International clinical practice guidelines including guidance for direct oral anticoagulants in the treatment and prophylaxis of venous thromboembolism in patients with cancer

Effectiveness of interventions for the implementation of thromboprophylaxis in hospitalised patients at risk of venous thromboembolism: an updated abridged Cochrane systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials

OBJECTIVE

To assess the effectiveness of system-wide interventions designed to increase the implementation of thromboprophylaxis and decrease the incidence of venous thromboembolism (VTE) in hospitalised medical and surgical patients at risk of VTE.

DESIGN

Systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials (RCTs).

DATA SOURCES

Medline, PubMed, Embase, BIOSIS, CINAHL, Web of Science, CENTRAL, DARE, EED, LILACS and clinicaltrials.gov without language restrictions from inception to 7 January 2017, as well as the reference lists of relevant review articles.

ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA FOR SELECTING STUDIES

RCTs that evaluated the effectiveness of system-wide interventions such as alerts, multifaceted, education, and preprinted orders when compared with no intervention, existing policy or another intervention.

RESULTS

We included 13 RCTs involving 35 997 participants. Eleven RCTs had data available for meta-analysis. Compared with control, we found absolute increase in the prescription of prophylaxis associated with alerts (21% increase, 95% CI [15% to 275%]) and multifaceted interventions (4% increase, 95% CI [3% to 11%]), absolute increase in the prescription of appropriate prophylaxis associated with alerts (16% increase, 95% CI [12% to 20%]) and relative risk reductions (risk ratio 64%, 95% CI [47% to 86%]) in the incidence of symptomatic VTE associated with alerts. Computer alerts were found to be more effective than human alerts, and multifaceted interventions with an alert component appeared to be more effective than multifaceted interventions without, although comparative pooled analyses were not feasible. The quality of evidence for improvement in outcomes was judged to be low to moderate certainty.

CONCLUSIONS

Alerts increased the proportion of patients who received prophylaxis and appropriate prophylaxis, and decreased the incidence of symptomatic VTE. Multifaceted interventions increased the proportion of patients who received prophylaxis but were found to be less effective than alerts interventions.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

CD008201.

Patients' experience and compliance with extended low molecular weight heparin prophylaxis post-surgery for gynecological cancer: a prospective observational study

OBJECTIVE

Gynaecological cancer patients have a high risk of developing venous thromboembolism (VTE). There is limited information on patient experience and compliance with an extended low molecular weight heparin prophylaxis in this setting. The aim of this study was to assess patient compliance, satisfaction and experience with the extended low molecular weight heparin prophylaxis after major surgery for gynaecological cancer.

METHODS

This was a prospective observational study conducted in a large tertiary center for gynaecological cancer between July 2017-March 2018. Consecutive patients undergoing surgery for gynaecological cancer who received low molecular weight heparin prophylaxis for four weeks following surgery were recruited. All participants received a log book to record all injections, side effects, and questionnaire to be completed at the end of the study.

RESULTS

A total of 106 patients completed and returned the VTE prophylaxis logbook and questionnaire. Sixty-six (62%) patients received low molecular weight heparin for 28 days, twenty-five (24%) for 26-27 days, and 15 (14%) for less than 26 days. The median number of days of therapy was 28 days (range; 12-28 days). Reasons for missed or stopped injections included: forgetfulness(n=12), medical procedures (n=6), pain (n=5), incorrect prescription (n=4), patient choice (n=3), cost (n=2), physician request (n=2), non-availability of person administering the injections (n=1) or unknown (n=5). Sixty-one (58%) patients self-administered the injections. Patients who had the injection performed by a third person were twice as likely to experience pain compared to patients who self-administered (OR 2.81, p=0.003). Eighty-nine (84%) patients self-reported side effects during low molecular weight heparin prophylaxis including: bruising (75%), pain after injections (49%), itchiness (9%), swelling (9%) or other (8%). Although 83 (78%) patients were satisfied with injections, 91 (86%) admitted they would much prefer a tablet form.

CONCLUSIONS

Compliance with standard recommended regimen of 28-days prophylaxis was completed by 62% of patients. Majority of patients (86%) reported a preference for a tablet form, if one was available.

Treatment of venous thromboembolism with tinzaparin in oncological patients

Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is a major cause of morbidity and mortality in patients with cancer. For over a decade, the gold standard of treatment and secondary prevention of cancer-associated thrombosis (CAT) has been represented by low-molecular-weight heparins (LMWHs), which are currently recommended as the first-line treatment for CAT. Among the LMWHs that were more extensively tested in patients with CAT, tinzaparin is a LMWH produced by the enzymatic degradation of porcine-derived unfractionated heparin. The efficacy of tinzaparin in this setting is supported by well-grounded evidence. However, there is a need to discuss the positioning of tinzaparin in the continuously evolving treatment scenario of VTE therapy in cancer patients. In this paper, which was developed by a group of clinicians with wide experience in the treatment of VTE in cancer patients, we discuss the current therapeutic options and the role of tinzaparin for the treatment of CAT.

Platelet cut-off for anticoagulant therapy in thrombocytopenic patients with blood cancer and venous thromboembolism: an expert consensus

BACKGROUND

Management of venous thromboembolism (VTE) in patients with haematologic malignancies and thrombocytopenia is clinically challenging due to the related risks. No prospective studies or clinical trials have been carried out and, therefore, no solid evidence on this compelling issue is available.

METHODS

Given this, an expert panel endorsed by the Gruppo Italiano Malattie Ematologiche dell'Adulto Working Party on Thrombosis and Haemostasis was set up to produce a formal consensus, according to the RAND method, in order to issue clinical recommendations about the platelet (PLT) cut-off for safe administration of low molecular weight heparin (LMWH) in thrombocytopenic (PLT <100×109/L) adult patients with haematologic malignancies affected by acute (<1 month) or non-acute VTE.

RESULTS

In acute VTE, the panel suggests safe anticoagulation with LMWH at therapeutic doses for PLT between ≥50<100×109/L and at 50% dose reduction for PLT ≥30<50×109/L. In acute VTE for PLT <30×109/L, the following interventions are recommended: positioning of an inferior vena cava (IVC) filter with prophylactic LMWH administration and platelet transfusion. In non-acute VTE, anticoagulation with LMWH at therapeutic doses for PLT between ≥50<100×109/L or over and at 50% dose reduction for PLT ≥30<50×109/L is considered appropriate. The discontinuation of full or reduced therapeutic dose of LMWH is recommended for PLT <30×109/L, both in acute and non-acute VTE.

DISCUSSION

We suggest using dose-adjusted LMWH according to PLT to optimise anticoagulant treatment in patients at high bleeding risk.

Oral anticoagulation is preferable to injected, but only if it is safe and effective: An interview study of patient and carer experience of oral and injected anticoagulant therapy for cancer-associated thrombosis in the select-d trial

BACKGROUND

Cancer patients have a four- to fivefold greater risk of thrombosis than the general population. Recommended treatment for cancer-associated thrombosis is 3-6 months of low-molecular-weight heparin. The 'select-d' trial is an open-label, randomised, multi-centre pilot trial in patients with cancer-associated thrombosis, utilising dalteparin (low-molecular-weight heparin) versus rivaroxaban (a direct oral anticoagulant), to assess effectiveness and safety.

AIM

To explore patient and informal carers' experiences of cancer-associated thrombosis and their experience and understanding of the risk-benefit of thrombosis treatment.

DESIGN

Qualitative substudy of the select-d trial, using semi-structured interviews. Interviews were audio-recorded and transcribed. Data were analysed using Framework Analysis.

PARTICIPANTS

Participants were purposively sampled ( n = 37 patients; 46% male; age 40-89; 9 with carer present).

RESULTS

Three themes were found: experience of cancer-associated thrombosis, experience of anticoagulation and risk-benefit balance of the two modes of administration. Some were shocked by their thrombosis diagnosis (most were unaware of their risk), but others found it insignificant compared with cancer. Most patients found tablets more convenient, but injections were acceptable in the context of having cancer. While most were happy to follow medical advice, others weighed preference on the basis of effectiveness.

CONCLUSION

Lack of awareness of thrombosis risk is concerning; cancer patients must be informed to enable prompt help-seeking. Tablets could provide a welcome choice for patients if there is equivalent risk-benefit to injected anticoagulants. Patients trust their clinicians to tailor their treatment. Future research could explore the effect of routine information giving about the risk of thrombosis.

Quality Appraisal of Guidelines on Cancer-Associated Thrombosis Using AGREE II Instrument and Analysis of Current Status of New Oral Anticoagulants

Cancer-associated thrombosis (CAT) studies have increased in recent years and the quality of guidelines to guide the clinical practice of CAT prevention and treatment becomes crucial. The therapy status of new oral anticoagulants (NOACs) has been established in some thrombotic diseases, but the evidence for CAT remains unconvincing. The aim of this research is to evaluate the quality of CAT guidelines and discuss the role of NOAC in CAT. A search of articles was performed using PubMed/Medline, Chinese National Knowledge Infrastructure, and other authoritative websites. Search terms included guideline or guidance, consensuses, cancer, and thrombosis. Appraisal of Guidelines for Research & Evaluation II (AGREE II) tool was used to evaluate the qualities of the guidelines. A total of 19 guidelines were screened out and evaluated, of which 8 were recommended, 5 were recommended after revision, and 6 were not recommended. For prevention and treatment of CAT, low-molecular-weight heparin is the most recommended, followed by vitamin K antagonist, unfractionated heparin, fondaparinux, and aspirin. New oral anticoagulant is optional in some cases of CAT treatment. Based on AGREE II assessment tool, the quality of CAT guidelines is inconsistent. Attention should be drawn to the quality of CAT guidelines during clinical practice. The role of NOAC in the treatment of CAT is gradually established but requires more supporting evidence from future clinical trials.

Evaluation of unmet clinical needs in prophylaxis and treatment of venous thromboembolism in high-risk patient groups: cancer and critically ill

Background

Clinical practice shows that venous thromboembolism (VTE) presents a substantial burden in medical patients, and awareness and advocacy for its primary and secondary prevention remains inadequate. Specific patient populations, such as those with cancer and the critically ill, show elevated risk for VTE, bleeding or both, and significant gaps in VTE prophylaxis and treatment exist in these groups.

Objective

To present novel insights and consolidated evidence collected from experts, clinical practice guidelines and original studies on the unmet needs in thromboprophylaxis, and on the treatment of VTE in two high-risk patient groups: patients with cancer and the critically ill.

Methodology

To identify specific unmet needs in the management of VTE, a methodology was designed and implemented that assessed gaps in prophylaxis and treatment of VTE through interviews with 44 experts in the field of thrombosis and haemostasis, and through a review of current guidelines and seminal studies to substantiate the insights provided by the experts. The research findings were then analysed, discussed and consolidated by a multidisciplinary group of experts.

Results

The gap analysis methodology identified shortcomings in the VTE risk assessment tools, patient stratification approaches for prophylaxis, and the suboptimal use of anticoagulants for primary prophylaxis and treatment.

Conclusions

Specifically, patients with cancer need better VTE risk assessment tools to tailor primary thromboprophylaxis to tumour types and disease stages, and the potential for drug–drug interactions needs to be considered. In critically ill patients, unfractionated heparin is not advised as a first-line treatment option, and the strength of evidence is increasing for direct oral anticoagulants as a treatment option over low-molecular-weight heparins.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1186/s12959-019-0196-6) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

[Primary prophylaxis of venous thromboembolism in ambulatory cancer patients treated with antineoplastic agents]

Apart from myeloma, primary prophylaxis of venous thromboembolism (VTE) in ambulatory cancer patients treated with chemotherapy is underused, despite its proven benefit for pancreatic cancer and to a lesser extent for lung cancer. This prophylaxis has been showed to be effective for myeloma, pancreas but in absolute numbers these cancers lead to a few venous thromboembolic events. Up to date, VTE risk scores cannot be used as a discriminatory criterion to select a high-risk population that could really benefit from this prevention. VTE depends in part on oncogenic mutations of tumor cells that result in an imbalance between activation and inhibition pathways that are involved in venous thrombus formation. So, stratification of risk of VTE in cancer patients could be considered from a clinical and molecular point of view and result in a tailored prophylaxis. This "personalized medicine" that is currently used for the anti-tumor treatment of many cancers and hematological malignancies, could lead to a more effective prophylaxis of VTE in cancer patients.

Anticoagulation Strategies in Patients With Cancer: JACC Review Topic of the Week

Patients with active cancer are at an increased risk of arterial and venous thromboembolism (VTE) and bleeding events. Historically, in patients with cancer, low molecular weight heparins have been preferred for treatment of VTE, whereas warfarin has been the standard anticoagulant for stroke prevention in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF). More recently, direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) have been demonstrated to reduce the risk of venous and arterial thromboembolism in large randomized clinical trials of patients with VTE and AF, respectively, thus providing an attractive oral dosing option that does not require routine laboratory monitoring. In this review, we summarize available clinical trial data and guideline recommendations, and outline a practical approach to anticoagulation management of VTE and AF in cancer.

Current Management of Cancer-associated Venous Thromboembolism: Focus on Direct Oral Anticoagulants

Cancer-associated venous thromboembolism (CAT) is a common complication associated with high morbidity and mortality. In accordance with major clinical trials comparing low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) with a vitamin K antagonist (VKA), LMWH is currently the standard treatment for CAT, owing to its efficacy for thrombosis recurrence and improved safety profile compared to VKA. Over the past few years, direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) have emerged as potential alternative therapies to LMWH due to their convenient route of administration and predictable pharmacokinetics, but evidence for their use in CAT is inconclusive, as only a small fraction of the study populations in these trials had CAT. Recently, two large head-to-head trials comparing DOACs to LMWH in CAT patients reported comparable efficacies of DOACs with increased bleeding risk. Occasionally, CAT treatment can be challenging due to the heterogeneity of underlying malignancies and comorbidities. Renal insufficiency and gastrointestinal defects are the main obstacles in anticoagulant selection. Careful choice of treatment candidates and proper anticoagulant strategies are critical for the treatment of CAT; hence, more studies are required to address these challenges.

Risk of recurrence and bleeding in patients with cancer-associated venous thromboembolism treated with rivaroxaban: A nationwide cohort study

BACKGROUND

Rivaroxaban could be an attractive alternative to low molecular weight heparin for the treatment of cancer-associated venous thromboembolism (VTE) but the safety and effectiveness remain unclear. We examined risk of recurrent VTE and major bleeding associated with rivaroxaban treatment of cancer-associated VTE.

METHODS

Through linkage of nationwide Danish registries, we identified all adults with cancer-associated VTE initiating treatment with rivaroxaban, 2012-2017. We estimated rates and absolute risk of the primary outcome of recurrent VTE and major bleeding; all-cause mortality was studied as a secondary outcome.

RESULTS

We identified 8901 patients with cancer-associated VTE of whom 476 (5.3%) redeemed a prescription for rivaroxaban within 30 days of VTE diagnosis (mean age 71.5 years, 41% females, 57% with pulmonary embolism). Median time from cancer diagnosis to rivaroxaban prescription was 31 days (interquartile range 12-73 days). Most frequent cancers were gastrointestinal (26.1%), genitourinary (23.3%), and hematological cancer (12.6%). Few had distant metastases (7.1%). At 6 months, recurrent VTE occurred in 6.1% (15.1 events per 100 person-years) with the highest absolute risks for genitourinary cancer (8.1%), gastrointestinal cancer (7.3%), and breast cancer (6.5%). Major bleeding occurred in 1.9% (5.3 events per 100 person-years), in particular, in genitourinary cancer (4.5%) and lung cancer (4.2%). Eighty deaths (17.8%) occurred during follow up.

CONCLUSION

In this clinical practice setting, rivaroxaban was rarely used for cancer-associated VTE. However, among those who received rivaroxaban, the treatment appeared safe and effective with rates comparable to previous studies of selected populations.

A prescription support-tool for chronic management of oral antithrombotic combinations in adults based on a systematic review of international guidelines

BACKGROUND

Oral antithrombotic (AT) drugs, which include antiplatelet and anticoagulant therapies, are widely implicated in serious preventable bleeding events. Avoiding inappropriate oral AT combinations is a major concern. Numerous practical guidelines have been released; a document to enhance prescriptions of oral AT combinations for adults would be of great help.

OBJECTIVE

To synthesize guidelines on the prescription of oral AT combinations in adults and to create a prescription support-tool for clinicians about chronic management (≥ one month) of oral AT combinations.

METHODS

A systematic review of guidelines published between January 2012 and April 2017, in English or in French, from Trip database, Guideline International Network and PubMed, dealing with the prescription of oral ATs in adults was conducted. In-hospital management of ATs, bridging therapy and switches of ATs were not considered. Some specific topics requiring specialized follow-up (cancer, auto-immune disease, haemophilia, HIV, paediatrics and pregnancy) were excluded. Last update was made in November 2018.

RESULTS

A total of 885 guidelines were identified and 70 met the eligibility criteria. A prescription support-tool summarizing medical conditions requiring chronic management of oral AT combinations in adults with drug types, dosage and duration, on a double-sided page, was provided and tested by an external committee of physicians. The lack of specific guidelines for old people (age 75 years and older) is questioned considering the specific vulnerability of this age group to serious bleedings.

CONCLUSIONS

Recommendations on prescriptions about chronic management of oral AT combinations in adults were mainly consensual but dispersed in numerous guidelines according to the medical indication. We provide a prescription support-tool for clinicians. Further studies are needed to assess the impact of this tool on appropriate prescribing and the prevention of serious adverse drug events.

Anticoagulation in Cancer Patients: a Summary of Pitfalls to Avoid

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is a leading cause of morbidity and mortality in cancer patients, and its management is often associated with complications including risk of recurrent VTE and bleeding. Here, we review the current data on pitfalls during anticoagulation in cancer patients and measures necessary to avoid them.

RECENT FINDINGS

Although low-molecular-weight heparin monotherapy has been the standard of treatment for several years, emerging data for direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) are leading to new paradigms in treatment. Reports of recent randomized trials suggest a lower risk of recurrent thrombosis but higher risk of bleeding, particularly in gastrointestinal cancer patients, with DOACs. Careful patient selection and individualization of therapy based on risk of bleeding as well as recurrent VTE are keys. Problems like bleeding, recurrence, thrombocytopenia, drug-drug interactions, renal impairment, nausea-vomiting along with concerns about adherence arise during anticoagulation in cancer patients. However, with adequate pre-treatment assessment, correct anticoagulant selection and proper monitoring during anticoagulation, these issues can be addressed safely and effectively.

Recent Advances in the Management of Cancer-Associated Thrombosis: New Hopes but New Challenges

Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is a common cause of morbidity and mortality in cancer patients and leads to a significant increase in health care costs. Cancer patients often suffer from multiple co-morbidities and have both a greater risk of VTE recurrence and bleeding compared to non-cancer patients. Anticoagulation is therefore challenging. For many years, long-term therapy with Low-Molecular-Weight Heparin (LMWH) was the standard of care for the management of cancer-associated VTE. Direct oral anticoagulants (DOAC), which offer the convenience of an oral administration and have a rapid onset of action, have recently been proposed as a new option in this setting. Head-to-head comparisons between DOAC and LMWHs for the treatment of established VTE are now available, and data on the efficacy and safety of these drugs for primary prophylaxis of VTE in ambulatory cancer patients receiving systemic anticancer therapy are emerging. This narrative review aims to summarize the main recent advances in the prevention and treatment of cancer-associated VTE, including recent data on the use of individualized factors to stratify the risk of VTE in each individual patient, quality-of-life in patients treated with LMWH, and the place that DOACs will likely take in the cancer-associated VTE management landscape.

Treatment and Prevention of Cancer-Associated Thrombosis in Frail Patients: Tailored Management

Advanced age is one of the major determinants of frailty in patients with cancer-associated thrombosis. However, multiple other factors contribute to frailty in these patients. The identification of frailty in patients with cancer-associated thrombosis is critical as it influences the complexity of the anticoagulant treatment in this population at high risk of venous thromboembolism and bleeding. Factors that contribute to frailty in patients with cancer-associated thrombosis include age, type of cancer, comorbidities such as chronic kidney disease, poly-pharmacotherapy, treatment compliance, cognitive impairment, anemia, thrombocytopenia, mobility, nutritional status, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group grade, risk of falls, and reduced life expectancy. In the absence of specific clinical studies current anticoagulant treatment guidelines for the management are not fully applicable to frail patients with cancer. The anticoagulant treatment should therefore benefit from a tailored approach based on an algorithm that takes into account the specificities of the malignant disease.

Direct Oral Anticoagulant Drugs: On the Treatment of Cancer-Related Venous Thromboembolism and their Potential Anti-Neoplastic Effect

Cancer patients develop a hypercoagulable state with a four- to seven-fold higher thromboembolic risk compared to non-cancer patients. Thromboembolic events can precede the diagnosis of cancer, but they more often occur at diagnosis or during treatment. After malignancy itself, they represent the second cause of death. Low molecular weight heparins are the backbone of the treatment of cancer-associated thromboembolism. This treatment paradigm is possibly changing, as direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) may prove to be an alternative therapeutic option. The currently available DOACs were approved during the first and second decades of the 21st century for various clinical indications. Three molecules (apixaban, edoxaban and rivaroxaban) are targeting the activated factor X and one (dabigatran) is directed against the activated factor II, thrombin. The major trials analyzed the effect of these agents in the general population, with only a small proportion of cancer patients. Two published and several ongoing studies are specifically investigating the use of DOACs in cancer-associated thromboembolism. This article will review the current available literature on the use of DOACs in cancer patients. Furthermore, we will discuss published data suggesting potential anti-cancer actions exerted by non-anticoagulant effects of DOACs. As soon as more prospective data becomes available, DOACs are likely to be considered as a potential new therapeutic option in the armamentarium for patients suffering of cancer-associated thromboembolism.

Thromboembolic disease in palliative and end-of-life care: A narrative review

Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is both common and a potential contributor to symptom burden in patients receiving palliative and end-of-life care. Many of the VTE treatment and prophylaxis recommendations are drawn from data of clinical trials assessing conventional VTE and cancer-associated thrombosis that excluded patients receiving specialist palliative or hospice care. In this group, the epidemiology of VTE and associated outcomes, as well as the risks and benefits of treatment in keeping with a palliative approach are of growing clinical and research interest. This narrative review summarizes current knowledge and challenges in the management of thromboembolic disease in palliative care, highlighting the complexity of decisions surrounding VTE treatment and prophylaxis.

Treatment of Venous Thromboembolism in Cancer. Historical Perspective and Evolving Role of the Direct Oral Anticoagulants

The management of cancer-associated thrombosis (CAT) is complex, and treatment strategies have been evolving over the past 15 years. It is well recognized that oral vitamin K antagonists are difficult to use in cancer patients, with higher rates of treatment failure and bleeding complications than in non-cancer patients. Low-molecular-weight-heparin (LMWH) became the widely accepted standard of care for treatment of cancer-associated thrombosis, following the CLOT study comparing dalteparin with warfarin in 2003. LMWH remains widely used for the treatment of CAT. However, in the past two years, several studies have served to validate direct oral anticoagulants as a safe and effective alternative to LMWH. Two randomized clinical trials comparing edoxaban and rivaroxaban with dalteparin, and several retrospective studies have shown the efficacy of edoxaban and rivaroxaban for the treatment of CAT. However, there is an evidence of increased bleeding with the DOACs, particularly gastrointestinal or urinary tract bleeding in patients with lesions within the gastrointestinal or urinary tracts. This chapter discusses the ongoing development of optimal treatment strategies for cancer-associated thrombosis.

Position paper of the Italian Society of Internal Medicine (SIMI) on prophylaxis and treatment of venous thromboembolism in patients with cancer

Cancer patients are at high risk of developing thrombotic events, including venous thromboembolism (VTE) [deep venous thrombosis (DVT) and pulmonary embolism (PE)], and arterial thrombosis. DVT and PE represent the second leading cause of death in cancer patients; moreover, the development of thromboembolic events in cancer patients is linked to a greater need of hospitalization and frequency of side effects during treatment, in particular bleeding, and to an increased risk of recurrence during and following antithrombotic therapy. The thromboembolic risk may be different in different subgroups of cancer population, being highest in patients with metastatic disease, patients with pancreas, stomach, kidney or primary brain cancer, or during therapeutic interventions or surgery. This document focuses on several relevant topics including the epidemiology and pathogenesis of cancer-associated VTE, the current and future strategies of primary prevention and anticoagulant treatment, and the management of bleeding complications. The main literature data are discussed in detail, including, when available, evidence from randomized clinical trials and meta-analyses, international guidelines statements, the results of recently published trials comparing direct oral anticoagulants to low molecular weight heparin, and the design and aims of ongoing trials on prevention/treatment of cancer-associated VTE.

Direct oral anticoagulant (DOAC) versus low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) for treatment of cancer associated thrombosis (CAT): A systematic review and meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

It is unclear if direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) are effective and safe alternatives to low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWHs) for the treatment of cancer-associated venous thromboembolism (VTE). We aim to synthesize existing literature that compared DOACs versus LMWHs in this high-risk population.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We conducted a systematic review using EMBASE, MEDLINE and CENTRAL for all observational studies and randomized controlled trials (RCTs) (PROSPERO: CRD42017080898). Two authors independently reviewed study eligibility, extracted data, and assessed bias. Primary outcomes included 6-month recurrent VTE and major bleeding. Secondary outcomes included clinically relevant non-major bleeding (CRNMB) and mortality.

RESULTS

We screened 426 articles, reviewed 25 in full-text, and selected 13 and 2 for qualitative and quantitative synthesis, respectively. Based on a meta-analysis of the 2 RCTs, DOACs had lower 6-month recurrent VTE (42/725) when compared to LMWH (64/727) (RR: 0.65 (0.42-1.01)). However, DOACs had higher major bleeding (40/725) when compared to LMWH (23/727) (RR 1.74 (1.05-2.88)). Similarly, CRNMB was higher (RR 2.31 (0.85-6.28)) for patients receiving DOACs. There was no difference in mortality (RR 1.03 (0.85-1.26)). Observational studies were heterogeneous with high risks of bias but showed recurrent VTE rates consistent with the meta-analysis.

CONCLUSIONS

DOACs were more effective than LMWHs to prevent recurrent VTE but were associated with a significantly increased risk of major bleeding as well as a trend toward more CRNMB. The absolute risk differences were small (2-3%) for both primary outcomes and may reflect better compliance with DOACs than LMWHs.

Increased Risk of Ischemic Stroke in Multiple Myeloma Associated With Lenalidomide Treatment: A Case Report and Review of the Literature

OBJECTIVE

The aim of the study was to illustrate the increased risk of ischemic stroke in the context of multiple myeloma (MM) under treatment with lenalidomide combined with dexamethasone.

METHODS

This is a case report and literature review.

RESULTS

A 62-year-old woman diagnosed with relapsed MM under treatment with lenalidomide and dexamethasone presented with acute onset disorientation, disturbed behavior, and aphasia. Cranial computed tomography scan revealed an acute cerebral infarction in the left middle cerebral artery territory, and brain magnetic resonance imaging showed additional silent ischemic lesions in other arterial territories. Common stroke etiologies were excluded after an extensive study, leading to a final diagnosis of cerebral infarction of uncommon cause probably related to MM and treatment with lenalidomide plus dexamethasone. A literature review provided 84 reports from the license holder, 2 more cases of stroke in patients with MM receiving lenalidomide and a recurrent stroke in a patient experiencing polyneuropathy, organomegaly, endocrinopathy, monoclonal gammopathy, and skin changes (POEMS syndrome) treated with lenalidomide.

CONCLUSIONS

Our case exemplifies the need to raise awareness about the risk of ischemic stroke associated with MM that might be increased by treatment with lenalidomide and to establish consistent recommendations regarding thromboprophylaxis to reduce comorbidities and mortality in these patients.

Venous Thromboembolism in Asian Patients with Pancreatic Cancer Following Palliative Chemotherapy: Low Incidence but a Negative Prognosticator for Those with Early Onset

BACKGROUND

Few studies have reported the epidemiology and clinical outcome of venous thromboembolism (VTE) in Asian patients with pancreatic cancer. This study investigated the incidence, risk factors, and clinical outcome of VTE in patients with pancreatic cancer following palliative chemotherapy.

METHODS

The medical records of 838 patients with newly diagnosed locally advanced or metastatic pancreatic cancer who underwent palliative chemotherapy between 2010 and 2016 at four institutes in Taiwan were retrospectively reviewed. The clinical characteristics of all patients were analyzed to identify independent predictors of VTE and their effects on survival outcome.

RESULTS

During the median follow-up period of 7.7 months (range, 0.6⁻55.6), VTE occurred in 67 (8.0%) of the 838 patients. Leukocyte count > 11,000/μL and presence of liver metastases were the independent predictors of VTE. Patients with VTE did not show significantly poorer survival outcomes than those without VTE. However, early-onset VTE that occurred within 1.5 months after chemotherapy initiation was an independent negative prognosticator for overall survival.

CONCLUSION

VTE incidence was found to be lower in Asian patients with pancreatic cancer than in their Western counterparts. Early-onset VTE, but not late-onset VTE, is a negative prognosticator for survival outcomes.

Anticoagulation for the Treatment of Cancer-Associated Thrombosis: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis of Randomized Trials

To perform a systematic review and network meta-analysis evaluating the efficacy and safety of low-molecular-weight heparins (LMWHs), vitamin K antagonists (VKAs), and direct-acting oral anticoagulants (DOACs) for the treatment of cancer-associated thrombosis (CAT). We searched MEDLINE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and conference abstracts through March 2018. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) enrolling adults with CAT comparing 2 or more full-dose anticoagulants (LMWH, VKA, and DOAC) and evaluating recurrent venous thromboembolism (VTE), major bleeding, and/or all-cause mortality were included. Reviewers identified studies, extracted data, and assessed the quality of the evidence in duplicate. A frequentist network meta-analysis, which uses direct and indirect evidence to simultaneously compare multiple interventions, was performed using a random-effects approach. Results are reported as pooled relative risks (RRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). We included 13 RCTs (n = 6292): 7 compared LMWHs with VKAs, 4 compared DOACs with VKAs, and 2 compared DOACs with LMWHs. The risk of recurrent VTE was significantly reduced by 28% and 54% with a DOAC compared to an LMWH and a VKA, respectively. Low-molecular-weight heparins significantly reduced the risk of recurrent VTE by 36% versus VKAs. The risk of major bleeding was 14% higher with DOACs compared to LMWHs and 15% and 25% lower with DOACs and LMWHs versus VKAs, although 95% CIs included unity for each. The risk of all-cause mortality appeared similar for all 3 comparisons (RR = 1.0 for each comparison). Direct-acting oral anticoagulants appeared superior in reducing recurrent VTE in patients with CAT compared to LMWH and VKAs, but an increased risk of major bleeding versus LMWH cannot be ruled out.

Pancreatic cancer: French clinical practice guidelines for diagnosis, treatment and follow-up (SNFGE, FFCD, GERCOR, UNICANCER, SFCD, SFED, SFRO, ACHBT, AFC)

BACKGROUND

This document is a summary of the French intergroup guidelines regarding the management of pancreatic adenocarcinoma (PA), updated in July 2018.

DESIGN

This collaborative work was produced under the auspices of all French medical and surgical societies involved in the management of PA. It is based on the previous guidelines, recent literature review and expert opinions. Recommendations were graded in three categories, according to the level of evidence.

RESULTS

Over the last seven years, significant changes in PA management have been implemented in clinical practice. Imaging/staging: diffusion magnetic resonance imaging is useful before surgery to rule out small liver metastases.

SURGERY

centralization of pancreatic surgery in expert centers is associated with a decreased postoperative mortality. Adjuvant chemotherapy: modified FOLFIRINOX in fit patients, or gemcitabine, or 5-FU, or gemcitabine plus capecitabine, to be discussed on a case-by-case basis. Locally advanced PA: no survival benefit of chemoradiotherapy. Metastatic PA: FOLFIRINOX and gemcitabine plus nab-paclitaxel combination are first-line standards in fit patients; second-line with 5FU/nal-IRI or 5FU/oxaliplatin combination after first-line gemcitabine.

CONCLUSION

Guidelines for management of PA are continuously evolving and need to be regularly updated. This constant progress is made possible through clinical and translational research. However, as each individual case is particular, they cannot substitute to multidisciplinary tumor board discussion.

Non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants in patients with an increased risk of bleeding

The non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants (NOACs) have considerably changed clinical practice and are increasingly being used as an alternative to vitamin K antagonists (VKAs) for 3 main reasons: 1) an improved benefit-risk ratio (in particular lower rates of intracranial bleeding), 2) a more predictable effect without the need for routine monitoring, and 3) fewer food and drug interactions compared with VKAs. Currently, there are four NOACs available: the factor Xa inhibitors apixaban, edoxaban, and rivaroxaban, and the thrombin inhibitor dabigatran. This consensus paper reviews the properties and usage of NOACs in a number of high-risk patient populations, such as patients with chronic kidney disease, patients ≥80 years of age and others and provides guidance for the use of NOACs in patients at risk of bleeding.

Management of venous thromboembolism in patients with cancer

Current guidelines for anticoagulant therapy do not so far suggest any form of differentiated approach to cancer patients with venous thromboembolism (VTE). This review article provides an overview of the published literature in cancer patients with VTE, mostly using data from the RIETE registry. Our findings provide some insights into what factors may be used to guide physicians in adapting recommended anticoagulant regimens to the individual patient, as oncologists are increasingly doing with cancer treatments. For instance, patients presenting with deep vein thrombosis (DVT) alone might benefit from curtailing treatment intensity as anticoagulant therapy progresses. The site of cancer also needs to be considered. In patients with incidental PE or splanchnic vein thrombosis, we should be more cautious before prescribing anticoagulant therapy. The optimal duration of anticoagulant therapy is unknown.

Update on extended treatment for venous thromboembolism

The importance of assessing the probability of venous thromboembolism recurrence, a condition that includes deep vein thrombosis and pulmonary embolism, lies in the fact that it is the most important factor in deciding the duration of anticoagulant treatment. Risk of recurrence depends mostly on the presence of a risk factor for developing venous thromboembolism, with patients with unprovoked events being at the higher risk of recurrence. The risk of recurrence needs to be balanced with the risk of bleeding and the potential severity of these thrombotic and hemorrhagic events. In patients with an unprovoked venous thromboembolism who complete treatment for the acute (first 10 days) and post-acute phase of the disease (from day 10 to 3-6 months), the decision has to be made regarding prolonged antithrombotic therapy to prevent recurrences. The main goal of extended treatment is preventing recurrences with a safety profile in terms of bleeding risk. Many therapeutic options are now available for these patients, including antiplatelet therapy with aspirin or direct oral anticoagulants. Moreover, apixaban and rivaroxaban at prophylactic doses have demonstrated efficacy in preventing recurrences with a low risk of bleeding. Key messages Extending treatment (longer than 3-6 months) is challenging in patients with venous thromboembolism (VTE) and depend on the risk of venous thromboembolism recurrence, the bleeding risk and patient and physician preferences. Anticoagulation treatment should be stopped in patients with provoked VTE and in those with unprovoked VTE and a high bleeding risk after an initial period of 3-6 months. There are some therapeutic alternatives (including Aspirin and low dose of some NOACs) to reduce venous thromboembolism recurrence risk in patients with unprovoked VTE and a low bleeding risk for extended treatment of VTE (after an initial period of 3-6 months).

Direct Oral Anticoagulants and Travel-related Venous Thromboembolism

Travel- related thromboembolism reflects the relationship between venous thromboembolism (VTE) and long-haul flights. Although this condition is rare, it may cause significant morbidity and mortality. Therefore, travelers should be evaluated for the risks for thrombosis. Travel physicians should employ a clinical risk score and select in vestigations, prophylaxis, and treatment that are appropriate for each individual. This review summarizes current VTE clinical risk scores and patient management from various reliable guidelines. We summarized 16 reliable publications for reviewing data. Direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) are currently the standard treatment for VTE and a prophylactic measure for VTE in orthopedic surgery. Compared with a vitamin K antagonist (VKA), DOACs show better safety and similar efficacy without the need for monitoring, and have fewer food/drug interactions. Inferred from the data on general VTE, DOACs may be used to treat travel-related VTE. Although the data are lacking, DOACs may be used off-label as VTE prophylax is. Before using DOACs, physicians must know the pharmacology of the drugs well and should realize that the availability of antidotes for bleeding complications is limited.

Improvement of appropriate pharmacological prophylaxis in hospitalised cancer patients with a multiscreen e-alert system: a single-centre experience

PURPOSE

Thromboprophylaxis use among medical inpatients, including cancer patients, is suboptimal. We aimed to evaluate the impact of a novel multiscreen version (v2.0) of an e-alert system for VTE prevention in hospitalised cancer medical patients compared to the original software.

METHODS

Prospective study including 989 consecutive adult cancer patients with high-risk of VTE. Patients were followed-up 30 days post-discharge. Two periods were defined, according to the operative software.

RESULTS

E-alert v2.0 was associated with an increase in the use of LMWH prophylaxis (65.5% vs. 72.0%); risk difference (95% CI) 0.064 (0.0043-0.12). Only 16% of patients in whom LMWH prophylaxis was not prescribed lacked a contraindication. No significant differences in the rates of VTE (2.9% vs. 3.2%) and major bleeding (2.7% vs. 4.0%) were observed.

CONCLUSIONS

E-alert v2.0 further increased the use of appropriate thromboprophylaxis in hospitalised cancer patients, although was not associated with a reduction in VTE incidence.

Cancer-Associated Thrombosis in Cirrhotic Patients with Hepatocellular Carcinoma

It is common knowledge that cancer patients are more prone to develop venous thromboembolic complications (VTE). It is therefore not surprising that patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) present with a significant risk of VTE, with the portal vein being the most frequent site (PVT). However, patients with HCC are peculiar as both cancer and liver cirrhosis are conditions that can perturb the hemostatic balance towards a prothrombotic state. Because HCC-related hypercoagulability is not clarified at all, the aim of the present review is to summarize the currently available knowledge on epidemiology and pathogenesis of non-malignant thrombotic complications in patients with liver cirrhosis and HCC. They are at increased risk to develop both PVT and non-splanchnic VTE, indicating that both local and systemic factors can foster the development of site-specific thrombosis. Recent studies have suggested multiple and often interrelated mechanisms through which HCC can tip the hemostatic balance of liver cirrhosis towards hypercoagulability. Described mechanisms include increased fibrinogen concentration/polymerization, thrombocytosis, and release of tissue factor-expressing extracellular vesicles. Currently, there are no specific guidelines on the use of thromboprophylaxis in this unique population. There is the urgent need of prospective studies assessing which patients have the highest prothrombotic profile and would therefore benefit from early thromboprophylaxis.

A systematic review of clinical practice guidelines on the use of low molecular weight heparin and fondaparinux for the treatment and prevention of venous thromboembolism: Implications for research and policy decision-making

Background

Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is a major global cause of morbidity and mortality. Low molecular weight heparin (LMWH) and fondaparinux (FDP) are frequently used to treat and prevent VTE and have a variety of safety and practical advantages over other anticoagulants, including use in outpatient settings. These medications are commonly listed on drug formularies, which act as a gateway for health plan prescription coverage by outlining the circumstances under which patients will be covered for specific drugs and drug products. Because patient access to medications is impacted by the nature of their listing on formularies, they must be rigorously reviewed and modernized as new evidence emerges.

Methods

As part of a broader drug class review team, we completed a systematic review of clinical practice guidelines to determine whether the recommendations they reported aligned with the indications listed for the coverage of LMWH and FDP in an outpatient drug formulary. Guideline quality was assessed using the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research & Evaluation (AGREE) II tool. Recommendation matrices were used to systematically compare, categorize, and summarize included recommendations.

Results

Twenty-seven guidelines were included from which 168 eligible recommendations were identified. Generally, AGREE II domains were adequately addressed; however, domain five (applicability) was poorly addressed. Most recommendations were based on moderate- to low-quality/limited evidence and reported on the use of LMWHs generally; few reported on specific agents.

Conclusions

Our findings contributed to the recommendation that the formulary listing for LMWH and FDP be streamlined to include coverage for specific outpatient indications. The paucity of available evidence on the comparative efficacy of specific LMWH agents against each other and FDP limited agent-specific listing recommendations, highlighting the need for high-quality comparative studies on this topic.

Cancer-Associated Thrombosis: Beyond Clinical Practice Guidelines-A Multidisciplinary (SEMI-SEOM-SETH) Expert Consensus

Despite the growing interest and improved knowledge about venous thromboembolism in cancer patients in the last years, there are still many unsolved issues. Due to the limitations of the available literature, evidence-based clinical practice guidelines are not able to give solid recommendations for challenging scenarios often present in the setting of cancer-associated thrombosis (CAT). A multidisciplinary expert panel from three scientific societies—Spanish Society of Internal Medicine (SEMI), Spanish Society of Medical Oncology (SEOM), and Spanish Society Thrombosis and Haemostasis (SETH)—agreed on 12 controversial questions regarding prevention and management of CAT, which were thoroughly reviewed to provide further guidance. The suggestions presented herein may facilitate clinical decisions in specific complex circumstances, until these can be made leaning on reliable scientific evidence.

[Clinical Value Evaluation of Perioperative Prophylactic Anticoagulation Therapy for Lung Cancer Patients]

BACKGROUND

The incidence of pulmonary embolism (PE) in lung cancer patients who underwent surgery increased during the perioperative period, and prophylactic anticoagulation therapy was important part of enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS). However, the timing of preventive anticoagulation in patients with lung cancer remained controversial. This study was designed to investigate the safety and efficacy of perioperative prophylactic anticoagulation therapy for lung cancer patients.

METHODS

Retrospective research was conducted on 562 lung cancer patients who underwent video-assisted thoracoscopic (VATS) anatomic pulmonary resections in West China Hospital from June 2016 to December 2016. 56 patients were treated with low molecular weight heparin (LMWH) anticoagulation 12 hours before operation until discharge, while the other 506 patients were treated with LMWH 24 hours after operation until discharge. The postoperative chest drainage volume, postoperative bleeding, pulmonary embolism incidence, and respiratory complications were analyzed.

RESULTS

(1) There were no significant differences in prothrombin time (PT), activated partial thromboplastin time (APTT) and international normalized ratio (INR) between the pre-operation prophylactic anticoagulation group (PRE group) [(11.5±3.9) s, (27.8±3.5) s, (0.96±0.06) s] and the post-operation prophylactic anticoagulation group (POST group) [(11.4±1.4) s, (28.3±4.0) s, (0.98±0.07) s] (P=0.796, P=0.250, P=0.137), and there was no significant difference in Caprini score between the PRE group (3.1±1.8) and the POST group (3.3±1.5) (P=0.104). (2) There were no significant differences in anesthesia time and intraoperative bleeding between PRE group [(130.2±53.9) min, (76.8±49.3) mL] and POST group [(142.2±56.5) min, (73.7±41.6) mL] (P=0.067, P=0.201). (3) The total drainage volume in 72 hours after operation in PRE group [(728.1±505.7) mL] was significantly higher than that of POST group [(596.4±373.5) mL] (P=0.005), while there were no significant differences between the two groups in total postoperative drainage volume [(1,066.8±1,314.6) mL vs (907.8±999.8) mL, P=0.203]. (4) There were no significant differences between the two groups in pulmonary embolism incidence (1.785% vs 0.019%, P=0.525) and postoperative bleeding rates (1.785% vs 0.039%, P=0.300). (5) There were no significant differences between PRE group and POST group in subcutaneous emphysema incidence (1.785% vs 1.581%, P=0.989) and pulmonary infection rates (14.285% vs 6.324%, P=0.085).

CONCLUSIONS

The clinical value of preoperative prophylactic anticoagulation is equal to postoperative prophylactic anticoagulation for lung cancer patients.