive search included (1) a major electronic search (February 2016) of the following databases: Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (2016, Issue 1), MEDLINE (1946 to February 2016; accessed via OVID) and Embase (1980 to February 2016; accessed via OVID); (2) handsearching of conference proceedings; (3) checking of references of included studies; (4) use of the 'related citation' feature in PubMed and (5) a search for ongoing studies in trial registries. As part of the living systematic review approach, we are running searches continually and we will incorporate new evidence rapidly after it is identified. This update of the systematic review is based on the findings of a literature search conducted on 14 August, 2017.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) assessing the benefits and harms of parenteral anticoagulation in ambulatory patients with cancer. Typically, these patients are undergoing chemotherapy, hormonal therapy, immunotherapy or radiotherapy, but otherwise have no standard therapeutic or prophylactic indication for anticoagulation.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Using a standardized form we extracted data in duplicate on study design, participants, interventions outcomes of interest, and risk of bias. Outcomes of interested included all-cause mortality, symptomatic venous thromboembolism (VTE), symptomatic deep vein thrombosis (DVT), pulmonary embolism (PE), major bleeding, minor bleeding, and quality of life. We assessed the certainty of evidence for each outcome using the GRADE approach (GRADE handbook).

MAIN RESULTS

Of 6947 identified citations, 18 RCTs fulfilled the eligibility criteria. These trials enrolled 9575 participants. Trial registries' searches identified nine registered but unpublished trials, two of which were labeled as 'ongoing trials'. In all included RCTs, the intervention consisted of heparin (either unfractionated heparin or low molecular weight heparin). Overall, heparin appears to have no effect on mortality at 12 months (risk ratio (RR) 0.98; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.93 to 1.03; risk difference (RD) 10 fewer per 1000; 95% CI 35 fewer to 15 more; moderate certainty of evidence) and mortality at 24 months (RR 0.99; 95% CI 0.96 to 1.01; RD 8 fewer per 1000; 95% CI 31 fewer to 8 more; moderate certainty of evidence). Heparin therapy reduces the risk of symptomatic VTE (RR 0.56; 95% CI 0.47 to 0.68; RD 30 fewer per 1000; 95% CI 36 fewer to 22 fewer; high certainty of evidence), while it increases in the risks of major bleeding (RR 1.30; 95% 0.94 to 1.79; RD 4 more per 1000; 95% CI 1 fewer to 11 more; moderate certainty of evidence) and minor bleeding (RR 1.70; 95% 1.13 to 2.55; RD 17 more per 1000; 95% CI 3 more to 37 more; high certainty of evidence). Results failed to confirm or to exclude a beneficial or detrimental effect of heparin on thrombocytopenia (RR 0.69; 95% CI 0.37 to 1.27; RD 33 fewer per 1000; 95% CI 66 fewer to 28 more; moderate certainty of evidence); quality of life (moderate certainty of evidence).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Heparin appears to have no effect on mortality at 12 months and 24 months. It reduces symptomatic VTE and likely increases major and minor bleeding. Future research should further investigate the survival benefit of different types of anticoagulants in patients with different types and stages of cancer. The decision for a patient with cancer to start heparin therapy should balance the benefits and downsides, and should integrate the patient's values and preferences.Editorial note:This is a living systematic review. Living systematic reviews offer a new approach to review updating in which the review is continually updated, incorporating relevant new evidence, as it becomes available. Please refer to the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews for the current status of this review.

Primary prophylaxis for venous thromboembolism in ambulatory cancer patients receiving chemotherapy

BACKGROUND

Venous thromboembolism (VTE) often complicates the clinical course of cancer. The risk is further increased by chemotherapy, but the trade-off between safety and efficacy of primary thromboprophylaxis in cancer patients treated with chemotherapy is uncertain. This is the second update of a review first published in February 2012.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the efficacy and safety of primary thromboprophylaxis for VTE in ambulatory cancer patients receiving chemotherapy compared with placebo or no thromboprophylaxis.

SEARCH METHODS

For this update the Cochrane Vascular Information Specialist searched the Cochrane Vascular Group Specialised Register (June 2016). In addition, the Information Specialist searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (2016, Issue 5). Clinical trials registries were searched up to June 2016.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials comparing any oral or parenteral anticoagulant or mechanical intervention to no thromboprophylaxis or placebo, or comparing two different anticoagulants.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We extracted data on methodological quality, participant characteristics, interventions, and outcomes including symptomatic VTE and major bleeding as the primary effectiveness and safety outcomes, respectively.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified five additional randomised controlled trials (2491 participants) in the updated search, considering in this update 26 trials with a total of 12,352 participants, all evaluating pharmacological interventions and performed mainly in people with locally advanced or metastatic cancer. The quality of the evidence ranged from high to very low across the different outcomes and comparisons. The main limiting factors were imprecision and risk of bias. One large trial of 3212 participants found a 64% (risk ratio (RR) 0.36, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.22 to 0.60) reduction of symptomatic VTE with the ultra-low molecular weight heparin (uLMWH) semuloparin relative to placebo, with no apparent difference in major bleeding (RR 1.05, 95% CI 0.55 to 2.00). When compared with no thromboprophylaxis, LMWH significantly reduced the incidence of symptomatic VTE (RR 0.54, 95% CI 0.38 to 0.75; no heterogeneity, Tau2 = 0.00%) with a non-statistically significant 44% higher risk of major bleeding events (RR 1.44, 95% CI 0.98 to 2.11). In participants with multiple myeloma, LMWH was associated with a significant reduction in symptomatic VTE compared with the vitamin K antagonist warfarin (RR 0.33, 95% CI 0.14 to 0.83), while the difference between LMWH and aspirin was not statistically significant (RR 0.51, 95% CI 0.22 to 1.17). Major bleeding was observed in none of the participants treated with LMWH or warfarin and in less than 1% of those treated with aspirin. Only one study evaluated unfractionated heparin against no thromboprophylaxis but did not report on VTE or major bleeding. When compared with placebo, warfarin was associated with a non-statistically significant reduction of symptomatic VTE (RR 0.15, 95% CI 0.02 to 1.20). Antithrombin, evaluated in one study involving paediatric patients, had no significant effect on VTE or on major bleeding when compared with no antithrombin. The direct oral factor Xa inhibitor apixaban was evaluated in a phase II dose-finding study that suggested a low rate of major bleeding (2.1% versus 3.4%) and symptomatic VTE (1.1% versus 13.8%) in comparison with placebo.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

In this second update, we confirmed that primary thromboprophylaxis with LMWH significantly reduced the incidence of symptomatic VTE in ambulatory cancer patients treated with chemotherapy. In addition, the uLMWH semuloparin, which is not commercially available, significantly reduced the incidence of symptomatic VTE. The risk of major bleeding associated with LMWH, while not reaching statistical significance, suggest caution and mandate additional studies to determine the risk-to-benefit ratio of LMWH in this setting. Despite the encouraging results of this review, routine prophylaxis in ambulatory cancer patients cannot be recommended before safety issues are adequately addressed. We need additional studies investigating targeted primary prophylaxis in people with specific types or stages of cancer associated with a higher risk of VTE.

"I didn't really understand it, I just thought it'd help": exploring the motivations, understandings and experiences of patients with advanced lung cancer participating in a non-placebo clinical IMP trial

BACKGROUND

Few studies have explored in depth the experiences of patients with advanced cancer who are participating in clinical investigational medicinal product trials. However, integrated qualitative studies in such trials are needed to enable a broader evaluation of patient experiences in the trial, with important ethical and practical implications for the design and conduct of similar trials and treatment regimes in the future.

METHODS

Ten participants were recruited from the control and intervention arms of FRAGMATIC: a non-placebo trial for patients with advanced lung cancer. Participants were interviewed at up to three time points during their time in the trial. Interviews were analysed using Interpretive Phenomenological Analysis.

RESULTS

Patients were motivated to join the trial out of hope of medical benefit and altruism. Understanding of randomisation was mixed and in some cases poor, as was appreciation of trial purpose and equipoise. The trial was acceptable to and evaluated positively by most participants; participants receiving the intervention focused on the potential treatment benefits they hoped they would receive, whilst participants in the control arm found alternative reasons, such as altruism, personal fulfilment and positive attention, to commit to and perceive benefits from the trial. However, whilst experiences were generally very positive, poor understanding, limited engagement with trial information and focus on treatment benefits amongst some participants give cause for concern.

CONCLUSIONS

By exploring longitudinally the psychological, emotional and cognitive domains of trial participation, we consider potential harms and benefits of participation in non-placebo trials amongst patients with advanced lung cancer and identify several implications for future research with and care for patients with advanced cancer.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ISRCTN80812769 . Registered on 8 July 2005.

Risk of venous thromboembolism in people with lung cancer: a cohort study using linked UK healthcare data

Background:

Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is a potentially preventable cause of death in people with lung cancer. Identification of those most at risk and high-risk periods may provide the opportunity for better targeted intervention.

Methods:

We conducted a cohort study using the Clinical Practice Research Datalink linked to Hospital Episode Statistics and Cancer Registry data. Our cohort comprises 10 598 people with lung cancer diagnosed between 1997 and 2006 with follow-up continuing to the end of 2010. Cox regression analysis was performed to determine which demographic, tumour and treatment-related factors (time-varying effects of chemotherapy and surgery) independently affected VTE risk. We also determined the effect of a VTE diagnosis on the survival of people with lung cancer.

Results:

People with lung cancer had an overall VTE incidence of 39.2 per 1000 person-years (95% confidence interval (CI), 35.4–43.5), though rates varied depending on the patient group and treatment course. Independent factors associated with increased VTE risk were metastatic disease (hazard ratio (HR)=1.9, CI 1.2–3.0 vs local disease); adenocarcinoma subtype (HR=2.0, CI 1.5–2.7, vs squamous cell; chemotherapy administration (HR=2.1, CI 1.4–3.0 vs outside chemotherapy courses); and diagnosis via emergency hospital admission (HR=1.7, CI 1.2–2.3 vs other routes to diagnosis). Patients with VTE had an approximately 50% higher risk of mortality than those without VTE.

Conclusions:

People with lung cancer have especially high risk of VTE if they have advanced disease, adenocarcinoma or are undergoing chemotherapy. The presence of VTE is an independent risk factor for death.

Randomized Phase III Trial of Standard Therapy Plus Low Molecular Weight Heparin in Patients With Lung Cancer: FRAGMATIC Trial

PURPOSE

Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is common in cancer patients. Evidence has suggested that low molecular weight heparin (LMWH) might improve survival in patients with cancer by preventing both VTE and the progression of metastases. No trial in a single cancer type has been powered to demonstrate a clinically significant survival difference. The aim of this trial was to investigate this question in patients with lung cancer.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We conducted a multicenter, open-label, randomized trial to evaluate the addition of a primary prophylactic dose of LMWH for 24 weeks to standard treatment in patients with newly diagnosed lung cancer of any stage and histology. The primary outcome was 1-year survival. Secondary outcomes included metastasis-free survival, VTE-free survival, toxicity, and quality of life.

RESULTS

For this trial, 2,202 patients were randomly assigned to the two treatment arms over 4 years. The trial did not reach its intended number of events for the primary analysis (2,047 deaths), and data were analyzed after 2,013 deaths after discussion with the independent data monitoring committee. There was no evidence of a difference in overall or metastasis-free survival between the two arms (hazard ratio [HR], 1.01; 95% CI, 0.93 to 1.10; P = .814; and HR, 0.99; 95% CI, 0.91 to 1.08; P = .864, respectively). There was a reduction in the risk of VTE from 9.7% to 5.5% (HR, 0.57; 95% CI, 0.42 to 0.79; P = .001) in the LMWH arm and no difference in major bleeding events but evidence of an increase in the composite of major and clinically relevant nonmajor bleeding in the LMWH arm.

CONCLUSION

LMWH did not improve overall survival in the patients with lung cancer in this trial. A significant reduction in VTE is associated with an increase in clinically relevant nonmajor bleeding. Strategies to target those at greatest risk of VTE are warranted.

Low-molecular-weight heparins and cancer: focus on antitumoral effect

A close relationship between cancer and thrombosis does exist, documented by the fact that an overall 7-fold increased risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE) has been reported in patients with malignancy compared to non-malignancy. The potential impact of antithrombotic agents in cancer-associated VTE has long been recognized, and, in particular, several clinical trials in the last 20 years have reported the safety and efficacy of low-molecular-weight heparins (LMWHs) for treatment and prophylaxis of VTE in patients with various types of cancer. More recently, a number of preclinical and clinical studies have suggested that LMWHs may improve survival in cancer patients with mechanisms that are different from its antithrombotic effect but are linked to the ability of influencing directly the tumor biology. This paper reviews the evidence around the potential survival benefits of LMWHs by analyzing the suggested mechanisms and the available clinical data.

Predictors and outcomes of venous thromboembolism in hospitalized lung cancer patients: A Nationwide Inpatient Sample database analysis

BACKGROUND

Patients with lung cancer are at high risk of developing venous thromboembolism (VTE), including deep venous thrombosis and pulmonary embolism. We sought to characterize the clinical factors associated with development of VTE and the impact of VTE on outcomes for hospitalized lung cancer patients.

METHODS

We analyzed data captured in the Nationwide Inpatient Sample (NIS) database of the Agency of Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ). The study included all lung cancer patients hospitalized between 2006 and 2010 who had VTE captured as one of the top three discharge diagnoses. Demographics and outcomes of this population were compared to those of inpatient lung cancer patients without a VTE diagnosis. All analyses were performed using SAS version 9.3.

RESULTS

Out of 570,304 lung cancer hospitalizations, 20,672 had a clinically relevant diagnosis of VTE, accounting for 3.6% of all events. The median age of lung cancer patients with VTE was 68 years; 48% were females, 79% were Caucasians, and 43% had metastatic disease. When compared to a lung cancer cohort without VTE (n=502,153), patients with VTE had significantly longer length of stay (LOS) (7.15 days vs. 6.05 days, OR 1.12), higher inpatient mortality (10.03% vs. 8.69%, OR 1.06), higher total hospital charges ($43,800 vs. $37,800, OR 1.07), and greater likelihood of moderate to severe disability upon discharge (55% vs. 49%, OR 1.23).

CONCLUSIONS

VTE in hospitalized lung cancer patients is associated with longer LOS, higher inpatient mortality rates, increased cost and greater disability upon discharge compared to other inpatient lung cancer patients.

Significantly inhibitory effects of low molecular weight heparin (Fraxiparine) on the motility of lung cancer cells and its related mechanism

Low molecular weight heparin (LMWH) improving the cancer survival has been attracting attention for many years. Our previous study found that LMWH (Fraxiparine) strongly downregulated the invasive, migratory, and adhesive ability of human lung adenocarcinoma A549 cells. Here, we aimed to further identify the antitumor effects and possible mechanisms of Fraxiparine on A549 cells and human highly metastatic lung cancer 95D cells. The ability of cell invasion, migration, and adhesion were measured by Transwell, Millicell, and MTT assays. FITC-labeled phalloidin was used to detect F-actin bundles in cells. Chemotactic migration was analyzed in a modified Transwell assay. Measurement of protein expression and phosphorylation activity of PI3K, Akt, and mTOR was performed with Western blot. Our studies found that Fraxiparine significantly inhibited the invasive, migratory, and adhesive characteristics of A549 and 95D cells after 24 h incubation and showed a dose-dependent manner. Fraxiparine influenced the actin cytoskeleton rearrangement of A549 and 95D cells by preventing F-actin polymerization. Moreover, Fraxiparine could significantly inhibit CXCL12-mediated chemotactic migration of A549 and 95D cells in a concentration-dependent manner. Furthermore, Fraxiparine might destroy the interaction between CXCL12-CXCR4 axis, then suppress the PI3K-Akt-mTOR signaling pathway in lung cancer cells. For the first time, our data indicated that Fraxiparine could significantly inhibit the motility of lung cancer cells by restraining the actin cytoskeleton reorganization, and its related mechanism might be through inhibiting PI3K-Akt-mTOR signaling pathway mediated by CXCL12-CXCR4 axis. Therefore, Fraxiparine would be a potential drug for lung cancer metastasis therapy.

Parenteral anticoagulation in ambulatory patients with cancer

BACKGROUND

Anticoagulation may improve survival in patients with cancer through an antitumor effect in addition to the perceived antithrombotic effect.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the efficacy and safety of parenteral anticoagulants in ambulatory patients with cancer who, typically, are undergoing chemotherapy, hormonal therapy or radiotherapy, but otherwise have no standard therapeutic or prophylactic indication for anticoagulation.

SEARCH METHODS

A comprehensive search included (1) an electronic search (February 2013) of the following databases: Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (2013, Issue 1), MEDLINE (1966 to February 2013; accessed via OVID) and EMBASE(1980 to February 2013; accessed via OVID); (2) handsearching of conference proceedings; (3) checking of references of included studies; (4) use of the 'related citation' feature in PubMed and (5) a search for ongoing studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) assessing the benefits and harms of parenteral anticoagulation in ambulatory patients with cancer. Typically, these patients are undergoing chemotherapy, hormonal therapy or radiotherapy, but otherwise have no standard therapeutic or prophylactic indication for anticoagulation.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Using a standardized form we extracted data in duplicate on methodological quality, participants, interventions and outcomes of interest including all-cause mortality, symptomatic venous thromboembolism (VTE), symptomatic deep vein thrombosis (DVT), symptomatic pulmonary embolism (PE), arterial thrombosis (e.g. stroke, myocardial infarction), major bleeding, minor bleeding and quality of life.

MAIN RESULTS

Of 9559 identified citations, 15 RCTs fulfilled the eligibility criteria. These trials enrolled 7622 participants for whom follow-up data were available. In all included RCTs the intervention consisted of heparin (either unfractionated heparin or low molecular weight heparin). Overall, heparin may have a small effect on mortality at 12 months and 24 months (risk ratio (RR) 0.97; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.92 to 1.01 and RR 0.95; 95% CI 0.90 to 1.00, respectively). Heparin therapy was associated with a statistically and clinically important reduction in venous thromboembolism (RR 0.56; 95% CI 0.42 to 0.74) and a clinically important increase in the risk of minor bleeding (RR 1.32; 95% 1.02 to 1.71). Results failed to show or to exclude a beneficial or detrimental effect of heparin on major bleeding (RR 1.14; 95% CI 0.70 to 1.85) or quality of life. Our confidence in the effect estimates (i.e. quality of evidence) was high for symptomatic venous thromboembolism, moderate for mortality, major bleeding and minor bleeding, and low for quality of life.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Heparin may have a small effect on mortality at 12 months and 24 months. It is associated with a reduction in venous thromboembolism and a likely increase in minor bleeding. Future research should further investigate the survival benefit of different types of anticoagulants in patients with different types and stages of cancer. The decision for a patient with cancer to start heparin therapy for survival benefit should balance the benefits and downsides, and should integrate the patient's values and preferences.

Brain neoplasms and coagulation-lessons from heterogeneity

The coagulation system constitutes an important facet of the unique vascular microenvironment in which primary and metastatic brain tumors evolve and progress. While brain tumor cells express tissue factor (TF) and other effectors of the coagulation system (coagulome), their propensity to induce local and peripheral thrombosis is highly diverse, most dramatic in the case of glioblastoma multiforme (GBM), and less obvious in pediatric tumors. While the immediate medical needs often frame the discussion on current clinical challenges, the coagulation pathway may contribute to brain tumor progression through subtle, context-dependent, and non-coagulant effects, such as induction of inflammation, angiogenesis, or by responding to iatrogenic insults (e.g. surgery). In this regard, the emerging molecular diversity of brain tumor suptypes (e.g. in glioma and medulloblastoma) highlights the link between oncogenic pathways and the tumor repertoire of coagulation system regulators (coagulome). This relationship may influence the mechanisms of spontaneous and therapeutically provoked tumor cell interactions with the coagulation system as a whole. Indeed, oncogenes (EGFR, MET) and tumor suppressors (PTEN, TP53) may alter the expression, activity, and vesicular release of tissue factor (TF), and cause other changes. Conversely, the coagulant microenvironment may also influence the molecular evolution of brain tumor cells through selective and instructive cues. We suggest that effective targeting of the coagulation system in brain tumors should be explored through molecular stratification, stage-specific analysis, and more personalized approaches including thromboprophylaxis and adjuvant treatment aimed at improvement of patient survival.

Primary prophylaxis for venous thromboembolism in ambulatory cancer patients receiving chemotherapy

BACKGROUND

Venous thromboembolism (VTE) often complicates the clinical course of cancer. The risk is further increased by chemotherapy, but the safety and efficacy of primary thromboprophylaxis in cancer patients treated with chemotherapy is uncertain. This is an update of a review first published in February 2012.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the efficacy and safety of primary thromboprophylaxis for VTE in ambulatory cancer patients receiving chemotherapy compared with placebo or no thromboprophylaxis.

SEARCH METHODS

For this update, the Cochrane Peripheral Vascular Diseases Group Trials Search Co-ordinator searched the Specialised Register (last searched May 2013), CENTRAL (2013, Issue 5), and clinical trials registries (up to June 2013).

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing any oral or parenteral anticoagulant or mechanical intervention to no intervention or placebo, or comparing two different anticoagulants.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Data were extracted on methodological quality, patients, interventions, and outcomes including symptomatic VTE and major bleeding as the primary effectiveness and safety outcomes, respectively.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified 12 additional RCTs (6323 patients) in the updated search so that this update considered 21 trials with a total of 9861 patients, all evaluating pharmacological interventions and performed mainly in patients with advanced cancer. Overall, the risk of bias varied from low to high. One large trial of 3212 patients found a 64% (risk ratio (RR) 0.36, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.22 to 0.60) reduction of symptomatic VTE with the ultra-low molecular weight heparin (uLMWH) semuloparin relative to placebo, with no apparent difference in major bleeding (RR 1.05, 95% CI 0.55 to 2.00). LMWH, when compared with inactive control, significantly reduced the incidence of symptomatic VTE (RR 0.53, 95% CI 0.38 to 0.75; no heterogeneity, Tau(2) = 0%) with similar rates of major bleeding events (RR 1.30, 95% CI 0.75 to 2.23). In patients with multiple myeloma, LMWH was associated with a significant reduction in symptomatic VTE when compared with the vitamin K antagonist warfarin (RR 0.33, 95% CI 0.14 to 0.83), while the difference between LMWH and aspirin was not statistically significant (RR 0.51, 95% CI 0.22 to 1.17). No major bleeding was observed in the patients treated with LMWH or warfarin and in less than 1% of those treated with aspirin. Only one study evaluated unfractionated heparin against inactive control and found an incidence of major bleeding of 1% in both study groups while not reporting on VTE. When compared with placebo, warfarin was associated with a statistically insignificant reduction of symptomatic VTE (RR 0.15, 95% CI 0.02 to 1.20). Antithrombin, evaluated in one study involving paediatric patients, had no significant effect on VTE nor major bleeding when compared with inactive control. The new oral factor Xa inhibitor apixaban was evaluated in a phase-II dose finding study that suggested a promising low rate of major bleeding (2.1% versus 3.3%) and symptomatic VTE (1.1% versus 10%) in comparison with placebo.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

In this update, we confirmed that primary thromboprophylaxis with LMWH significantly reduced the incidence of symptomatic VTE in ambulatory cancer patients treated with chemotherapy. In addition, the uLMWH semuloparin significantly reduced the incidence of symptomatic VTE. However, the broad confidence intervals around the estimates for major bleeding suggest caution in the use of anticoagulation and mandate additional studies to determine the risk to benefit ratio of anticoagulants in this setting. Despite the encouraging results of this review, routine prophylaxis in ambulatory cancer patients cannot be recommended before safety issues are adequately addressed.

The effect of low molecular weight heparin on survival in cancer patients: an updated systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized trials

BACKGROUND

Tumors may exploit the coagulation system to enhance the survival and dissemination of cancer cells. Some studies have suggested that heparin and low molecular weight heparin (LMWH) have antitumor effects. We reported a previous meta-analysis that suggested a modest improvement in overall survival with the use of LMWH in patients with cancer. Herein, we present the results of an updated systematic review and meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the effect of LMWH as compared with placebo or no anticoagulant on the overall survival in patients with solid cancers.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized trials evaluating the use of LMWH vs. placebo or no anticoagulant in cancer patients without venous thrombosis. A meta-analysis was conducted with a random-effects model, and data were analyzed by the use of odds ratios (ORs) and relative risks (RRs) calculated for 1-year overall mortality.

RESULTS

We identified 724 potentially relevant studies, nine of which met our inclusion criteria, and reported data on 1-year overall mortality. Studies were heterogeneous regarding types of cancer and interventions, and included 5987 patients, 98.4% of whom had advanced-stage disease (III and IV). There was no discernible effect on mortality with the use of LMWH (pooled OR 0.87, 95% CI 0.70-1.08; RR 0.94, 95% CI 0.86-1.04).

CONCLUSIONS

In contrast to the previous study, these results did not show a survival benefit in cancer patients receiving LMWH. The effect of LMWH on overall survival in patients with limited-stage disease still is unknown.

Adjuvant therapy with bemiparin in patients with limited-stage small cell lung cancer: results from the ABEL study

INTRODUCTION

The haemostatic system plays an important role in the process of cancer development and spread. Anticoagulants, mainly low molecular weight heparins, could prolong survival in cancer patients, particularly in patients with lung cancer, beyond prevention of thromboembolic events.

METHODS

In a multicenter, investigator-initiated, open-label, randomized, sequential study, 38 patients with newly-diagnosed, limited-stage small-cell lung cancer were randomized to receive standard chemoradiotherapy or the same therapy plus 3,500 IU daily of bemiparin for a maximum of 26 weeks. The primary outcome was progression-free survival.

RESULTS

The study was terminated early due to slow recruitment. Median progression-free survival was 272 days with chemoradiotherapy alone and 410 days in the bemiparin group; hazard ratio, 2.58 (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.15-5.80); p=0.022. Median overall survival was 345 days with chemoradiotherapy alone and 1133 days in the bemiparin group; hazard ratio, 2.96 (95% CI, 1.22-7.21); p=0.017. The rate of tumor response was similar in both study arms. There was no significant between-group difference in the rates of major bleeding. Toxicity related with the experimental treatment was minimal.

CONCLUSION

The addition of bemiparin to first line therapy with chemoradiotherapy significantly increases survival in patients with newly-diagnosed, limited-stage small-cell lung cancer. (Funded by the Instituto Científico y Tecnológico, University of Navarra. ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT00324558).

Evolution of heparin anticoagulants to ultra-low-molecular-weight heparins: a review of pharmacologic and clinical differences and applications in patients with cancer

The burden of venous thromboembolism (VTE) is high in patients with cancer, particularly those with metastatic disease and those receiving chemotherapy. The use of heparin and heparin derivatives should be considered for primary prevention of VTE in hospitalized patients with cancer and in patients undergoing cancer surgery. Preliminary evidence also suggests that heparins may have direct anticancer benefits owing to effects on tumor growth, angiogenesis, and metastasis. Despite the potential benefits of heparin-derived anticoagulants, many at-risk patients do not receive adequate thromboprophylaxis. The evolution of unfractionated heparin to low-molecular-weight and ultra-low-molecular-weight heparins has provided practitioners with alternatives for VTE prevention in cancer, although these alternatives present challenges related to clinically relevant pharmacologic differences between agents. In this review, we present results from our review of the medical literature focusing on the use of the heparin-derived anticoagulants in prospective interventional studies of primary thromboprophylaxis in patients with cancer in surgical, hospitalized, and ambulatory settings.

Bioequivalence study of two subcutaneous formulations of dalteparin: randomized, single-dose, two-sequence, two-period, cross-over study in healthy volunteers

Objective

This study assessed relative bioavailability of a new subcutaneous formulation, test (T) (dalteparin sodium 95000 IU/3.8 mL) with the branded product (R) in healthy subjects to meet the regulatory requirements of bioequivalence in the US.

Methods

This was an open label, randomized, single dose, two-sequence, two-period cross-over study under fasting conditions. A total of 88 healthy adult volunteers were randomized to either of the treatment arms (T or R) separated by a washout period of 7 days. Pharmacodynamic surrogates, namely anti-Xa and anti-IIa activity, heparin clotting assay (heptest), and activated partial thromboplastin time (aPTT) were used as a tool to establish bioequivalence between these two formulations. Blood samples were collected up to 36 h post-dose to characterize the primary pharmacokinetic parameters A_max, AUC_0–t, and AUC_0–∞ for anti-Xa and anti-IIa and heptest; parameters (Δt )_max and AU(Δt ) for aPTT.

Results

For anti-Xa activity, the means (SD) of A_max (IU/mL) were 1.34 (0.25) [range = 0.59–2.03] and 1.39 (0.35) [range = 0.65–2.69]; AUC_0–t (IU•h/mL) values were 11.4 (2.76) [range = 2.89–19.5] and 12.1 (2.87) [range = 2.52–21.30]; AUC_0–∞ (IU•h/mL) values were 13.1 (3.59) [range = 3.15–28.2] and 14.5 (4.97) [range = 2.79–36.1] for test and branded formulations, respectively. For anti-IIa activity, the means (SD) of A_max (IU/mL) were 0.34 (0.12) [range = 0.14–0.72] and 0.34 (0.13) [range = 0.11–0.84]; AUC_0–t (IU•h/mL) values were 2.05 (0.72) [range = 0.61–4.69] and 2.11 (0.76) [range = 0.84–4.80]; AUC_0–∞ (IU•h/mL) values were 2.47 (0.80) [range = 0.76–6.29] and 2.61 (0.86) [range = 1.31–5.36], for test and branded formulations, respectively. The 90% CI for all the primary pharmacokinetic parameters of all the pharmacodynamic surrogates tested met the regulatory bioequivalence criterion of 80.00–125.00%.

Conclusion

The test product met the US regulatory criteria of bioequivalence relative to the branded product in this single dose bioequivalence study. Study limitations include open-label single dose design.

The antineoplastic effect of low-molecular-weight heparins - a literature review

There is some evidence for the antitumor effect of heparins, especially the low-molecular-weight ones. The authors discuss the potential mechanism of this antineoplastic effect and present results from several in vitro and in vivo experiments. The clinical trials concerning the impact of low-molecular-weight heparins on the tumor and on the patients' survival are described. The objective was to find out if heparins could be administered as an antitumor drug, independently of their anticoagulatory properties. The antitumor role of tissue factor, heparinase, chemokines, stromal proteins, cellular interactions as well as angiogenesis and immunology seems certain. The results of the available studies seem promising but large clinical trials are necessary in order to confirm the antineoplastic effect of the low-molecular-weight heparins and to approve them for standard anticancer treatment. It could be a breakthrough in modern oncology.

Coagulation and cancer: biological and clinical aspects

Malignancy affects the hemostatic system and the hemostatic system affects malignancy. In cancer patients there are a number of coagulation abnormalities which provide the background for an increased tendency of these patients to both thrombosis and hemorrhage. The causes of this coagulation impairment rely on general risk factors which are common to other categories of patients, and other factors which are specific to cancer, such as tumor type and disease stage. In addition, data from basic research indicate that the hemostatic components and the cancer biology are interconnected in multiple ways. Notably, while cancer cells are able to activate the coagulation system, the hemostatic factors play a role in tumor progression. This opens the way to the development of bifunctional therapeutic approaches that are both capable of attacking the malignant process and resolving the coagulation impairment. On the other hand, the management of thrombosis and hemorrhages in cancer patients can be different. To approach these problems, some guidelines have been released by prominent international scientific societies. Also actively investigated is the issue of identifying new biomarkers to classify the subjects at a higher risk, thus improving the prevention of thrombohemorrhagic events in these patients. Finally, novel prophylactic and therapeutic approaches are currently under development. This review provides an overview of the hemostatic complications in cancer, together with new insights into the interaction between hemostasis and cancer biology. We also review the assessment of the risk of thrombohemorrhagic events in cancer patients, and the prophylaxis and treatment of such manifestations.

Thromboprophylaxis in non-surgical cancer patients

Acutely ill medical patients with cancer and cancer patients requiring non-surgical therapy are considered as non-surgical cancer patients and are at moderate to high risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE): approximately 10-30% of these patients may develop asymptomatic or symptomatic deep-vein thrombosis (DVT) or pulmonary embolism (PE), and the latter is a leading contributor to deaths in hospital. Other medical conditions associated with a high risk of VTE include cardiac disease, respiratory disease, inflammatory bowel disease, rheumatological and infectious diseases. Pre-disposing risk factors in non-surgical cancer patients include a history of VTE, immobilisation, history of metastatic malignancy, complicating infections, increasing age, obesity hormonal or antiangiogenic therapies, thalidomide and lenalidomide therapy. Heparins, both unfractionated (UFH) and low molecular weight heparin (LMWH) and fondaparinux have been shown to be effective agents in prevention of VTE in the medical setting with patients having a history of cancer. UFH and LMWH along with semuloparin also have a role in outpatients with cancer receiving chemotherapy. However, it has not yet been possible to demonstrate a significant effect on mortality rates in this population. UFH has a higher rate of bleeding complications than LMWH. Thromboprophylaxis has been shown to be effective in medical patients with cancer and may have an effect on cancer outcomes. Thromboprophylaxis in patients receiving chemotherapy remains controversial and requires further investigation. There is no evidence for the use of aspirin, warfarin or mechanical methods. We recommend either LMWH, or fondaparinux for the prevention of VTE in cancer patients with acute medical illnesses and UFH for those with significant severe renal impairment. For ambulatory cancer patients undergoing chemotherapy we recommend LMWH or semuloparin. These are safe and effective agents in the thromboprophylaxis of non-surgical cancer patients.

Treatment of depression in people with lung cancer: a systematic review

Lung cancer commonly occurs in older adults who live in deprived areas and have multiple medical comorbidities. As well as suffering severe physical deterioration they are aware of their poor prognosis. It is therefore unsurprising that people with lung cancer have a high rate of depression. Whilst there are effective treatments for depression in people who do not have cancer, it is uncertain which treatments, if any, are effective in depressed cancer patients; the special characteristics of the condition only increase that uncertainty for people with lung cancer. We therefore conducted a systematic review of relevant randomised controlled trials to determine which, if any, treatments have been found to be effective for depression in patients with lung cancer. Surprisingly, we found no completed trials of treatments in patients selected for having depression and no trials that had evaluated treatments known to be effective for depression in the general population. We did, however, find six trials of interventions intended to improve quality of life in unselected patients with lung cancer. These suggested that enhanced care is more effective in reducing depressive symptoms than standard care. Whilst it may be reasonable to treat depression in individuals with lung cancer with standard treatments until more specific evidence is available, clinicians should be aware that the effectiveness and potential adverse effects of these treatments remain unknown in this patient group. Evidence from randomised trials is urgently required.

Primary prophylaxis for venous thromboembolism in ambulatory cancer patients receiving chemotherapy

BACKGROUND

Venous thromboembolism (VTE) often complicates the clinical course of cancer disease. The risk is further increased by chemotherapy but the safety and efficacy of primary thromboprophylaxis in cancer patients treated with chemotherapy is uncertain.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the efficacy and safety of primary thromboprophylaxis in ambulatory cancer patients receiving chemotherapy.

SEARCH METHODS

The Cochrane Peripheral Vascular Diseases Group searched their Specialised Register (last searched 3 May 2011) and CENTRAL (2011, Issue 2). The authors searched clinical trials registries and reference lists of relevant studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing unfractionated heparin (UFH), low molecular weight heparin (LMWH), vitamin K antagonists (VKA), direct thrombin inhibitors, direct factor Xa inhibitors or mechanical intervention to no intervention or placebo; or comparing two different anticoagulants.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Data were extracted on methodological quality, patients, interventions and outcomes including symptomatic VTE and major bleeding as the primary effectiveness and safety outcomes, respectively.

MAIN RESULTS

Nine RCTs with a total of 3538 patients were considered. None of the RCTs tested UFH, fondaparinux, direct factor Xa inhibitors or mechanical interventions. Overall, the risk of bias was low in most of the studies. LMWH, when compared with inactive control, significantly reduced the incidence of symptomatic VTE (risk ratio (RR) 0.62, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.41 to 0.93) with no evidence of heterogeneity (I(2) = 0%). The number needed to treat to prevent a symptomatic VTE was 60. LMWH was associated with a 60% increase in major bleeding when compared with inactive control, although this was not statistically significant (RR 1.57, 95% CI 0.69 to 3.60; I(2) = 10%). There was a 45% reduction in overall VTE (RR 0.55, 95% CI 0.34 to 0.88; I(2) = 0%) while for symptomatic pulmonary embolism, asymptomatic VTE, minor bleeding and one-year mortality the differences between the LMWH and control groups were not statistically significant. The effect of the vitamin K antagonist warfarin on preventing symptomatic VTE, measured in only one study, was not statistically significant (RR 0.15, 95% CI 0.02 to 1.20). In one RCT of patients with myeloma, LMWH was associated with a 67% reduction in symptomatic VTE (RR 0.33, 95% CI 0.14 to 0.83) compared with warfarin, with no differences in major bleeding. Antithrombin, evaluated in one study on paediatric patients, had no significant effect on VTE nor major bleeding when compared with inactive control.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Primary thromboprophylaxis with LMWH significantly reduced the incidence of symptomatic VTE in ambulatory cancer patients treated with chemotherapy. However, the lack of power hampers definite conclusions on the effects on major safety outcomes, which mandates additional studies to determine the risk to benefit ratio of LMWH in this setting.

Acute pulmonary embolus in the course of cancer

Risk of pulmonary embolism (PE) is relatively high in patients with advanced chronic diseases, particularly with malignancies. Most patients with cancer have blood coagulation test abnormalities indicative of up-regulation of the coagulation cascade, increased platelet activation and aggregation. Pulmonary thromboembolism is common in patients with any cancer and incidence is increased by surgery, chemotherapy, radiotherapy and disease progression. Manifestations range from small asymptomatic to life-threatening central PE with subsequent hypotension and cardiogenic shock. Diagnostic algorithms utilizing various noninvasive tests have been developed to determine the pretest probability of PE results of D-dimer assay, chest radiography ECG and computed tomography. The mortality in untreated PE is high (30%) but appropriate treatment may decrease it to 2-18%. The current recommended treatment for massive pulmonary embolus is either thrombolytic therapy or surgical embolectomy.

Concentration- and time-dependent effects of enoxaparin on human adenocarcinomic epithelial cell line A549 proliferation in vitro

Non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is a major health problem. Surgery is the only potential curative treatment, in spite of the high recurrence and mortality rates. Low molecular weight heparins (LMWH) have been suggested to have a positive impact on the outcome of various cancers, mainly attributed to their anticoagulant properties; yet a direct antineoplastic effect has not been excluded. We thought to evaluate the direct effect of the LMWH enoxaparin on the human lung adenocarcinomic epithelial cell line A549 and to determine potential antiproliferative and antimetastatic effects that could guide future trials. A549 cells were cultured with different concentrations of enoxaparin (1–30 U/mL). Cell counting was performed at 24, 48, and 72 h. Detection of c-Myc protein and CD44 protein was performed by electrophoresis and Western blotting. Statistical analysis was performed using paired Student’s t tests. Cell counts were decreased with increasing concentrations and time of exposure to enoxaparin. This corresponds to decreased expression of c-Myc and CD44. In conclusion, enoxaparin displayed a direct dose and exposure duration dependent suppressor effect on A549 cell proliferation and the expression of both c-Myc and CD44 in vitro, suggesting reduced proliferative and metastatic potentials of these cells.

Comparative assessment of low-molecular-weight heparins in cancer from the perspective of patient outcomes and survival

Patients with cancer are at high risk of developing venous thromboembolism (VTE), including deep venous thrombosis and pulmonary embolism. Compared to non-cancer patients, VTE in cancer is more frequently associated with clinical consequences, including recurrent VTE, bleeding, and an increase in the risk of death. Low-molecular-weight heparins (LMWHs) are commonly recommended for the prevention and treatment of VTE in cancer patients because of their favorable risk-to-benefit profile. Indeed, compared with vitamin K antagonists, LMWHs are characterized by a reduced need for coagulation monitoring, few major bleeding episodes, and once-daily dosing, which make these drugs more suitable in the cancer setting. Guidelines have been published recently with the aim to improve the clinical outcomes in cancer patients at risk of VTE and its complications. Coagulation activation in cancer may have a role not only in thrombosis but also in tumor growth and dissemination. Hence, inhibition of fibrin formation has been considered a possible tool against the progression of malignant disease. Clinical studies show that anticoagulant drugs may have a beneficial effect on survival in cancer patients, with a major role for LMWHs. Recently a number of prospective randomized clinical trials to test LMWHs to improve cancer survival as a primary endpoint in cancer patients have been conducted. Although the results are controversial, the interest in this research area remains high.

M402, a novel heparan sulfate mimetic, targets multiple pathways implicated in tumor progression and metastasis

Heparan sulfate proteoglycans (HSPGs) play a key role in shaping the tumor microenvironment by presenting growth factors, cytokines, and other soluble factors that are critical for host cell recruitment and activation, as well as promoting tumor progression, metastasis, and survival. M402 is a rationally engineered, non-cytotoxic heparan sulfate (HS) mimetic, designed to inhibit multiple factors implicated in tumor-host cell interactions, including VEGF, FGF2, SDF-1α, P-selectin, and heparanase. A single s.c. dose of M402 effectively inhibited seeding of B16F10 murine melanoma cells to the lung in an experimental metastasis model. Fluorescent-labeled M402 demonstrated selective accumulation in the primary tumor. Immunohistological analyses of the primary tumor revealed a decrease in microvessel density in M402 treated animals, suggesting anti-angiogenesis to be one of the mechanisms involved in-vivo. M402 treatment also normalized circulating levels of myeloid derived suppressor cells in tumor bearing mice. Chronic administration of M402, alone or in combination with cisplatin or docetaxel, inhibited spontaneous metastasis and prolonged survival in an orthotopic 4T1 murine mammary carcinoma model. These data demonstrate that modulating HSPG biology represents a novel approach to target multiple factors involved in tumor progression and metastasis.

Structure and epitope distribution of heparan sulfate is disrupted in experimental lung hypoplasia: a glycobiological epigenetic cause for malformation?

BACKGROUND

Heparan sulfate (HS) is present on the surface of virtually all mammalian cells and is a major component of the extracellular matrix (ECM), where it plays a pivotal role in cell-cell and cell-matrix cross-talk through its large interactome. Disruption of HS biosynthesis in mice results in neonatal death as a consequence of malformed lungs, indicating that HS is crucial for airway morphogenesis. Neonatal mortality (~50%) in newborns with congenital diaphragmatic hernia (CDH) is principally associated with lung hypoplasia and pulmonary hypertension. Given the importance of HS for lung morphogenesis, we investigated developmental changes in HS structure in normal and hypoplastic lungs using the nitrofen rat model of CDH and semi-synthetic bacteriophage ('phage) display antibodies, which identify distinct HS structures.

RESULTS

The pulmonary pattern of elaborated HS structures is developmentally regulated. For example, the HS4E4V epitope is highly expressed in sub-epithelial mesenchyme of E15.5 - E17.5 lungs and at a lower level in more distal mesenchyme. However, by E19.5, this epitope is expressed similarly throughout the lung mesenchyme.We also reveal abnormalities in HS fine structure and spatiotemporal distribution of HS epitopes in hypoplastic CDH lungs. These changes involve structures recognised by key growth factors, FGF2 and FGF9. For example, the EV3C3V epitope, which was abnormally distributed in the mesenchyme of hypoplastic lungs, is recognised by FGF2.

CONCLUSIONS

The observed spatiotemporal changes in HS structure during normal lung development will likely reflect altered activities of many HS-binding proteins regulating lung morphogenesis. Abnormalities in HS structure and distribution in hypoplastic lungs can be expected to perturb HS:protein interactions, ECM microenvironments and crucial epithelial-mesenchyme communication, which may contribute to lung dysmorphogenesis. Indeed, a number of epitopes correlate with structures recognised by FGFs, suggesting a functional consequence of the observed changes in HS in these lungs. These results identify a novel, significant molecular defect in hypoplastic lungs and reveals HS as a potential contributor to hypoplastic lung development in CDH. Finally, these results afford the prospect that HS-mimetic therapeutics could repair defective signalling in hypoplastic lungs, improve lung growth, and reduce CDH mortality.

Parenteral anticoagulation in patients with cancer who have no therapeutic or prophylactic indication for anticoagulation

BACKGROUND

Anticoagulation may improve survival in patients with cancer through an antitumor effect in addition to the perceived antithrombotic effect.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the efficacy and safety of parenteral anticoagulants in patients with cancer with no therapeutic or prophylactic indication for anticoagulation.

SEARCH STRATEGY

A comprehensive search included (1) an electronic search (February 2010) of the following databases: Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) Issue 1, 2010, MEDLINE, EMBASE and ISI the Web of Science; (2) handsearch of conference proceedings; (3) checking of references of included studies; and (4) use of the 'related citation' feature in PubMed.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) assessing the benefits and harms of parenteral anticoagulation in patients with cancer but no therapeutic or prophylactic indication for anticoagulation.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Using a standardized form we extracted in duplicate data on methodological quality, participants, interventions and outcomes of interest including all-cause mortality, symptomatic thromboembolism, major bleeding, minor bleeding and quality of life (QoL).

MAIN RESULTS

Of 8187 identified citations, nine RCTs enrolling 2857 patients fulfilled the inclusion criteria. In all included RCTs the intervention consisted of heparin (either unfractionated heparin or low molecular weight heparin). Overall, the effect of heparin therapy on mortality was not statistically significant at 12 months (risk ratio (RR) 0.93; 95% CI 0.85 to 1.02) but it was statistically significant at 24 months (RR 0.92; 95% CI 0.88 to 0.97). Heparin therapy was associated with a statistically and clinically important reduction in venous thromboembolism (RR 0.55; 95% CI 0.37 to 0.82). There were no statistically significant effects on major bleeding (RR 1.30; 95% CI 0.59 to 2.88), minor bleeding (RR 1.05; 95% 0.75 to 1.46) or QoL. The quality of evidence was high for symptomatic venous thromboembolism, moderate for mortality, major bleeding and minor bleeding, and low for QoL.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Heparin was associated with a significant reduction of death at 24 months but not 12 months. It was also associated with a reduction in venous thromboembolism but based on the RCTs in this review it had no significant effect on major bleeding, minor bleeding or QoL. Future research should further investigate the survival benefit of different types of anticoagulants in patients with different types and stages of cancer. The decision for a patient with cancer to start heparin therapy for survival benefit should balance the benefits and downsides and integrate the patient's values and preferences.

Prevention of VTE in women with cancer

The prevention of venous thromboembolism (VTE) in women with cancer requires special consideration. The presence of cancer results in both non-surgical and surgical patients having increased risk of VTE. This usually leads to a modification of the recommended preventive therapy, affecting the type, dose and length of therapy. Cancer patients have other factors which may predispose them to bleeding. Prevention of VTE in cancer patients is important in a number of settings and has been investigated in many of these. These can be broadly classified into three areas: (1) Non-surgical patients in hospital and outpatient care: (1.1) Acutely ill medical patients with incidental cancer or with complications related to cancer; (1.2) Cancer patients receiving therapy--chemotherapy, hormonal therapy, radiotherapy. (2) Surgical care: (2.1) Surgical procedures for cancer therapy; (2.2) Surgical procedures for non-cancer indications in cancer patients. (3) Long-term prevention of VTE in otherwise well outpatients with cancer and its effect on mortality.

Parenteral anticoagulation in patients with cancer who have no therapeutic or prophylactic indication for anticoagulation

BACKGROUND

Anticoagulation may improve survival in patients with cancer through an antitumor effect in addition to the perceived antithrombotic effect.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the efficacy and safety of parenteral anticoagulants in patients with cancer with no therapeutic or prophylactic indication for anticoagulation.

SEARCH STRATEGY

A comprehensive search included (1) an electronic search (February 2010) of the following databases: Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) Issue 1, 2010, MEDLINE, EMBASE and ISI the Web of Science; (2) handsearch of conference proceedings; (3) checking of references of included studies; and (4) use of the 'related citation' feature in PubMed.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) assessing the benefits and harms of parenteral anticoagulation in patients with cancer but no therapeutic or prophylactic indication for anticoagulation.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Using a standardized form we extracted in duplicate data on methodological quality, participants, interventions and outcomes of interest including all-cause mortality, symptomatic thromboembolism, major bleeding, minor bleeding and quality of life (QoL).

MAIN RESULTS

Of 8187 identified citations, nine RCTs enrolling 2857 patients fulfilled the inclusion criteria. In all included RCTs the intervention consisted of heparin (either unfractionated heparin or low molecular weight heparin). Overall, the effect of heparin therapy on mortality was not statistically significant at 12 months (risk ratio (RR) 0.93; 95% CI 0.85 to 1.02) but it was statistically significant at 24 months (RR 0.92; 95% CI 0.88 to 0.97). Heparin therapy was associated with a statistically and clinically important reduction in venous thromboembolism (RR 0.55; 95% CI 0.37 to 0.82). There were no statistically significant effects on major bleeding (RR 1.30; 95% CI 0.59 to 2.88), minor bleeding (RR 1.05; 95% 0.75 to 1.46) or QoL. The quality of evidence was high for symptomatic venous thromboembolism, moderate for mortality, major bleeding and minor bleeding, and low for QoL.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Heparin was associated with a significant reduction of death at 24 months but not 12 months. It was also associated with a reduction in venous thromboembolism but based on the RCTs in this review it had no significant effect on major bleeding, minor bleeding or QoL. Future research should further investigate the survival benefit of different types of anticoagulants in patients with different types and stages of cancer. The decision for a patient with cancer to start heparin therapy for survival benefit should balance the benefits and downsides and integrate the patient's values and preferences.

VTE prophylaxis for the medical patient: where do we stand? - a focus on cancer patients

Acutely ill medical patients are at moderate to high risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE): approximately 10-30% of general medical patients may develop deep-vein thrombosis or pulmonary embolism, and the latter is a leading contributor to deaths in hospital. Medical conditions associated with a high risk of VTE include cardiac disease, cancer, respiratory disease, inflammatory bowel disease, rheumatological and infectious diseases. Pre-disposing risk factors in medical patients include a history of VTE, history of malignancy, complicating infections, increasing age, thrombophilia, prolonged immobility and obesity. Hence active cancer and a history of cancer are both strongly related to VTE in medical (non-surgical) patients. Heparins, both unfractionated (UFH) and low molecular weight (LMWH) and fondaparinux have been shown to be effective agents in prevention of VTE in this setting. However, it has not yet been possible to demonstrate a significant effect on mortality rates in this population. In medical patients, unfractionated heparin has a higher rate of bleeding complications than low molecular weight heparin. Thromboprophylaxis has been shown to be effective in medical patients with cancer and may have an effect on cancer outcomes. Thromboprophylaxis in patients receiving chemotherapy remains controversial and requires further investigation. There is no evidence for the use of aspirin, warfarin or mechanical methods. We recommend either low molecular weight heparin or fondaparinux as safe and effective agents in the thromboprophylaxis of medical patients.

Heparan sulfate in lung morphogenesis: The elephant in the room

Heparan sulfate (HS) is a structurally complex polysaccharide located on the cell surface and in the extracellular matrix, where it participates in numerous biological processes through interactions with a vast number of regulatory proteins such as growth factors and morphogens. HS is crucial for lung development; disruption of HS synthesis in flies and mice results in a major aberration of airway branching, and in mice, it results in neonatal death as a consequence of malformed lungs and respiratory distress. Epithelial-mesenchymal interactions governing lung morphogenesis are directed by various diffusible proteins, many of which bind to, and are regulated by HS, including fibroblast growth factors, sonic hedgehog, and bone morphogenetic proteins. The majority of research into the molecular mechanisms underlying defective lung morphogenesis and pulmonary pathologies, such as bronchopulmonary dysplasia and pulmonary hypoplasia associated with congenital diaphragmatic hernia (CDH), has focused on abnormal protein expression. The potential contribution of HS to abnormalities of lung development has yet to be explored to any significant extent, which is somewhat surprising given the abnormal lung phenotype exhibited by mutant mice synthesizing abnormal HS. This review summarizes our current understanding of the role of HS and HS-binding proteins in lung morphogenesis and will present in vitro and in vivo evidence for the fundamental importance of HS in airway development. Finally, we will discuss the future possibility of HS-based therapeutics for ameliorating insufficient lung growth associated with lung diseases such as CDH.

Antithrombotic therapy and survival in patients with malignant disease

A broad range of studies suggest a two-way relationship between cancer and venous thromboembolism (VTE). Patients with cancer have consistently been shown to be at elevated risk for VTE; this risk is partly driven by an intrinsic hypercoagulable state elicited by the tumour itself. Conversely, thromboembolic events in patients without obvious risk factors are often the first clinical manifestation of an undiagnosed malignancy. The relationship between VTE and cancer is further supported by a number of trials and meta-analyses which, when taken together, strongly suggest that antithrombotic therapy can extend survival in patients with cancer by a mechanism that extends beyond its effect in preventing VTE. Moreover, accumulating evidence from in vitro and in vivo studies has shown that tumour growth, invasion, and metastasis are governed, in part, by elements of the coagulation system. On 22 May 2009, a group of health-care providers based in the United Kingdom met in London, England, to examine recent advances in cancer-associated thrombosis and its implications for UK clinical practice. As part of the discussion, attendees evaluated evidence for and against an effect of antithrombotic therapy on survival in cancer. This paper includes a summary of the data presented at the meeting and explores potential mechanisms by which antithrombotic agents might exert antitumour effects. The summary is followed by a consensus statement developed by the group.

Deadly allies: the fatal interplay between platelets and metastasizing cancer cells

The general notion that functional platelets are important for successful hematogenous tumor metastasis has been inaugurated more than 4 decades ago and has since been corroborated in numerous experimental settings. Thorough preclinical investigations have, at least in part, clarified some specifics regarding the involvement of platelet adhesion receptors, such as thrombin receptors or integrins, in the metastasis cascade. Pivotal preclinical experiments have demonstrated that hematogenous tumor spread was dramatically diminished when platelets were depleted from the circulation or when functions of platelet surface receptors were inhibited pharmacologically or genetically. Such insight has inspired researchers to devise novel antitumoral therapies based on targeting platelet receptors. However, several mechanistic aspects underlying the impact of platelet receptors on tumor metastasis are not fully understood, and agents directed against platelet receptors have not yet found their way into the clinic. In addition, recent results suggesting that targeted inhibition of certain platelet surface receptors may even result in enhanced experimental tumor metastasis have demonstrated vividly that the role of platelets in tumor metastasis is more complex than has been anticipated previously. This review gives a comprehensive overview on the most important platelet receptors and their putative involvement in hematogenous metastasis of malignant tumors.