Extended enoxaparin monotherapy for acute symptomatic pulmonary embolism

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.

The treatment of venous thromboembolism with low-molecular-weight heparins

The currently recommended method of venous thromboembolism (VTE) treatment is the application of vitamin K antagonists (VKA) in most patients, and low-molecular-weight heparins (LMWH) in selected groups. The VKA dose adjustment is difficult which might well render the treatment ineffective. The study aimed to compare LMWH with VKA in treating VTE in terms of efficacy and safety. A systematic review of literature and the meta-analysis of the treatment results were performed. The main differences between LMWH and VKA in terms of their respective effectiveness in treating VTE consist in appreciably more advantageous effects of LMWH in preventing deep venous thrombosis (DVT). The key difference in terms of respective safety is the greater effectiveness of LMWH in preventing minor bleedings. The advantage of LMWH in cancer patients consists predominantly in a significantly better protection against DVT episodes, whereas the advantage of LMWH in non-cancer patients is mainly owed to better protection against minor bleedings. In none of the analysed outcomes of VTE treatment, the application of VKA proved to hold any advantage over LMWH. Although, arguably, there might well be sufficient medical grounds to propose more widespread use of LMWH, it still remains a debatable issue whether the currently used therapeutic standard should also be modified accordingly. Apart from the actual findings of the present meta-analysis, pertinent economic considerations must also be addressed.

Vitamin K antagonists versus low-molecular-weight heparin for the long term treatment of symptomatic venous thromboembolism

BACKGROUND

People with venous thromboembolism (VTE) generally are treated for five days with intravenous unfractionated heparin or subcutaneous low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH), followed by three months of vitamin K antagonists (VKAs). Treatment with VKAs requires regular laboratory measurements and carries risk of bleeding; some patients have contraindications to such treatment. Treatment with LMWH has been proposed to minimise the risk of bleeding complications. This is the second update of a review first published in 2001.

OBJECTIVES

The purpose of this review was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of long term treatment (three months) with LMWH versus long term treatment (three months) with VKAs for symptomatic VTE.

SEARCH METHODS

For this update, the Cochrane Vascular Information Specialist searched the Specialised Register (last searched November 2016) and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL; 2016, Issue 10), The Cochrane Vascular Information Specialistalso searched clinical trials registries for ongoing studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials comparing LMWH versus VKA for long treatment (three months) of symptomatic VTE. Two review authors independently evaluated trials for inclusion and methodological quality.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Review authors independently extracted data and assessed risk of bias. We resolved disagreements by discussion and performed meta-analysis using fixed-effect models with Peto odds ratios (Peto ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Outcomes of interest were recurrent VTE, major bleeding, and mortality. We used GRADE to assess the overall quality of evidence supporting these outcomes.

MAIN RESULTS

Sixteen trials, with a combined total of 3299 participants fulfilled our inclusion criteria. According to GRADE, the quality of evidence was moderate for recurrent VTE, low for major bleeding, and moderate for mortality. We downgraded the quality of the evidence for imprecision (recurrent VTE, mortality) and for risk of bias and inconsistency (major bleeding).We found no clear differences in recurrent VTE between LMWH and VKA (Peto OR 0.83, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.60 to 1.15; P = 0.27; 3299 participants; 16 studies; moderate-quality evidence). We found less bleeding with LMWH than with VKA (Peto OR 0.51, 95% CI 0.32 to 0.80; P = 0.004; 3299 participants; 16 studies; low-quality evidence). However, when comparing only high-quality studies for bleeding, we observed no clear differences between LMWH and VKA (Peto OR 0.62, 95% CI 0.36 to 1.07; P = 0.08; 1872 participants; seven studies). We found no clear differences between LMWH and VKA in terms of mortality (Peto OR 1.08, 95% CI 0.75 to 1.56; P = 0.68; 3299 participants; 16 studies; moderate-quality evidence).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Moderate-quality evidence shows no clear differences between LMWH and VKA in preventing symptomatic VTE and death after an episode of symptomatic DVT. Low-quality evidence suggests fewer cases of major bleeding with LMWH than with VKA. However, comparison of only high-quality studies for bleeding shows no clear differences between LMWH and VKA. LMWH may represent an alternative for some patients, for example, those residing in geographically inaccessible areas, those who are unable or reluctant to visit the thrombosis service regularly, and those with contraindications to VKA.

Anti-Xa monitoring of low-molecular-weight heparin in adult patients with cancer

A 68-year-old man developed a right femoral vein deep vein thrombosis and bilateral pulmonary embolism while receiving chemotherapy for stage IV prostate cancer. His creatinine at diagnosis is 1.4 mg/dL, with an estimated clearance of 63 mL/min. In patients with cancer, should low-molecular-weight heparin treatment be dosed according to weight, or adjusted using anti-Xa levels?

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

BACKGROUND

Cancer increases the risk of thromboembolic events in patients including those receiving anticoagulation treatments.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the efficacy and safety of low molecular weight heparin (LMWH) and oral anticoagulants for the long-term treatment of venous thromboembolism (VTE) in patients with cancer.

SEARCH METHODS

We conducted a comprehensive search for studies of anticoagulation in cancer patients including 1. a February 2013 electronic search of: the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL Issue 12, 2012), MEDLINE, and EMBASE; 2. a handsearch of conference proceedings; 3. checking of references of included studies; 4. use of the 'related citation' feature in PubMed; and 5. a search of clinicaltrials.gov for ongoing studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing long-term treatment with LMWH versus oral anticoagulants (vitamin K antagonist (VKA) or ximelagatran) in patients with cancer and symptomatic objectively confirmed VTE.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Using a standardized data form, we extracted data on methodological quality, participants, interventions and outcomes of interest: survival, recurrent VTE, major bleeding, minor bleeding, thrombocytopenia, and postphlebitic syndrome. We assessed the quality of evidence at the outcome level following the GRADE approach.

MAIN RESULTS

Of 9559 identified citations, 10 RCTs (11 reports) were eligible and reported data for 1981 patients with cancer. We excluded 14 studies in which patients with cancer constituted study subgroups, but did not report outcome data for them. Meta-analysis of seven RCTs comparing LMWH with VKA found no statistically significant survival benefit (hazard ratio (HR) 0.96; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.81 to 1.14) but a statistically significant reduction in VTE (HR 0.47; 95% CI 0.32 to 0.71). The remaining findings did not exclude a beneficial or harmful effect of LMWH compared with VKA for the outcomes of major bleeding (RR 1.07; 95% CI 0.52 to 2.19), minor bleeding (RR 0.89; 95% CI 0.51 to 1.55), or thrombocytopenia (RR 0.98; 95% CI 0.57 to 1.66). We judged the quality of evidence as low for mortality, major bleeding, and minor bleeding, and as moderate for recurrent VTE.One RCT comparing dabigatran with VKA did not exclude beneficial or harmful effects of one agent over the other. One RCT comparing six months' extension of anticoagulation with 18 months of ximelagatran 24 mg twice daily versus no extended ximelagatran did not exclude beneficial or harmful effects for the outcomes of reduction in VTE, mortality, and minor bleeding. One RCT comparing once-weekly subcutaneous injection of idraparinux for three or six months versus standard treatment (parenteral anticoagulation followed by warfarin or acenocoumarol) suggested a reduction in recurrent VTE (HR 0.39; 95% CI 0.14 to 1.11) at six months, but did not exclude beneficial or harmful effects for the outcomes of mortality (HR 0.99; 95% CI 0.66 to 1.48) and major bleeding (RR 1.04; 95% CI 0.39 to 2.83).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

For the long-term treatment of VTE in patients with cancer, LMWH compared with VKA reduces venous thromboembolic events but not mortality. The decision for a patient with cancer and VTE to start long-term LMWH versus oral anticoagulation should balance the benefits and harms and integrate the patient's values and preferences for the important outcomes and alternative management strategies.

Influence of sex on risk of bleeding in anticoagulated patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The risk of bleeding on anticoagulation varies between patients. It is uncertain whether sex influences this risk.

OBJECTIVES

To determine if the risk of major bleeding differs between men and women receiving anticoagulation for atrial fibrillation or venous thromboembolism(VTE).

METHODS

We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane databases, and relevant conference proceedings, until February 2013. We included randomized controlled trials and prospective cohort studies of patients on therapeutic anticoagulation for atrial fibrillation or VTE. Two reviewers independently extracted data. The relative risk of bleeding in men compared to women was pooled using a random-effects model.

RESULTS

Forty-two studies including 94 293 patients were eligible; 78 044 patients (83%) had atrial fibrillation; 16 156 patients (17%) had VTE; 37 250 patients were women (40%); and there were 4147 major bleeds. The relative risk of major bleeding for men vs. women was 1.02(95% CI 0.95–1.10; P = 0.27 for heterogeniety). The relative risk was 1.02 (95% CI 0.95–1.09) in patients with atrial fibrillation and 0.80 (95% CI 0.65–0.98) in patients with VTE (P = 0.03 for subgroup effect). Type of anticoagulant,intensity of anticoagulation, and whether patients began or were already established on anticoagulants at enrollment did not influence the relative risk of major bleeding in men compared to women.

CONCLUSIONS

The risk of major bleeding on anticoagulation appears to be the same in men and women, particularly if patients have atrial fibrillation. This finding is less certain for patients with VTE, in whom the risk of bleeding may be marginally lower in men compared to in women.

Treatment of mobile right heart thrombi with low-molecular-weight heparin

Treatment of choice in patients with mobile thrombi in the right heart chambers is still controversial owing to the increased risk of recurrent pulmonary embolism (PE). Thrombolysis and surgical or catheter embolectomy are the preferred options. We present a case of an elderly patient with PE and free-floating atrial thrombi who was treated successfully with low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH).

Treatment of venous thromboembolism - effects of different therapeutic strategies on bleeding and recurrence rates and considerations for future anticoagulant management

Effective treatment of venous thromboembolism (VTE) strikes a balance between prevention of recurrence and bleeding complications. The current standard of care is heparin followed by a vitamin K antagonist such as warfarin. However, this option is not without its limitations, as the anticoagulant effect of warfarin is associated with high inter- and intra-patient variability and patients must be regularly monitored to ensure that anticoagulation is within the narrow target therapeutic range. Several novel oral anticoagulant agents are in the advanced stages of development for VTE treatment, some of which are given after an initial period of heparin treatment, in line with current practice, while others switch from high to low doses after the initial phase of treatment. In this review we assess the critical considerations for treating VTE in light of emerging clinical data for new oral agents and discuss the merits of novel treatment regimens for patients who have experienced an episode of deep vein thrombosis or pulmonary embolism.

Vitamin K antagonists or low-molecular-weight heparin for the long term treatment of symptomatic venous thromboembolism

BACKGROUND

People with venous thromboembolism (VTE) are generally treated for five days with intravenous unfractionated heparin or subcutaneous low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) followed by three months of vitamin K antagonist treatment. Treatment with vitamin K antagonists requires regular laboratory measurements and some patients have contraindications to treatment. This is an update of a review first published in 2000 and updated in 2002.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the efficacy and safety of long term treatment of VTE with LMWH compared to vitamin K antagonists.

SEARCH METHODS

For this update the Cochrane Peripheral Vascular Diseases Group Trials Search Co-ordinator searched their Specialised Register (last searched February 2012) and CENTRAL (2012, Issue 1).

SELECTION CRITERIA

Two authors evaluated trials independently for methodological quality.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

The review authors extracted data independently. Primary analysis included all trial participants randomised to the allocated treatment groups. Separate analyses were performed according to the quality of the trials and for subgroups such as trials initially using similar treatments in both trial arms and those that did not, trials concerning deep vein thrombosis (DVT) and pulmonary embolism (PE) and the different periods of follow-up.

MAIN RESULTS

All 15 trials, with a combined total of 3197 patients, fulfilling our criteria were combined in a meta-analysis. We found a non-statistically significant reduction in the risk of recurrent VTE between the two treatments (odds ratio (OR) 0.82, 95% CI 0.59 to 1.13). Analysis of pooled data for category I trials (those with a high methodological quality) showed a non-significant reduction in the odds of recurrent VTE favouring LMWH treatment (OR 0.80, 95% CI 0.54 to 1.18).For all trials combined, the difference in bleeding significantly favoured treatment with LMWH (OR 0.50, 95% CI 0.31 to 0.79). Considering only category I trials, a non-significant trend favouring LMWH remained (OR 0.62, 95% CI 0.36 to 1.07). No difference was observed in mortality (OR 1.06, 95% CI 0.74 to 1.54).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

LMWHs are possibly as effective as vitamin K antagonists in preventing symptomatic VTE after an episode of symptomatic deep venous thrombosis, but are much more expensive. Treatment with LMWH is significantly safer than treatment with vitamin K antagonists. LMWH may result in fewer episodes of bleeding and is possibly a safe alternative in some patients, especially those in geographically inaccessible areas, are reluctant to visit the thrombosis service regularly, or with contraindications to vitamin K antagonists. However, treatment with vitamin K antagonists remains the treatment of choice for the majority of patients.

Antithrombotic therapy for VTE disease: Antithrombotic Therapy and Prevention of Thrombosis, 9th ed: American College of Chest Physicians Evidence-Based Clinical Practice Guidelines

BACKGROUND

This article addresses the treatment of VTE disease.

METHODS

We generated strong (Grade 1) and weak (Grade 2) recommendations based on high-quality (Grade A), moderate-quality (Grade B), and low-quality (Grade C) evidence.

RESULTS

For acute DVT or pulmonary embolism (PE), we recommend initial parenteral anticoagulant therapy (Grade 1B) or anticoagulation with rivaroxaban. We suggest low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) or fondaparinux over IV unfractionated heparin (Grade 2C) or subcutaneous unfractionated heparin (Grade 2B). We suggest thrombolytic therapy for PE with hypotension (Grade 2C). For proximal DVT or PE, we recommend treatment of 3 months over shorter periods (Grade 1B). For a first proximal DVT or PE that is provoked by surgery or by a nonsurgical transient risk factor, we recommend 3 months of therapy (Grade 1B; Grade 2B if provoked by a nonsurgical risk factor and low or moderate bleeding risk); that is unprovoked, we suggest extended therapy if bleeding risk is low or moderate (Grade 2B) and recommend 3 months of therapy if bleeding risk is high (Grade 1B); and that is associated with active cancer, we recommend extended therapy (Grade 1B; Grade 2B if high bleeding risk) and suggest LMWH over vitamin K antagonists (Grade 2B). We suggest vitamin K antagonists or LMWH over dabigatran or rivaroxaban (Grade 2B). We suggest compression stockings to prevent the postthrombotic syndrome (Grade 2B). For extensive superficial vein thrombosis, we suggest prophylactic-dose fondaparinux or LMWH over no anticoagulation (Grade 2B), and suggest fondaparinux over LMWH (Grade 2C).

CONCLUSION

Strong recommendations apply to most patients, whereas weak recommendations are sensitive to differences among patients, including their preferences.

Evaluation and management of chronic pulmonary thromboembolic disease

Pulmonary embolism (PE) is common and the majority of patients survive the acute event. Survivors are at increased risk for adverse outcomes, including persistent thrombi, recurrent embolism, chronic thromboembolic pulmonary hypertension (CTEPH), and death. Anticoagulation protects against recurrence, which has a high mortality rate. The recommended duration of anticoagulation for patients with reversible PE risk factors is 3 months. For patients with idiopathic PE or persistent risk factors, extended duration of anticoagulation is preferred, balanced with an individual patient's risk of hemorrhage, which in itself is a major cause of morbidity and mortality. Among patients with malignancy who develop venous thromboembolism (VTE), low-molecular-weight heparin is preferred over oral vitamin K antagonists in the first 6 months. Thereafter, anticoagulation should be continued indefinitely with either low-molecular-weight heparin or oral vitamin K antagonists. Inferior vena cava filters are not routinely recommended and should only be used in patients who have a contraindication to anticoagulation. Patients who have had VTE and with persistent or recurrent dyspnea should be evaluated for recurrence of VTE or development of CTEPH. Patients with recurrent VTE should be anticoagulated indefinitely. Routine screening for CTEPH in asymptomatic patients is not recommended. Echocardiography often provides the first indication of the presence of pulmonary hypertension. Once presence of CTEPH is established by right-sided heart catheterization and perfusion imaging (ie, ventilation/perfusion scintigraphy, computed tomography angiography, or pulmonary angiography), patients should be referred early to a center with expertise, as it is potentially surgically curable by pulmonary endarterectomy. Those who are deemed inoperable after being evaluated may gain symptomatic benefit from drugs approved for idiopathic pulmonary arterial hypertension. Lung transplantation may also be an option for patients who are not candidates for pulmonary endarterectomy.

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

BACKGROUND

Cancer increases the risk of thromboembolic events even while on anticoagulation.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the efficacy and safety of low molecular weight heparin (LMWH) and oral anticoagulants for the long-term treatment of venous thromboembolism (VTE) in patients with cancer.

SEARCH STRATEGY

A comprehensive search for studies of anticoagulation in cancer patients including a February 2010 electronic search of: the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, EMBASE and ISI Web of Science.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing long-term treatment with LMWH versus oral anticoagulants (vitamin K antagonist (VKA) or ximelagatran) in patients with cancer and symptomatic objectively-confirmed VTE.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Using a standardized data form we extracted data on methodological quality, participants, interventions and outcomes of interest: survival, recurrent VTE, major bleeding, minor bleeding, thrombocytopenia and postphlebitic syndrome. We assessed the quality of evidence at the outcome level following the GRADE approach.

MAIN RESULTS

Of 8187 identified citations, nine RCTs were eligible and reported data for 1908 patients with cancer. Meta-analysis of seven RCTs showed that LMWH, compared to VKA provided no statistically significant survival benefit (hazard ratio (HR) 0.96; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.81 to 1.14) but a statistically significant reduction in VTE (HR 0.47; 95% CI 0.32 to 0.71). Other results did not exclude a beneficial or harmful effect of LMWH compared to VKA for the outcomes of major bleeding (RR 1.05; 95% CI 0.53 to 2.10) or thrombocytopenia (RR 1.02; 95% CI 0.60 to 1.74). The quality of evidence was low for mortality, major bleeding and minor bleeding and moderate for recurrent VTE. One RCT comparing six months extension of anticoagulation with 18 months ximelagatran 24 mg twice daily versus placebo found a reduction in VTE (HR 0.16; 95% CI 0.09 to 0.30) but did not exclude beneficial or harmful effects for the outcomes of mortality and bleeding. One RCT, comparing dabigatran to VKA, did not exclude beneficial or harmful effect of one agent over the other.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

For the long-term treatment of VTE in patients with cancer, LMWH compared to VKA reduces venous thromboembolic events but not death. The decision for a patient with cancer and VTE to start long-term LMWH versus oral anticoagulation should balance the benefits and downsides and integrate the patient's values and preferences for the important outcomes and alternative management strategies.

Comparison of tinzaparin and acenocoumarol for the secondary prevention of venous thromboembolism: a multicentre, randomized study

The objective of the present study was to evaluate the efficacy, safety and healthcare resource utilization of long-term treatment with tinzaparin in symptomatic patients with acute pulmonary embolism as compared to standard therapy. In this open-label trial, 102 patients with objectively confirmed pulmonary embolism were randomized to receive, after initial treatment with tinzaparin, either tinzaparin (175 IU/kg/day) or international normalized ratio-adjusted acenocoumarol for 6 months. Clinical endpoints were assessed during the 6 months of treatment. A pharmacoeconomic analysis was carried out to evaluate the cost of the long-term treatment with tinzaparin in comparison with the standard one. In an intention-to-treat analysis, one of 52 patients developed recurrent venous thromboembolism in the tinzaparin group compared with none of the 50 patients in the acenocoumarol group. One patient in each group had a major haemorrhagic complication. Six patients in the acenocoumarol group had minor bleeding compared with none in the tinzaparin group (P = 0.027). Median hospital length of stay was shorter in the tinzaparin group compared to the acenocoumarol group (7 versus 9 days; P = 0.014). When all the direct and indirect cost components were combined for the entire population, we found a slight, nonstatistically significant (mean difference €345; 95% CI 1382-2071; P = 0.69) reduction in total cost with tinzaparin. Symptomatic acute pulmonary embolism treatment with full therapeutic doses of tinzaparin for 6 months is a feasible alternative to conventional treatment with vitamin K antagonists.

Early Discharge of Patients With Venous Thromboembolism: Implications Regarding Therapy

The purpose of this investigation is to show trends in the duration of hospitalization of patients with pulmonary embolism (PE) and deep venous thrombosis (DVT). The number of patients discharged from short-stay non-Federal hospitals throughout the United States with a primary diagnostic code for PE or DVT from 1979 through 2005 was obtained from the National Hospital Discharge Survey. By 2005, 13% of patients with PE were discharged in 1 to 2 days, 30% in 3 to 4 days, 26% in 5 to 6 days, and 31% in ≥7 days. Regarding DVT, by 2005, 26% of patients with DVT were discharged in 1 to 2 days, 34% were discharged in 3 to 4 days, 20% were discharged in 5 to 6 days, and 19% were discharged in ≥7 days. The data indicate that large proportions of patients with a primary diagnosis of PE and of DVT are being discharged before adequate heparin can be administered and before warfarin can become antithrombotic. Others have reported an increased mortality among patients with PE discharged in ≤4 days. If patients are to be discharged before adequate heparin can be administered, outpatient treatment with low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) for at least 5 days and until the international normalized ratio (INR) is ≥2.0 for 24 hours is recommended or extended outpatient treatment with LMWH may be considered.

Once Daily Enoxaparin for Outpatient Treatment of Acute Venous Thromboembolism: A Case-control Study

We studied the efficacy and safety of an investigational enoxaparin regimen, 1.5 mg/kg once daily, as a bridge to warfarin for the outpatient treatment of acute venous thromboembolism. We undertook a case-control design. We enrolled 40 acute venous thromboembolism cases prospectively and matched them by age, gender, and location of venous thromboembolism to 80 previously treated controls. All controls had received enoxaparin 1 mg/kg twice daily. The primary end point was recurrent venous thromboembolism. We followed the cases for 30 days. We discontinued enoxaparin after we achieved the target international normalized ratio between 2.0 and 3.0. One case (2.9%) and three controls (3.8%) had recurrent venous thromboembolic events (P = 1.00). There were no major bleeding complications in the case group, compared to 3 (3.8%) in the control group (P = .55). Once daily enoxaparin, 1.5 mg/kg, as a bridge to warfarin was as effective with a similar safety profile as twice daily enoxaparin, 1mg/kg, for initial treatment of acute venous thromboembolism in the outpatient setting. This case-control study provides the rationale for undertaking a randomized controlled trial comparing enoxaparin 1.5 mg/kg once daily versus enoxaparin 1.0 mg/kg twice daily as a bridge to warfarin in outpatients with acute venous thromboembolism.

Antithrombotic therapy for venous thromboembolic disease: American College of Chest Physicians Evidence-Based Clinical Practice Guidelines (8th Edition)

This chapter about treatment for venous thromboembolic disease is part of the American College of Chest Physicians Evidence-Based Clinical Practice Guidelines (8th Edition). Grade 1 recommendations are strong and indicate that the benefits do or do not outweigh risks, burden, and costs. Grade 2 suggests that individual patient values may lead to different choices (for a full understanding of the grading, see "Grades of Recommendation" chapter). Among the key recommendations in this chapter are the following: for patients with objectively confirmed deep vein thrombosis (DVT) or pulmonary embolism (PE), we recommend anticoagulant therapy with subcutaneous (SC) low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH), monitored IV, or SC unfractionated heparin (UFH), unmonitored weight-based SC UFH, or SC fondaparinux (all Grade 1A). For patients with a high clinical suspicion of DVT or PE, we recommend treatment with anticoagulants while awaiting the outcome of diagnostic tests (Grade 1C). For patients with confirmed PE, we recommend early evaluation of the risks to benefits of thrombolytic therapy (Grade 1C); for those with hemodynamic compromise, we recommend short-course thrombolytic therapy (Grade 1B); and for those with nonmassive PE, we recommend against the use of thrombolytic therapy (Grade 1B). In acute DVT or PE, we recommend initial treatment with LMWH, UFH or fondaparinux for at least 5 days rather than a shorter period (Grade 1C); and initiation of vitamin K antagonists (VKAs) together with LMWH, UFH, or fondaparinux on the first treatment day, and discontinuation of these heparin preparations when the international normalized ratio (INR) is > or = 2.0 for at least 24 h (Grade 1A). For patients with DVT or PE secondary to a transient (reversible) risk factor, we recommend treatment with a VKA for 3 months over treatment for shorter periods (Grade 1A). For patients with unprovoked DVT or PE, we recommend treatment with a VKA for at least 3 months (Grade 1A), and that all patients are then evaluated for the risks to benefits of indefinite therapy (Grade 1C). We recommend indefinite anticoagulant therapy for patients with a first unprovoked proximal DVT or PE and a low risk of bleeding when this is consistent with the patient's preference (Grade 1A), and for most patients with a second unprovoked DVT (Grade 1A). We recommend that the dose of VKA be adjusted to maintain a target INR of 2.5 (INR range, 2.0 to 3.0) for all treatment durations (Grade 1A). We recommend at least 3 months of treatment with LMWH for patients with VTE and cancer (Grade 1A), followed by treatment with LMWH or VKA as long as the cancer is active (Grade 1C). For prevention of postthrombotic syndrome (PTS) after proximal DVT, we recommend use of an elastic compression stocking (Grade 1A). For DVT of the upper extremity, we recommend similar treatment as for DVT of the leg (Grade 1C). Selected patients with lower-extremity (Grade 2B) and upper-extremity (Grade 2C). DVT may be considered for thrombus removal, generally using catheter-based thrombolytic techniques. For extensive superficial vein thrombosis, we recommend treatment with prophylactic or intermediate doses of LMWH or intermediate doses of UFH for 4 weeks (Grade 1B).

Low-molecular-weight heparins are superior to vitamin K antagonists for the long term treatment of venous thromboembolism in patients with cancer: a cochrane systematic review

Background

Cancer and its therapies increase the risk of venous thromboembolism. Compared to patients without cancer, patients with cancer anticoagulated for venous thromboembolism are more likely to develop recurrent thrombotic events and major bleeding. Addressing all important outcomes including harm is of great importance to make evidence based health care decisions. The objective of this study was to compare low molecular weight heparin (LMWH) and oral anticoagulants (vitamin K antagonist (VKA) and ximelagatran) for the long term treatment of venous thromboembolism in patients with cancer.

Methods

A systematic review of the medical literature. We followed the Cochrane Collaboration methodology for conducting systematic reviews. We assessed methodological quality for each outcome by grading the quality of evidence using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) methodology.

Results

Eight randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were eligible and reported data for patients with cancer. The quality of evidence was low for death and moderate for recurrent venous thromboembolism. LMWH, compared to VKA provided no statistically significant survival benefit (Hazard ratio (HR) = 0.96; 95% CI 0.81 to 1.14) but a statistically significant reduction in venous thromboembolism (HR = 0.47; 95% (Confidence Interval (CI) = 0.32 to 0.71). There was no statistically significant difference between LMWH and VKA in bleeding outcomes (RR = 0.91; 95% CI = 0.64 to 1.31) or thrombocytopenia (RR = 1.02; 95% CI = 0.60 to 1.74).

Conclusion

For the long term treatment of venous thromboembolism in patients with cancer, LMWH compared to VKA reduces venous thromboembolism but not death.

Sublingual administration of warfarin: a novel form of delivery

Current therapy for venous thromboembolism (VTE) includes the initiation of short acting parenteral agents, heparin, low-molecular-weight heparin, or fondaparinux, with subsequent conversion to oral warfarin therapy for the duration of anticoagulation. We present two patients who required long-term anticoagulation for VTE but because of gastrointestinal dysmotility issues were unable to use standard oral anticoagulation. Warfarin is water soluble and absorbed across the epithelium; therefore, we elected to administer warfarin sublingually in an effort to avoid the dysmotility issues while trying to achieve therapeutic anticoagulation. Using sublingual warfarin dosing we were able to achieve therapeutic anticoagulation without complications. Both patients required approximately 6 days to achieve a therapeutic International Normalized Ratio (INR). Neither patient reported adverse side effects related to the sublingual dosing. This unique form of warfarin delivery may be considered for patients with gastrointestinal dysmotility or other gastrointestinal issues which prevent oral use of medications.

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

BACKGROUND

Cancer increases the risk of thromboembolic events and the risk of recurrent thromboembolic events while on anticoagulation.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the efficacy and safety of low molecular weight heparin (LMWH) and oral anticoagulants (vitamin K antagonist (VKA) and ximelagatran) for the long term treatment of venous thromboembolism (VTE) in patients with cancer.

SEARCH STRATEGY

A comprehensive search was undertaken including a January 2007 search of electronic databases; Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), (The Cochrane Library 2007, Issue 1). MEDLINE (1966 onwards; accessed via OVID), EMBASE (1980 onwards; accessed via OVID) and ISI the Web of Science. Hand search of the proceedings of the American Society of Clinical Oncology and of the American Society of Hematology. Checking of references of included studies, relevant papers and related systematic reviews. Use of "related article" feature in PubMed; and (5) search of ISI the Web of Science for papers citing landmark studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing long term treatment with LMWH versus oral anticoagulants (VKA or ximelagatran) in patients with cancer and symptomatic objectively confirmed VTE.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Using a standardized data form we extracted data on methodological quality, participants, interventions and outcomes of interest: survival, recurrent VTE, major bleeding, minor bleeding, thrombocytopenia and postphlebitic syndrome.

MAIN RESULTS

Of 3986 identified citations, eight RCTs were eligible and reported data for patients with cancer. Their overall methodological quality was moderate. Meta-analysis of six RCTs showed that LMWH, compared to VKA provided no statistically significant survival benefit (Hazard ratio (HR) = 0.96; 95% CI 0.81 to 1.14) but a statistically significant reduction in VTE (HR = 0.47; 95% (Confidence Interval (CI) = 0.32 to 0.71). There was no statistically significant difference between LMWH and VKA in bleeding outcomes (RR = 0.91; 95% CI = 0.64 to 1.31) or thrombocytopenia (RR = 1.02; 95% CI = 0.60 to 1.74). One RCT compared tinzaparin and dalteparin and showed no differences in the outcomes of interest. One RCT compared a six months extension of anticoagulation with 18 months Ximelagatran 24mg twice daily versus placebo. It showed a reduction in VTE (HR = 0.16; 95% CI 0.09 to 0.30) with no apparent effect on survival or bleeding.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

For the long term treatment of VTE in patients with cancer, LMWH compared to VKA reduces venous thromboembolic events but not death. The decision for a patient with cancer and VTE to start long term LMWH versus oral anticoagulation should balance the benefits and downsides and integrate the patient's values and preferences for the important outcomes and alternative management strategies.

Use and Misuse of Cardiac Troponins in Clinical Practice

Cardiac troponins are very sensitive and specific markers of myocardial injury. Elevated troponin levels in the setting of acute coronary syndrome are diagnostic of acute myocardial infarction and provide guidance to clinicians with regard to appropriate use of intensive medical and revascularization therapies. However, elevated troponin levels are commonly seen in several noncoronary ischemia presentations and create considerable confusion among clinicians in these settings. In this review article, we discuss the utility of troponins in various clinical settings and present a "common sense" approach to interpreting troponin elevation outside the setting of acute coronary syndrome.

Monotherapy with enoxaparin for the prevention of recurrent venous thromboembolism

This study aimed to determine whether a weight-adjusted dose of subcutaneous enoxaparin is as effective and safe as oral acenocoumarol for the secondary prophylaxis of pulmonary embolism. Three hundred and eighty consecutive noncancer outpatients hospitalized with an episode of symptomatic pulmonary embolism selected treatment with acenocoumarol or enoxaparin at a dose of 1 mg/kg once daily after being informed of the type of administration and expected frequency of laboratory monitoring for both medicinal products. Endpoints were symptomatic recurrent thromboembolic events evaluated by standard objective testing, and a composite endpoint of recurrent venous thromboembolism, major bleeding, and death from any cause. One hundred and ninety-nine patients (52%) chose acenocoumarol therapy and 181 chose enoxaparin monotherapy. Four patients in the enoxaparin group (2.2%) and six patients in the acenocoumarol group (3%) had an objective thromboembolic recurrence (hazard ratio, 1.35; 95% confidence interval, 0.38-4.79; P = 0.64). Nine patients in the enoxaparin group (5.0%) had a hemorrhagic complication compared with 11 in the acenocoumarol group (5.5%) (P = 0.81). The hospital length of stay was shorter with enoxaparin compared with acenocoumarol (11 versus 16 days, P = 0.0001). Enoxaparin is as effective and safe as acenocoumarol in the secondary prevention of recurrent thromboembolic disease and is associated with shorter hospitalization.