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

D-dimer and high-sensitivity C-reactive protein levels to predict venous thromboembolism recurrence after discontinuation of anticoagulation for cancer-associated thrombosis

Background

Optimal duration of anticoagulation for cancer-associated thrombosis (CAT) remains unclear. This study assessed D-dimer (DD) and high-sensitivity C-reactive protein (hs-CRP) levels after the withdrawal of anticoagulation treatment to predict the risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE) recurrence among patients with CAT.

Methods

Prospective, multicentre study to evaluate CAT with ≥3 months of anticoagulation that was subsequently discontinued. Blood samples were taken when patients stopped the anticoagulation and 21 days later to determine the DD and hs-CRP levels. All patients were followed up for 6 months to detect VTE recurrence.

Results

Between 2013 and 2015, 325 patients were evaluated and 114 patients were ultimately enrolled in the study. The mean age was 62 ± 14 years and nearly 40% had metastasis. Ten patients developed VTE recurrence within 6 months (8.8%, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 4.3–15.5%). The DD and hs-CRP levels after 21 days were associated with VTE recurrence. The subdistribution hazard ratios were 9.82 for hs-CRP (95% CI: 19–52) and 5.81 for DD (95% CI: 1.1–31.7).

Conclusions

This study identified that hs-CRP and DD were potential biomarkers of VTE recurrence after discontinuation of anticoagulation in CAT. A risk-adapted strategy could identify low-risk patients who may benefit from discontinuation of anticoagulation.

Direct oral anticoagulants for the treatment of venous thromboembolism in cancer patients: Potential for drug-drug interactions

Patients with cancer are at high risk of developing venous thromboembolism (VTE). Although the recommended low molecular weight heparins (LMWHs) are more effective than vitamin K antagonists in treating VTE in patients with cancer, they have limitations and contraindications. Direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) circumvent some of these limitations. Here, DOAC use for VTE treatment in patients receiving anticancer therapy is reviewed, focusing on metabolic and elimination pathways, potential drug-drug interactions and practical considerations. DOACs are typically substrates of the cytochrome P450-based metabolic pathways and/or ATP-binding cassette transporters. Although many cancer therapies influence these pathways, only a minority of these drugs interact with DOACs. Phase III DOAC trials provided encouraging safety and efficacy data for their use in cancer-associated thrombosis. Furthermore, numerous ongoing DOAC trials strive to gain a better understanding of the treatment of cancer-associated thrombosis and continue to support a role for DOACs in this setting.

COSIMO - patients with active cancer changing to rivaroxaban for the treatment and prevention of recurrent venous thromboembolism: a non-interventional study

BACKGROUND

Around 20% of venous thromboembolism (VTE) cases occur in patients with cancer. Current guidelines recommend low molecular weight heparin (LMWH) as the preferred anticoagulant for VTE treatment. However, some guidelines state that vitamin K antagonists (VKAs) and direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) are acceptable alternatives for long-term therapy in some patients if LMWHs are not available. LMWHs and VKAs have a number of drawbacks that can increase the burden on patients. DOACs, such as rivaroxaban, can ameliorate some burdens and may offer an opportunity to increase patient satisfaction and health-related quality of life (HRQoL). The Cancer-associated thrOmboSIs - patient-reported outcoMes with rivarOxaban (COSIMO) study is designed to provide real-world information on treatment satisfaction in patients with active cancer who switch from LMWH or VKA to rivaroxaban for the treatment of acute VTE or to prevent recurrent VTE.

METHODS

COSIMO is a prospective, non-interventional, single-arm cohort study that aims to recruit 500 patients in Europe, Canada and Australia. Adults with active cancer who are switching to rivaroxaban having received LMWH/VKA for the treatment and secondary prevention of recurrent VTE for at least the previous 4 weeks are eligible. Patients will be followed for 6 months. The primary outcome is treatment satisfaction assessed as change in the Anti-Clot Treatment Scale (ACTS) Burdens score at week 4 after enrolment compared with baseline. Secondary outcomes include treatment preferences, measured using a discrete choice experiment, change in ACTS Burdens score at months 3 and 6, and change in HRQoL (assessed using the Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy - Fatigue questionnaire). COSIMO will collect data on patients' medical history, patterns of anticoagulant use and incidence of bleeding and thromboembolic events. Study recruitment started in autumn 2016.

CONCLUSIONS

COSIMO will provide information on outcomes associated with switching from LMWH or VKA therapy to rivaroxaban for the treatment or secondary prevention of cancer-associated thrombosis in a real-life setting. The key goal is to assess whether there is a change in patient-reported treatment satisfaction. In addition, COSIMO will facilitate the evaluation of the safety and effectiveness of rivaroxaban in preventing recurrent VTE in this patient population.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

NCT02742623. Registered 19 April 2016.

Anticoagulants in frail patients. Seven situations at risk

In the case of venous thromboembolic disease (VTE), physicians are facing more and more difficulties in managing VTE and their treatment in frail patients. These patients could present several risk situations such as: chronic kidney disease (CKD), underweight or malnourished, falls, cognitive impairment, multi-medicated patients, cancer and pregnancy. Guidelines typically recommend anticoagulation. There are multiple challenges in the safe use of anticoagulation in frail patients, including bleeding risk, monitoring and adherence, and polypharmacy. The objective of this review is to explore these at-risk situations and to suggest adequate anticoagulation therapy, when possible, in each of these complex situations.

Arterial Ischemic Events Are a Major Complication in Cancer Patients with Venous Thromboembolism

BACKGROUND

Venous thromboembolism is common in patients with malignancies, affecting up to 10% of this patient population. The association between arterial ischemic events and venous thromboembolism also has been established. However, the influence of arterial ischemic events on outcomes in cancer patients with venous thromboembolism has not been fully determined.

METHODS

The current study analyzed clinical characteristics, time course, risk factors, incidence and severity of venous thromboembolism recurrences, arterial ischemic events and major bleeding in 5717 patients with active cancer and venous thromboembolism recruited into RIETE (multi-center prospective registry of patients with objectively confirmed venous thromboembolism).

RESULTS

During the anticoagulation course (median 7.3 months), 499 (8.7%) patients developed venous thromboembolism recurrences, 63 (1.1%) developed arterial events, and 346 (6.1%) suffered from major bleeding. Overall, major bleeding and arterial events appeared earlier (median 35 and 36 days, respectively) than venous thromboembolism recurrences (median 97 days). Thirty-day mortality rates after each event were: 20% after recurrent pulmonary embolism, 13% after recurrent deep vein thrombosis, 41% after major bleeding, 40% after myocardial infarction, 64% after ischemic stroke, and 83% after lower limb amputation. Bleeding was the leading cause of death (67 fatal bleeds), whereas cumulative mortality due to arterial ischemic events (n = 27) was similar to that related to pulmonary embolism recurrences (n = 26).

CONCLUSIONS

In this study, arterial ischemic events and major bleeding appeared early after venous thromboembolism in patients with active cancer and were among frequent causes of their deaths. The risk and severity of arterial events need to be considered in this clinical setting.

Efficacy and safety of anticoagulant agents in patients with venous thromboembolism and cancer: A network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Low-molecular-weight heparins (LMWHs) are the recommended treatment for cancer-associated venous thrombosis (CAT). Recent evidences suggest a role for direct-acting oral anticoagulants (DOACs) in this clinical setting.

METHODS

To evaluate the efficacy and safety of different anticoagulants we performed a network meta-analysis of RCTs including patients with CAT treated with LMWHs, vitamin K antagonists (VKAs) or DOACs. MEDLINE and EMBASE were searched up to February 2018. The primary efficacy and safety outcomes were recurrent VTE and major bleeding, respectively.

RESULTS

Overall, 4720 CAT patients from 12 studies were included: 1430 from 2 studies comparing DOACs with LMWHs, 1212 from 4 studies comparing DOACs with VKAs and 2078 from 6 studies comparing VKAs to LMWHs. Recurrent VTE occurred in 4.9% of patients receiving DOACs, 9.6% receiving VKAs and 8.4% receiving LMWHs. The network meta-analysis showed a not significant increase of recurrent VTE in patients receiving LMWHs compared to those receiving DOACs (RR 1.3, 95% CI 0.9 to 2.0). The risk of recurrent VTE was higher in patients receiving VKAs compared to LMWHs (RR 1.5, 95% CI 1.0 to 2.0) or DOACs (RR 2.0, 95% CI 1.3 to 3.0) with no heterogeneity. Major bleeding occurred in 4.9, 4.1 and 4.3% of patients with CAT treated with DOAC, VKA or LMWH, respectively. No significant differences were observed from the direct, indirect and network meta-analyses.

CONCLUSION

In patients with CAT, DOACs showed a good efficacy and safety profile compared to other anticoagulants and is candidates to be an alternative to LMWHs.

[Treatment of cancer associated thrombosis: Which role for direct oral anticoagulants in 2018?]

Low molecular weight heparin (LMWH) for at least 3-6 months is the current standard of care for the treatment of cancer associated venous thromboembolism (VTE). Anticoagulation should be continued as long as the cancer is active. In recent years, several direct-acting oral anticoagulants (DOACs) have been approved for the treatment of VTE in the general population. These drugs have progressively emerged as attractive alternatives with the potential to overcome the limitations of LMWH. Due to the lack of high quality prospective data, DOACs are currently not recommended for the treatment of cancer associated VTE yet. Indeed, evidence supporting the use of DOACs in this specific population remains limited, and concerns have been raised about their safety and efficacy in this setting. However, a pattern of increased use of DOACs has been observed in the cancer population. Meta-analyses of Phase III trials of DOACs in VTE as well as analysis of large health care claims databases and non-controlled retrospective studies suggest that DOACs might have similar effectiveness and safety to LMWH for the management of cancer associated VTE. Results from 2 randomized clinical trial (RCT), HOKUSAI-Cancer and SELECT-D, were recently released. Based on a meta-analysis of these 2 RCTs, compared to LMWH, DOACs had lower 6 month recurrent VTE but higher major bleeding. Thus, DOACs should be used with caution in cancer patients and a careful evaluation of the risks and benefits for individual patients is warranted. Ongoing studies will provide much needed evidence to guide clinical care.

Cancer-associated thrombosis in patients with implanted ports: a prospective multicenter French cohort study (ONCOCIP)

The incidence of venous thromboembolism is high in patients with a solid tumor and implanted port in the real-life practice setting. The risk factors for catheter-related thrombosis differ from those for venous thromboembolism unrelated to the catheter.

Incidence and risk of thromboembolism associated with bevacizumab in patients with non-small cell lung carcinoma

Background

Bevacizumab, a recombinant humanized monoclonal antibody against vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF), is effective for the treatment of advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). However, severe adverse events (AEs) have been reported in NSCLC patients treated with bevacizumab. Currently, the contribution of Bevacizumab to thromboembolism is still controversial. We conducted a study to determine the overall risk and incidence of thromboembolism with bevacizumab in NSCLC patients.

Methods

Electronic databases such as the PubMed, Web of Science and Cochrane Library were searched for related trials. Statistical analyses were conducted to calculate the overall incidence rates, odds ratios (ORs), and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) by using either random-effect or fixed-effect models depending on the heterogeneity. We also used trial sequence analysis (TSA) to verify the pooled result.

Results

A total of 3,555 subjects from nine studies were included. The overall incidence of thromboembolism events in NSCLC patients treated with bevacizumab was 4.8% (95% CI: 1.9-7.7%). Without bevacizumab, this incidence was 2.9% (95% CI: 0.6-5.1%). Bevacizumab use was associated with a significantly increased risk in thromboembolism events (OR =1.74; 95% CI: 1.15-2.62; P=0.008). Subgroup analysis based on the doses showed that bevacizumab administered at 15 mg/kg (OR =1.81; 95% CI: 1.14-2.86; P=0.012), but not 7.5 mg/kg (OR =1.32; 95% CI: 0.78-2.24; P=0.296), increased the risk of thromboembolism.

Conclusions

Bevacizumab is associated with a significantly increased risk of thromboembolism development in NSCLC patients. It may have dose-toxicity relationship and low dose of bevacizumab may be a better choice for NSCLC patients, with equal efficacy and low hazard of thromboembolism events.

Venous thromboembolism prophylaxis for ambulatory cancer patients, can we do better?

Patients with cancer are at a much higher risk of thromboembolic events. Such events are occasionally associated with significant complications that can negatively affect patients' quality of life. Thromboprophylaxis is widely practiced, but much of the emphasis is given for those admitted with acute medical illnesses or following major surgical procedures. However, a significant percentage of thrombotic events encountered in routine clinical practice are among ambulatory patients where current guidelines do not recommend routine thromboprophylaxis.

Antithrombotic therapy for venous thromboembolism in patients with cancer: expert guidance

INTRODUCTION

Most of the current clinical guidelines recommend the use of Low-Molecular-Weight Heparins (LMWHs) for cancer-associated thrombosis (CAT). The Hokusai VTE-cancer trial reported the first results of a direct comparison between a direct oral anticoagulant (DOAC), edoxaban, and LMWH in this setting.

AREAS COVERED

This review aims to critically appraise the currently available evidence on the efficacy and safety of anticoagulant agents for the long-term treatment of CAT and to provide an expert opinion and guidance in this field.

EXPERT OPINION

Based on the available evidence, DOACs represent a valid alternative to LMWH for the treatment of CAT for the majority of patients with active cancer. Currently, most solid evidence comes from the Hokusai VTE-cancer study, which showed that edoxaban is non-inferior to the LMWH dalteparin, with a trend toward fewer recurrent venous thromboembolic events, but with more major bleeding events. Similar findings were reported with rivaroxaban, although the study was not sufficiently powered to allow definitive conclusions. The majority of bleeding events occurred in the upper gastrointestinal tract and in patients with gastrointestinal cancer. Thus, LMWH remains the preferred option for patients with gastrointestinal cancer. Additional studies aimed to confirm these findings with other DOACs are now warranted.

Antiplatelet and anticoagulant agents for primary prevention of thrombosis in individuals with antiphospholipid antibodies

BACKGROUND

Antiphospholipid syndrome (APS) is an autoimmune disease characterised by the presence of antiphospholipid (aPL) antibodies that have prothrombotic activity. Antiphospholipid antibodies are associated with an increased risk of pregnancy complications (recurrent miscarriage, premature birth, intrauterine growth retardation) and thrombotic events (both arterial and venous). The most common thrombotic events include brain ischaemia (stroke or transient ischaemic attack) and deep vein thrombosis. To diagnose APS, the presence of aPL antibodies in two measurements and at least one thrombotic event or pregnancy complication are required. It is unclear if people with positive aPL antibodies but without any previous thrombotic events should receive primary antithrombotic prophylaxis.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of antiplatelet or anticoagulant agents versus placebo or no intervention or other intervention on the development of thrombosis in people with aPL antibodies who have not had a thrombotic event. We did not address obstetric outcomes in this review as these have been thoroughly addressed by other Cochrane Reviews.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Vascular Specialised Register (4 December 2017), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (last search 29 November 2017), MEDLINE Ovid, Embase Ovid, CINAHL, and AMED (searched 4 December 2017), and trials registries (searched 29 November 2017). We also checked reference lists of included studies, systematic reviews, and practice guidelines, and contacted experts in the field.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that compared any antiplatelet or anticoagulant agents, or their combinations, at any dose and mode of delivery with placebo, no intervention, or other intervention. We also included RCTs that compared antiplatelet or anticoagulant agents with each other or that compared two different doses of the same drug. We included studies performed in people of any age and with no history of thrombosis (as defined by APS Sapporo classification criteria or updated Sydney classification criteria), but with aPL antibodies confirmed on at last two separate measurements. The studies included both pregnant women who tested positive for aPL antibodies and had a history of recurrent obstetric complications, as well as non-pregnancy related cases with positive screening for antibodies, in accordance with the criteria mentioned above.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Pairs of authors independently selected studies for inclusion, extracted data, and assessed the risk of bias for the included studies and quality of evidence using GRADE. Any discrepancies were resolved through discussion or by consulting a third review author when necessary. In addition, one review author checked all the extracted numerical data.

MAIN RESULTS

We included nine studies involving 1044 randomised participants. The studies took place in several countries and had different funding sources. No study was at low risk of bias in all domains. We classified all included studies as at unclear or high risk of bias in two or more domains. Seven included studies focused mainly on obstetric outcomes. One study included non-pregnancy-related cases, and one study included both pregnancy-related cases and other patients with positive results for aPL antibodies. The remaining studies concerned women with aPL antibodies and a history of pregnancy failure. Four studies compared anticoagulant with or without acetylsalicylic acid (ASA) versus ASA only and observed no clear difference in thrombosis risk (risk ratio (RR) 0.98, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.25 to 3.77; 4 studies; 493 participants; low-quality evidence). No major bleeding was reported, but minor bleeding risk (nasal bleeding, menorrhagia) was higher in the anticoagulant with ASA group as compared with ASA alone in one study (RR 22.45, 95% CI 1.34 to 374.81; 1 study; 164 participants; low-quality evidence). In one study ASA was compared with placebo, and there were no clear differences in thrombosis (RR 5.21, 95% CI 0.63 to 42.97; 1 study; 98 participants; low-quality evidence) or minor bleeding risk between the groups (RR 3.13, 95% CI 0.34 to 29.01; 1 study; 98 participants; low-quality evidence), and no major bleeding was observed. Two studies compared ASA with low molecular weight heparin (LMWH) versus placebo or intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIG), and no thrombotic events were observed in any of the groups. Moreover, there were no clear differences in the risk of bleeding requiring transfusion (RR 9.0, 95% CI 0.49 to 164.76; 1 study; 180 participants; moderate-quality evidence) or postpartum bleeding (RR 1.30, 95% CI 0.60 to 2.81; 1 study; 180 participants; moderate-quality evidence) between the groups. Two studies compared ASA with high-dose LMWH versus ASA with low-dose LMWF or unfractionated heparin (UFH); no thrombotic events or major bleeding was reported. Mortality and quality of life data were not reported for any of the comparisons.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is insufficient evidence to demonstrate benefit or harm of using anticoagulants with or without ASA versus ASA alone in people with aPL antibodies and a history of recurrent pregnancy loss and with no such history; ASA versus placebo in people with aPL antibodies; and ASA with LMWH versus placebo or IVIG, and ASA with high-dose LMWH versus ASA with low-dose LMWH or UFH, in women with aPL antibodies and a history of recurrent pregnancy loss, for the primary prevention of thrombotic events. In a mixed population of people with a history of previous pregnancy loss and without such a history treated with anticoagulant combined with ASA, the incidence of minor bleeding (nasal bleeding, menorrhagia) was increased when compared with ASA alone. Studies that are adequately powered and that focus mainly on thrombotic events are needed to draw any firm conclusions on the primary prevention of thrombotic events in people with antiphospholipid antibodies.

Management and supportive treatment of frail patients with metastatic pancreatic cancer

Data regarding management of frail patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma practice is currently very scarce. Randomized clinical trials usually exclude these subgroup of patients and the majority of the publications only consider chronological age and ECOG performance status for their classification. Therefore, the current available data do not reflect daily clinical practice. Only data from a phase two study (FRAGANCE study), designed to select a tolerable dose-schedule of nab-placitaxel + gemcitabine (Phase one) and to evaluate the efficacy of the selected regimen (Phase two) in patients with ECOG-2 and previously untreated advanced PDAC, are currently available. Management of these particular patients is exceedingly complex and requires collaboration of multidisciplinary teams and intensive support treatment. This article reviews the literature available regarding the management of the so-called frail patients and provide guidance for chemotherapy as well as supportive care treatments.

[Venous thromboembolism and pancreatic cancer]

Pancreatic cancer (PC) is a devastating malignancy with an overall 5-year survival of 8% for all stages combined. Most of the PC patients diagnosed have an advanced disease (40%) or metastatic stage (40%), which eliminates surgery as a potentially curative treatment. The disease course is often complicated by venous thromboembolism (VTE) events, which per se account for significant morbidity and mortality, with significantly worsen survival. PC is associated with the highest risk of VTE among all cancer patients. We review the literature data to address the incidence and clinical outcomes of VTE in PC patients. VTE incidence varies from 5 to 41% according to epidemiological studies and is as high as 57% in postmortem series. Since 2013, international clinical practice guidelines recommend primary thromboprophylaxis with a grade 1B level of evidence as an adjuvant therapy in advanced PC. A recent meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials investigating the benefit and risk of low-molecular-weight heparins (LMWH) in ambulatory advanced PC patients under chemotherapy showed that the incidence of VTE was 2.1% in patients treated with LMWH and 11.2% in controls (risk ratio, 0.18; 95% CI, 0.083-0.39; P<0.0001). In conclusion, improved earlier diagnosis and effective management of VTE, a frequent and life-threatening complication in PC, is warranted to improve PC patient outcomes.

Recent advancements in esophageal cancer treatment in Japan

The 11th edition of the Japanese Classification of Esophageal Cancer (EC) was published in 2017. Some correction was made in the depth of tumor invasion to be consistent with the TNM classification by the Union for International Cancer Control (UICC). With regard to surgery, short-term safety and long-term effectiveness under thoracotomy/video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery are expected to be proven by the Japan Clinical Oncology Group (JCOG)1409 study. Results of nutritional management and countermeasures for adverse events not only during the perioperative period but also during EC chemotherapy were reported. From now on, the pursuit of low invasiveness and radicality is desired. Esophageal surgery is also expected to be safe at all institutions. To determine the optimal modality of preoperative treatment and a novel chemo(radio)therapy regimen for patients with distant metastasis, the results of the ongoing JCOG1109 and 0807 studies are being released. The effect of the addition of molecular targeted drugs on chemotherapy and concurrent chemoradiation has not yet improved overall survival. Immune checkpoint inhibitor drugs could offer a potential new treatment approach for patients with treatment-refractory advanced squamous cell carcinoma (SCC). The Cancer Genome Atlas Research Network reported the results of a comprehensive genome analysis and molecular analysis of SCC and adenocarcinoma of the esophagus. Further differentiation of SCC and adenocarcinoma by molecular characterization analysis may be useful for the development of clinical trials and targeted drug therapies as precision medicine. The era of ultimate minimally invasive surgery and personalized treatment has begun. Large, prospective studies will be required to confirm the value of these advancements.

Updates in venous thromboembolism management: evidence published in 2017

Venous thromboembolism (VTE) management is rapidly evolving and staying up-to-date is challenging. We identified the most practice-informing articles published in 2017 relevant to the nonspecialist provider managing VTE. We performed a systematic search of the literature (Appendix A), limiting the search to a publication date of 2017. Two reviewers screened the 2735 resulting abstracts to identify high-quality, clinically relevant publications related to VTE management. One-hundred and six full-text articles were considered for inclusion. The five authors used a modified Delphi method to reach consensus on inclusion of seven articles for in-depth appraisal, following predetermined criteria of clinical relevance to nonspecialist providers, potential for practice change, and strength of the evidence.

Prophylaxis of Postoperative Venous Thromboembolism Using Enoxaparin After Esophagectomy: A Prospective Observational Study of Effectiveness and Safety

BACKGROUND

The incidence of venous thromboembolism (VTE) after esophagectomy is higher than in other gastroenterological cancer surgery. Although the effectiveness and safety of thromboprophylaxis using enoxaparin have been established in orthopedic, abdominal, and pelvic surgeries, no studies regarding esophagectomy are available.

METHODS

A prospective observational study was conducted to elucidate the usefulness of enoxaparin for VTE prophylaxis after esophagectomy. The study enrolled 30 patients who underwent elective esophagectomy for esophageal cancer between April 2015 and October 2016. During postoperative days 2-11, the patients received a subcutaneous injection of enoxaparin (2000 IU) twice daily. The primary end point for the study was the incidence of postoperative VTE. In addition, the incidence of all enoxaparin treatment- and operation-related adverse events was investigated. The study identified VTE by VTE protocol-enhanced computed tomography, performed routinely during and after enoxaparin treatment.

RESULTS

One pulmonary embolism (PE) (3.3%) and two deep vein thromboses (DVTs) (6.7%) were observed during enoxaparin treatment. In addition, one PE (3.6%) and four DVTs (14.3%) (one patient experienced both) were observed after treatment. All VTEs were asymptomatic. Regarding enoxaparin-related adverse events, four minor bleeds occurred but did not require discontinuation of enoxaparin. The incidence of postoperative morbidity was acceptable. In blood tests related to coagulation, no significant differences were observed between patients with and without VTE.

CONCLUSIONS

The authors believe that thromboprophylaxis using enoxaparin is safe and can prevent VTE after esophagectomy. However, its effectiveness is limited to the period of treatment, so additional prophylaxis may be recommended.

Quality of life in cancer patients undergoing anticoagulant treatment with LMWH for venous thromboembolism: the QUAVITEC study on behalf of the Groupe Francophone Thrombose et Cancer (GFTC)

BACKGROUND

Clinical guidelines recommend at least 3-months low molecular weight heparin (LMWH) treatment for established venous thromboembolism (VTE) in cancer patients. However, no study has analyzed the impact of 3-6 months of LMWH therapy on quality-of-life (QoL) in cancer patients.

RESULTS

Among 400 cancer patients included at M0, 88.8% received long-term LMWH. Using a random-effects linear regression model with time as covariate, QoL scores in the MOS SF-36 (Global HRQoL, 1.3-fold per month [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.81-1.79], p < 0.0001) and EORTC QLQ-C30 (global health status/qol, 2.25-fold per month [95% CI 1.63-2.88]; p < 0.0001) questionnaires significantly improved over the 6-month study period in patients treated with LMWH, while VEINES-QOL scores did not change. In the MOS SF-36 and EORTC QLQ-C30, the following factors were associated with change in QoL: symptomatic VTE, cancer dissemination and histological type. Factors pertaining to reduced mobility were also identified as significant predictors of QoL outcomes, including being bedridden in the MOS SF-36 and ECOG score ≥ 2 in the EORTC QLQ-C30. Presence of acute infection and not undergoing anti-angiogenic therapy were additional factors associated with QoL improvement in the EORTC QLQ-C30.

METHODS

QUAVITEC, a prospective, longitudinal, multicenter study, recruited all consecutive eligible adult cancer patients with objectively confirmed VTE between February 2011 and 2012. Patients were asked to answer three QoL questionnaires at anticoagulant treatment initiation (M0) and at 3 (M3) and 6 (M6)-month follow-ups.

CONCLUSION

QUAVITEC is the first study to show that QoL was improved in cancer patients receiving long-term LMWH treatment for established VTE.

Evaluation of the ThroLy score for the prediction of venous thromboembolism in newly diagnosed patients treated for lymphoid malignancies in clinical practice

The utility in clinical practice of a recently developed and validated predictive model for venous thromboembolism (VTE) events in lymphoma patients, known as the thrombosis lymphoma (ThroLy) score, is unknown. We evaluated the association of ThroLy with VTE in patients treated for diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) or Hodgkin lymphoma (HL) undergoing ambulatory first-line chemotherapy. Retrospective analyses were performed on 428 patients (median age 50), 241 were newly diagnosed DLBCL, and 187 had HL. During initial chemotherapy, 64 (15%) patients developed VTE. According to the ThroLy, 322 (75.2%) patients were considered low risk, 88 (20.6%) patients had intermediate risk and 18 (4.2%) patients high risk for VTE development. Patients with DLBCL were more often in the high-risk ThroLy group and had more VTE events than HL. VTE occurred in; 38.9% (n = 7) high-risk patients, 29.5% (n = 26) intermediate risk, and 9.6% (n = 31) low risk according to the ThroLy score. However, in multivariate analysis, high ThroLy (OR 5.13; 95% CI: 1.83-14.36, P = .002), intermediate ThroLy (OR 3.96; 95% CI: 2.19-7.17, P < .001), and aggressive lymphoma-DLBCL (OR 1.91; 95% CI: 1.05-3.47, P = .034) were all significantly associated with development of VTE, 48% of the VTE events occurred in the low-risk ThroLy score group (the ROC AUC (95% CI) 0.40-0.70 and C statistic-0.55). In our study, the ThroLy score was not a suitably accurate model for predicting VTE events in patients at higher risk of VTE. Further research should be conducted to identify new biomarkers that will predict these events and to establish a new VTE risk assessment model.

Cancer patients' experiences of living with venous thromboembolism: A systematic review and qualitative thematic synthesis

BACKGROUND

Cancer-associated thrombosis is common. Recommended treatment is daily injected low-molecular-weight heparin for 6 months. Most studies focus on prophylaxis and treatment; few have explored the patients' experience.

AIMS

To identify and synthesise the available literature concerning patients' experience of cancer-associated thrombosis.

DESIGN

Systematic literature review and qualitative thematic synthesis.

DATA SOURCE

MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, PsycINFO (until 10/2016; limited to English) were searched. Eligible papers were qualitative studies of adult patients' experience of cancer-associated thrombosis. Two researchers screened titles/abstracts/papers against inclusion criteria with recourse to a third for disagreements. Critical Appraisal Skills Programme qualitative checklist tool was used for quality appraisal.

RESULTS

A total of 1397 articles were identified. Five qualitative studies (total n = 92; age range 32-84 years) met the inclusion criteria. Participants had various cancer types. Most had advanced disease and were receiving palliative care. Four major themes emerged from the data: knowledge deficit (patients and clinicians), effects of cancer-associated thrombosis (physical and psychological), effects of anticoagulation and coping strategies.

CONCLUSION

The cancer journey is difficult in itself, but thrombosis was an additional, frightening and unexpected burden. Although the association between cancer and thromboembolism is well-known, cancer patients are not routinely educated about the risk or warning symptoms/signs of thromboembolism which may otherwise be misattributed to the cancer by patient and clinician alike. This systematic review highlights the impact of cancer-associated thrombosis on the lives of cancer patients, and calls for education for patients and clinicians to be part of routine care and further work to address this patient priority.

[Direct oral anticoagulants (DOACS): A necessary focus]

In 2008, we decided to enter the era of direct oral anticoagulants (DOACS). Was that the right decision to make? The answer will depend on how well we meet the conditions of proper use. This means avoiding underdosing and overdosing as well as understanding how DOACS were validated so that our prescriptions fulfill their role in the management of thrombotic disease.

From First Line to Sequential Treatment in the Management of Metastatic Pancreatic Cancer

The current management of patients with metastatic pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (mPDAC) is based on systemic chemotherapy. The results of the MPACT and PRODIGE clinical trials have demonstrated that the combination of nab-paclitaxel and gemcitabine (GEM) as well as FOLFIRINOX regimen result in improvement in overall survival when compared to GEM alone. Treatment guidelines now recommend either one of these two regimens as first line treatment for fit patients with mPDAC. Because no head-to-head comparison between the two regimens exists, the selection of one versus the other is based on clinical criteria. The design and eligibility criteria of these two clinical trials are dissimilar, making the results of the MPACT trial more applicable to the general population of patients with mPDAC. In addition, the combination of nab-paclitaxel and GEM is better tolerated and easier to administer in clinical practice than FOLFIRINOX. Furthermore, when the regimens are studied in comparable patient populations the efficacy results are very similar. Nanoliposomal irinotecan plus 5FU has recently demonstrated a significant increase in efficacy rates after a GEM-based treatment. Importantly, treatment of mPDAC should now be considered as a continuum care for patients who are fit, with second and even third line treatments. Different sequential treatment algorithms are proposed based on available data. In retrospective studies, patients who were managed with GEM-based regimens followed by fluoropyrimidine-based regimens appear to have the most favorable outcome.

Length of Thromboprophylaxis in Patients Operated on for a High-Grade Glioma: A Retrospective Study

OBJECTIVE

High-grade gliomas are associated with venous thromboembolism (VTE). This retrospective study with a parallel cohort design investigated influence of continuing prophylactic anticoagulation after discharge on rate of VTE and intracranial hemorrhage (ICH) in patients operated on for high-grade glioma.

METHODS

Consecutive adult patients who underwent subtotal or gross total resection for high-grade glioma at a single institution were included. Multivariable logistic regression analysis was used to investigate the association between duration of thromboprophylaxis (dalteparin administered 21 days vs. 0-7 days) and occurrence of VTE and ICH within 21 or 90 days after surgery, corrected for known risk factors.

RESULTS

Of 301 included patients, 166 received short-term thromboprophylaxis, and 135 received prolonged thromboprophylaxis. In multivariable analysis, prolonged thromboprophylaxis was not significantly associated with occurrence of VTE within 21 days (3.0% vs. 1.2%; P = 0.24) or 90 days (8.9% vs. 4.8%; P = 0.09) after surgery; however, prolonged prophylaxis was associated with occurrence of ICH (5.9% vs. 0.6%; P = 0.03). Additionally, immobility (P = 0.03) and high body mass index (P = 0.02) were associated with occurrence of VTE.

CONCLUSIONS

Prophylactic anticoagulation for 21 days postoperatively was not associated with a decreased rate of VTE compared with thromboprophylaxis until discharge. ICH was more common with prolonged thromboprophylaxis. These results provide insufficient evidence to extend duration of prophylaxis beyond hospitalization. Large-scale randomized prospective studies are needed to clarify safety, efficacy, and optimal timing of postoperative thromboprophylaxis in patients with high-grade glioma.

Interventions for implementation of thromboprophylaxis in hospitalized patients at risk for venous thromboembolism

BACKGROUND

Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is a leading cause of morbidity and mortality in hospitalized patients. While numerous randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have shown that the appropriate use of thromboprophylaxis in hospitalized patients at risk for VTE is safe, effective, and cost-effective, thromboprophylaxis remains underused or inappropriately used. Our previous review suggested that system-wide interventions, such as education, alerts, and multifaceted interventions were more effective at improving the prescribing of thromboprophylaxis than relying on individual providers' behaviors. However, 47 of the 55 included studies in our previous review were observational in design. Thus, an update to our systematic review, focused on the higher level of evidence of RCTs only, was warranted.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of system-wide interventions designed to increase the implementation of thromboprophylaxis and decrease the incidence of VTE in hospitalized adult medical and surgical patients at risk for VTE, focusing on RCTs only.

SEARCH METHODS

Our research librarian conducted a systematic literature search of MEDLINE Ovid, and subsequently translated it to CENTRAL, PubMed, Embase Ovid, BIOSIS Previews Ovid, CINAHL, Web of Science, the Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects (DARE; in the Cochrane Library), NHS Economic Evaluation Database (EED; in the Cochrane Library), LILACS, and clinicaltrials.gov from inception to 7 January 2017. We also screened reference lists of relevant review articles. We identified 12,920 potentially relevant records.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included all types of RCTs, with random or quasi-random methods of allocation of interventions, which either randomized individuals (e.g. parallel group, cross-over, or factorial design RCTs), or groups of individuals (cluster RCTs (CRTs)), which aimed to increase the use of prophylaxis or appropriate prophylaxis, or decrease the occurrence of VTE in hospitalized adult patients. We excluded observational studies, studies in which the intervention was simply distribution of published guidelines, and studies whose interventions were not clearly described. Studies could be in any language.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We collected data on the following outcomes: the number of participants who received prophylaxis or appropriate prophylaxis (as defined by study authors), the occurrence of any VTE (symptomatic or asymptomatic), mortality, and safety outcomes, such as bleeding. We categorized the interventions into alerts (computer or human alerts), multifaceted interventions (combination of interventions that could include an alert component), educational interventions (e.g. grand rounds, courses), and preprinted orders (written predefined orders completed by the physician on paper or electronically). We meta-analyzed data across RCTs using a random-effects model. For CRTs, we pooled effect estimates (risk difference (RD) and risk ratio (RR), with 95% confidence interval (CI), adjusted for clustering, when possible. We pooled results if three or more trials were available for a particular intervention. We assessed the certainty of the evidence according to the GRADE approach.

MAIN RESULTS

From the 12,920 records identified by our search, we included 13 RCTs (N = 35,997 participants) in our qualitative analysis and 11 RCTs (N = 33,207 participants) in our meta-analyses.

PRIMARY OUTCOME

Alerts were associated with an increase in the proportion of participants who received prophylaxis (RD 21%, 95% CI 15% to 27%; three studies; 5057 participants; I² = 75%; low-certainty evidence). The substantial statistical heterogeneity may be in part explained by patient types, type of hospital, and type of alert. Subgroup analyses were not feasible due to the small number of studies included in the meta-analysis.Multifaceted interventions were associated with a small increase in the proportion of participants who received prophylaxis (cluster-adjusted RD 4%, 95% CI 2% to 6%; five studies; 9198 participants; I² = 0%; moderate-certainty evidence). Multifaceted interventions with an alert component were found to be more effective than multifaceted interventions that did not include an alert, although there were not enough studies to conduct a pooled analysis.

SECONDARY OUTCOMES

Alerts were associated with an increase in the proportion of participants who received appropriate prophylaxis (RD 16%, 95% CI 12% to 20%; three studies; 1820 participants; I² = 0; moderate-certainty evidence). Alerts were also associated with a reduction in the rate of symptomatic VTE at three months (RR 64%, 95% CI 47% to 86%; three studies; 5353 participants; I² = 15%; low-certainty evidence). Computer alerts were associated with a reduction in the rate of symptomatic VTE, although there were not enough studies to pool computer alerts and human alerts results separately.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

We reviewed RCTs that implemented a variety of system-wide strategies aimed at improving thromboprophylaxis in hospitalized patients. We found increased prescription of prophylaxis associated with alerts and multifaceted interventions, and increased prescription of appropriate prophylaxis associated with alerts. While multifaceted interventions were found to be less effective than alerts, a multifaceted intervention with an alert was more effective than one without an alert. Alerts, particularly computer alerts, were associated with a reduction in symptomatic VTE at three months, although there were not enough studies to pool computer alerts and human alerts results separately.Our analysis was underpowered to assess the effect on mortality and safety outcomes, such as bleeding.The incomplete reporting of relevant study design features did not allow complete assessment of the certainty of the evidence. However, the certainty of the evidence for improvement in outcomes was judged to be better than for our previous review (low- to moderate-certainty evidence, compared to very low-certainty evidence for most outcomes). The results of our updated review will help physicians, hospital administrators, and policy makers make practical decisions about adopting specific system-wide measures to improve prescription of thromboprophylaxis, and ultimately prevent VTE in hospitalized patients.

Management of venous thromboembolism in cancer patients according to guidelines after educative measures

Guidelines for venous thromboembolism treatment with curative anticoagulation in cancer patients are poorly respected. Yet, venous thromboembolism is the second leading cause of death in cancer patients, after cancer progression. The aim of this study was to re-evaluate the application of these guidelines after the implementation of educational measures for patients and caregivers, and also to assess the acceptability and tolerance of treatment by patients. On the one hand, a prospective observational study conducted in cancer patients with VTE allowed to assess the rate of compliance to guidelines. These phone calls with patients also provided information on their perception of their treatment. On the other hand, surveys were sent to healthcare professionals before and after educative actions took place (information meetings and information sheets distribution) in order to evaluate the evolution of their knowledge about guidelines. Among the 110 patients included in the study, 71.8% received treatment according to guidelines: choice of the anticoagulant (low-molecular-weight heparin or antivitamin K if contraindicated) and right period of treatment. Among the patients, 84.1% were willing to continue treatment beyond 6 months. Healthcare professionals' knowledge about guidelines has increased significantly (from 20% to 42%) following the information meetings and information sheets distribution. These educative actions seem to have a positive impact on knowledge of the recommendations and their implementation.

Mean platelet volume as a predictive marker for venous thromboembolism in patients treated for Hodgkin lymphoma

Mean platelet volume (MPV) is reported to be associated with the risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE) and mortality in patients with cancer. We sought to determine the association of MPV with symptomatic VTE occurrence in patients treated for newly diagnosed Hodgkin lymphoma (HL) and their outcomes. We retrospectively studied 167 consecutive adult patients treated with HL. During first-line treatment 12 (7.2%) patients developed VTE and 14 (8%) died within the observation period. The pre-chemotherapy values of MPV were significantly lower in VTE patients than those without (p=0.0343). Patients with MPV≤25^th percentile (6.8 fl) had an increased risk of VTE occurrence (p=0.0244). In multivariate analysis, MPV≤25^th percentile (OR 2.21; 95%CI 1.07-4.57, p=0.033), advanced stage (OR 2.08; 95%CI 1.06-4.07, p=0.033) and bulky disease (OR 2.23; 95%CI 1.16-4.31, p=0.016) were significant factors for developing VTE. Only the impact of MPV≤25^th percentile on VTE-free survival rates was found. VTE occurred in 43% (n=3) of the high-risk patients of the Thrombosis Lymphoma (ThroLy) score and in 17% (n=2) of the high-risk of the Khorana Risk Score (KRS). Neither the KRS nor the ThroLy score could identify patients at a high risk of VTE with a high degree of accuracy. We expanded the ThroLy score with the addition of the MPV≤25^th percentile to more accurately identify HL patients with a higher risk of VTE. Our study indicates that the pre-chemotherapy MPV value, while of no use as an overall prognosis predictor, may still represent a useful prognostic marker for a significant VTE risk especially when incorporated into VTE-risk assessment models.

The comparison between Caprini and Padua VTE risk assessment models for hospitalised cancer patients undergoing chemotherapy at the tertiary oncology department in Poland: is pharmacological thromboprophylaxis overused?

AIM OF THE STUDY

Thromboprophylaxis in cancer patients during hospitalization reduces the risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE).

MATERIAL AND METHODS

To assess the underuse and the overuse of thromboprophylaxis in cancer patients at a tertiary oncology department, we retrospectively analyzed 1983 consecutive hospitalizations of 498 cancer patients who received chemotherapy from October 2016 to May 2017. The Padua prediction score (≥ 4 points) and Caprini risk assessment (≥ 5 points) were used to identify patients at high risk of VTE.

RESULTS

The majority of individuals (n = 363, 72.9%) suffered from advanced lung cancer. We found that 419 (84.14%) patients received thromboprophylaxis with enoxaparin 40 mg qd,including 181 (43.2%) individuals using concomitant mechanical thromboprophylaxis. As few as 44 (8.8%) and 11 (2.2%) patients did not receive thromboprophylaxis despite high VTE risk based on the Caprini risk assessment and Padua prediction score, respectively (p < 0.001). The number of patients without high risk of VTE, who received pharmacological thromboprophylaxis, was higher when the Padua prediction score was used compared with the Caprini risk assessment (n = 391 [78.5%] vs. n = 210 [42.2%], respectively; p < 0.001). Three patients (0.6%) experienced vascular events during hospital stay, including one symptomatic deep vein thrombosis. No major bleeding was observed. Predictors of thromboprophylaxis overuse were as follows: previous VTE and abnormal pulmonary function for both scales.

CONCLUSIONS

This study shows that thromboprophylaxis in cancer in patients undergoing chemotherapy is suboptimal in Poland in part due to the use of various VTE risk scores yielding discrepant results in everyday practice.

Evaluation of risk factors and assessment models for predicting venous thromboembolism in lung cancer patients

The aim of the study was to investigate the prognostic significance of selected risk assessment models (RAMs) for predicting venous thromboembolism (VTE) events in patients undergoing outpatient chemotherapy for lung cancer. We evaluated the following VTE-risk assessment tools: Khorana risk score (KRS), PROTECHT score, CONKO score and COMPASS-cancer-associated thrombosis score (COMPASS-CAT). Retrospective analyses were performed on 118 patients with lung cancer, 20 of whom developed VTE with a median of 2.5 months from diagnosis. Patients receiving gemcitabine-based regimen (25%), patients with a history of atrial fibrillation (AF) and patients with chronic kidney disease developed VTE more often than other patients. In the multivariate analysis, high COMPASS-CAT score (OR 8.73; 95% CI 1.01–75.22, P = 0.049), gemcitabine chemotherapy (OR 3.37; 95% CI 1.09–10.39, P = 0.035) and AF (OR 7.19; 95% CI 1.89–27.33, P = 0.004) were all significantly associated with VTE development. VTE occurred in; 13% (n = 2) of the KRS high-risk group, 17.7% (n = 11) of the PROTECHT high-risk group, 15% (n = 4) of the CONKO high-risk group and 23.8% (n = 20) of the COMPASS-CAT high-risk group (n = 84). Only the COMPASS-CAT score was able to identify 100% of patients who developed VTE, and best discriminated between patients with high and low risk of VTE development (C statistic 0.89). The ROC analysis indicated a cutoff value of 11 points (95% CI 0.821–0.962) for COMPASS-CAT for VTE development in patients with lung cancer. In conclusion, in our study of all the VTE–RAMs analyzed, the COMPASS-CAT model was the most accurate predictor of VTE development in patients with lung cancer.

Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Real-World Studies Evaluating Rivaroxaban for Cancer-Associated Venous Thrombosis

INTRODUCTION

While not designated as guideline-recommended first-line anticoagulation therapy, about one in five patients in the United States receive rivaroxaban for the treatment of cancer-associated venous thrombosis (CAT).

METHODS

A systematic review and meta-analysis were performed to evaluate the incidences of recurrent venous thromboembolism (VTE), major bleeding, and all-cause mortality in rivaroxaban patients treated for CAT in routine practice. Literature searches of MEDLINE and SCOPUS were performed through September 2017 to identify real-world studies of ≥ 20 patients evaluating the incidence of recurrent VTE, major bleeding, or all-cause mortality in CAT patients anticoagulated with rivaroxaban. Using a Hartung-Knapp random-effects model, the pooled incidence estimates and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated for each end point.

RESULTS

Six studies evaluating rivaroxaban for CAT were identified. Of these, three were prospective and three were retrospective. Study sample sizes ranged from 41 to 949 patients, and duration of follow-up ranged from 164 to 496 days. The most frequent active cancer sites reported in studies were gastrointestinal (range: 12.0-56.0%), genitourinary (range: 8.6-26.0%), and breast (range: 9.3-25.5%). The weighted average incidences of recurrent VTE, major bleeding, and all-cause mortality were 4.2% (95% CI = 2.6-6.6%; I² = 31%), 2.9% (95% CI = 1.6-5.0%; I² = 59%), and 16.1% (95% CI = 6.0-36.6%; I² = 96%).

CONCLUSIONS

This meta-analysis suggests that incidences of recurrent VTE and major bleeding among rivaroxaban-managed patients are not dissimilar to those seen in recent randomized trials of anticoagulation in CAT. The pooled incidence for mortality was lower than reported in many anticoagulation CAT trials. This may suggest that rivaroxaban is being used in CAT patients who have less severe cancer.

Bleeding Events in Thrombocytopenic Patients With Cancer Undergoing Acute Rehabilitation

Objectives:

To determine incidence of bleeding in thrombocytopenic patients with cancer undergoing acute inpatient rehabilitation.

Design:

This is an observational cross-sectional retrospective study.

Setting:

Acute inpatient academic rehabilitation facility.

Participants:

Adult patients admitted to acute inpatient rehabilitation with functional impairments secondary to cancer.

Methods:

Electronic records were reviewed for thrombocytopenic patients with cancer to determine platelet counts, bleeding events during rehabilitation, and anticoagulant medications prescribed.

Main outcomes measurements:

Type and number of bleeding events, severity of bleeding by World Health Organization criteria.

Results:

Of the 278 patients with cancer admitted to acute rehabilitation over a 27-month time frame, 119 had at least one platelet count <150 000/µL. In all, 37 (31.1%) had a history of a bleeding event prior to the rehabilitation admission and 34 (28.6%) had at least one bleeding complication during their stay. Most events (87.5%) were of low grade (Grade 1 and 2 World Health Organization criteria). There was no association between platelet counts <11 000 or counts 11 000 to 20 000/µL and the occurrence of bleeding ( P = .106 and P = .319, respectively). Although anticoagulants were common, there was no association found with a bleeding event and either anticoagulation status (receiving or not on such agents), specific anticoagulant or antiplatelet agents, or a combination.

Conclusions:

Bleeding events in patients with cancer with thrombocytopenia during acute rehabilitation stay are not uncommon but are typically mild in severity and not associated with the degree of thrombocytopenia. Patients taking anticoagulants when platelet levels rose did experience bleeding events, but not at a statistically greater rate than those not taking such medications.

[Cancer and venous thromboembolism recurrence: The keys for an optimal management]

Low-molecular-weight heparins (LMWH) are to date the standard for 3-to-6-month treatment of cancer-associated thrombosis (CAT) as they are consistently recommended by international clinical practice guidelines. Despite the high risk of VTE recurrence and death in patients with cancer and the favorable benefit-risk profile of LMWH demonstrated in randomized-control studies, the implementation of treatment guidelines remains insufficient in the clinical practice. A systematic review of observational studies, registries and surveys reveals that approximately only 50% of patients with CAT are treated according to practice guidelines while both physicians and patients may be accountable for this situation. Based on the few available published data, we have observed differences between guidelines and clinical practice and we have identified factors influencing patient's management with the perspective to improve adherence to clinical practice guidelines in patients with CAT. Improving the implementation of clinical practice guidelines requires a better knowledge of physician and patient-related factors that influence therapeutic decisions. A global approach of patients with CAT is warranted to optimize the therapeutic management of cancer-associated VTE.

Cancer diagnosis in patients with heart failure: epidemiology, clinical implications and gaps in knowledge

Cancer and heart failure (HF) are common medical conditions with a steadily rising prevalence in industrialized countries, particularly in the elderly, and they both potentially carry a poor prognosis. A new diagnosis of malignancy in subjects with pre-existing HF is not infrequent, and challenges HF specialists as well as oncologists with complex questions relating to both HF and cancer management. An increased incidence of cancer in patients with established HF has also been suggested. This review paper summarizes the epidemiology and the prognostic implications of cancer occurrence in HF, the impact of pre-existing HF on cancer treatment decisions and the impact of cancer on HF therapeutic options, while providing some practical suggestions regarding patient care and highlighting gaps in knowledge.

Physicians' decision about long-term thromboprophylaxis in cancer outpatients: CAT AXIS, a case vignette study on clinical practice in France

PURPOSE

Data on long-term venous thromboembolism prophylaxis in cancer outpatients remain scarce. In the absence of clear and consistent treatment guidelines, our objectives were to describe and better understand clinical practice and to identify factors influencing the use of thromboprophylaxis.

METHODS

CAT AXIS was a multicentred cross-sectional study based on the completion of physician-profile questionnaires and the assessment of 10 e-mailed credible clinical scenarios of lung, colon and breast cancers by each of participants using the case vignette-validated method.

RESULTS

A total of 224 physicians participated allowing the completion and the analysis of 2085 reviewed case vignettes corresponding to 765, 703 and 617 fictive clinical scenarios on lung, colon and breast cancers, respectively. The overall rate of thromboprophylaxis was 680/2085 (32.6%) among participants with a comparable proportion for the three types of cancer. Low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) was the most frequently used, by 92.7, 93.8 and 83.9% of participants for lung, colon and breast cancers, respectively; thromboprophylaxis duration of ≥ 3 months was used by 74.4% of participants. Multivariate analyses revealed that the Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group index, metastatic malignancy, chemotherapy and history of thrombosis were significantly associated with the therapeutic decision unlike Khorana score and anaemia.

CONCLUSION

In the absence of clear guidance, the use of thromboprophylaxis remains low and rather empiric even though the selection of LMWH by the majority of participants and treatment duration seems appropriate based on available data to date. Specific guidelines with corresponding awareness are required.

Management of cancer-associated venous thromboembolism - a case-based practical approach

In patients with solid tumours or haematological malignancies, venous thromboembolism (VTE) is a leading cause of death and significantly contributes to morbidity and healthcare resource utilization. Current practice guidelines recommend long-term anticoagulation with low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) as the treatment of choice for cancer-associated VTE, based on clinical trial data showing an overall improved safety and efficacy profile of LMWH compared to vitamin K antagonists. However, several open questions remain, e. g. with regard to the intensity and duration of LMWH therapy; moreover, recent real-world evidence indicates that adherence to parenteral anticoagulation with LMWH over the course of treatment is poor in clinical practice. In this regard, the direct oral factor Xa or thrombin inhibitors (DOACs) have emerged as potential alternatives in the management of patients with cancer-associated VTE, albeit findings from randomized controlled studies with a direct head-to-head comparison of DOACs with LMWH, the current standard of care, are still lacking. Based on the case of a lymphoma patient experiencing symptomatic pulmonary embolism during immunochemotherapy, this article aims at both highlighting the current state-of-the-art approach to cancer-associated VTE and pointing out some of the unresolved, controversial issues clinicians have to face when taking care of haematology and oncology patients with already established or with high risk of developing VTE. These issues include the management of patients with incidental pulmonary embolism or thrombocytopenia, the use of DOACs, and the initiation of pharmacological thromboprophylaxis in non-surgical cancer patients.

Overview of VTE treatment in cancer according to clinical guidelines

Evidence-based clinical practice guidelines are available to provide guidance to clinicians in managing patients living with cancer-associated venous thromboembolism (VTE). While most are developed using rigorous methods and grounded by systematic reviews of the literature, their recommendations do differ because of differences in their grading criteria and interpretation of the data. This can be confusing to practicing clinicians. Also, guidelines are often out of date and cannot keep pace with publications because of the lengthy processes and extensive resources required for completion. The most recent updates of major guidelines in the management of cancer-associated VTE were published in 2015-2016. They broadened the topics addressed in earlier versions but, similar to that in earlier documents, the quality of evidence remains weak in many important clinical scenarios, such as management of recurrent VTE, choice of anticoagulants for long-term and extended treatment, and duration of anticoagulant therapy. Consequently, many recommendations continue to reflect expert opinion and extrapolation from indirect data in non-cancer populations. This review summarizes and comments on the most recent guideline updates from the American College of Chest Physicians, the American Society of Clinical Oncology, the National Comprehensive Cancer Network, and the International Initiative on Thrombosis and Cancer. A new round of revisions is expected to incorporate the emerging data on the efficacy and safety of direct oral anticoagulants for the treatment of cancer-associated VTE.

Venous thromboembolism and intracranial hemorrhage after craniotomy for primary malignant brain tumors: a National Surgical Quality Improvement Program analysis

Venous thromboembolism (VTE), including deep venous thrombosis (DVT) and pulmonary embolism (PE), frequently complicates the postoperative course of primary malignant brain tumor patients. Thromboprophylactic anticoagulation is commonly used to prevent VTE at the risk of intracranial hemorrhage (ICH). We extracted all patients who underwent craniotomy for a primary malignant brain tumor from the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP) registry (2005-2015) to perform a time-to-event analysis and identify relevant predictors of DVT, PE, and ICH within 30 days after surgery. Among the 7376 identified patients, the complication rates were 2.6, 1.5, and 1.3% for DVT, PE, and ICH, respectively. VTE was the second-most common major complication and third-most common reason for readmission. ICH was the most common reason for reoperation. The increased risk of VTE extends beyond the period of hospitalization, especially for PE, whereas ICH occurred predominantly within the first days after surgery. Older age and higher BMI were overall predictors of VTE. Dependent functional status and longer operative times were predictive for VTE during hospitalization, but not for post-discharge events. Admission two or more days before surgery was predictive for DVT, but not for PE. Preoperative steroid usage and male gender were predictive for post-discharge DVT and PE, respectively. ICH was associated with various comorbidities and longer operative times. This multicenter study demonstrates distinct critical time periods for the development of thrombotic and hemorrhagic events after craniotomy. Furthermore, the VTE risk profile depends on the type of VTE (DVT vs. PE) and clinical setting (hospitalized vs. post-discharge patients).

ESC position paper on cardiovascular toxicity of cancer treatments: challenges and expectations

The recent position paper of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) on cardiovascular toxicity of cancer treatments has attracted considerable interest by healthcare professionals, since it is the first concrete help in the difficult task of monitoring and approaching cardiovascular side effects of anticancer treatments. The ESC expert opinion was not intended as a clinical practice guideline; however, it reports major cardiovascular complications grouped into nine categories, addressing current clinical strategies for prevention and mitigation. In this point of view, we discuss key challenges emerging from critical appraisal of the ESC position paper: (1) the wide spectrum of cardiovascular toxicities associated with oncological drugs, focusing on targeted agents, (2) managing strategies in patients with cardiac implantable devices, (3) the underappreciated (but emerging) immune-related cardiovascular toxicities of checkpoint inhibitors, which may also result in severe heart failure and fulminant myocarditis, (4) the evolving role of anticoagulation in oncology, and the evidence supporting (or not) the use of direct-acting oral anticoagulants in cancer-associated thrombosis.

Direct oral anticoagulants: now also for prevention and treatment of cancer-associated venous thromboembolism?

Data on specific studies in cancer patients using direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) for the prevention and treatment of venous thromboembolism (VTE) are still scarce. For preventing VTE with DOACs, current experience is still very limited, so definite conclusions cannot yet be drawn. However, DOACs have so far been compared with vitamin K antagonists (VKAs) in patients with acute VTE in 5 studies, and several hundreds of patients included in these studies had either active cancer, a history of cancer, or a new occurrence of cancer during the course of disease. Meta-analyses have revealed an at least similar efficacy and safety profile of DOACs compared with VKAs. A number of studies of cancer patients investigating primary prevention and treatment are underway, and some will be finalized soon. Nevertheless, we might need further trials, specifically on the prevention of VTE in patients who are at particularly high risk. This article also includes a personal opinion on the use of DOACs in cancer patients. In conclusion, the currently available data show that DOACs might be safe and efficacious in the treatment of VTE, however, this has yet to be proven in specifically designed trials in patients with cancer. With regard to prevention, thus far, even less data exist, and the outcomes of the ongoing studies have to be evaluated before DOACs may be used for primary prevention.

The role of direct oral anticoagulants in cancer-related venous thromboembolism: a perspective beyond the guidelines

Cancer-related venous thromboembolism (Wickham et al., Intern Med J 42(6):698-708, 2012) is an important source of morbidity and mortality in that population. The standard of care for the treatment of cancer-related venous thromboembolism (VTE) is a low molecular weight heparin (LMWH) for long periods of time. The favorable clinical trial results for efficacy and safety and availability of direct oral anticoagulants (DOAC) have remodeled the care and options for treatment of venous thromboembolism in the adult population. The data of cancer population-subgroup analysis of those studies have shown that DOAC are as effective and safe as conventional long-term oral anticoagulation with vitamin K antagonists (VKA). Additionally, non-controlled retrospective and prospective cohort data have been published describing efficacy and safety outcomes for the use of DOAC in cancer-related VTE. Altogether, the results from clinical studies have shown that direct oral anticoagulants may represent a treatment option for cancer-related VTE and an alternative to anticoagulation with VKA. Little is known about the patient-centered and system-based variables that determine the use of DOAC outside consensus guidelines, neither is known the impact of different anticoagulant modalities in adherence and quality of life in cancer patients. The objectives of this manuscript are to summarize the clinical trial-based and cohort data of cancer patients treated with DOAC for VTE and to highlight the aspects that may influence adherent to therapy, effectiveness, and safety outcomes in the treatment of cancer-related VTE.