Gemcitabine versus gemcitabine plus dalteparin thromboprophylaxis in pancreatic cancer

The incidence of venous thromboembolism by type of solid cancer worldwide: A systematic review

There is a well-established relationship between cancer and venous thromboembolism (VTE). Thrombosis in cancer is of major concern as it is a leading cause of mortality, impairs quality of life, and can adversely impact treatment protocols. Despite the role of thrombosis in cancer, no singular source consolidates data on VTE incidence by cancer type worldwide. This systematic review aims to report the incidence of VTE by type of solid cancer worldwide. The current analysis used three databases (MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Library) to identify relevant articles. All articles were written in English, assessed solid cancers in adults (≥18; males, females), and reported the incidence of VTE, or information that could be used to calculate incidence. After completing the search and removing duplicates, 3077 articles were assessed. All articles were screened by title and abstract, followed by a full-text review. A total of 124 articles were included in the final evaluation. The cumulative reported incidence of VTE across all types of solid cancer was 9.74 %. The highest reported incidence of VTE was in gastroesophageal cancer (15.43 %), whereas the lowest incidence was in prostate cancer (1.58 %). The two most reported cancers by country within our study cohort were colorectal (n = 23) and lung cancer (n = 23). The reported incidence of VTE in colorectal cancer was highest in Mexico (22.10 %), and lung cancer was highest in Canada (32.91 %). In conclusion, gathering data on global VTE rates in solid cancer identified high-risk cancers and highlighted under-investigated areas that require attention to reduce VTE occurrence in cancer patients.

Primary Prevention of Cancer-Associated Thrombosis: Current Perspectives

Over the past two decades, the incidence of cancer-associated thrombosis (CAT) has increased. It is nowadays a common and often serious complication among patients with cancer. Although medical thromboprophylaxis is recommended for most surgical and nonsurgical cancer patients, it has been infrequently used in ambulatory patients with cancer because of the burden of treatment and concerns about bleeding. However, various risk assessment scores are now available and randomized placebo-controlled trials have established the efficacy of low-molecular-weight heparin or the direct oral Xa inhibitors rivaroxaban and apixaban in ambulatory patients with cancer at high risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE). This review provides an overview of (1) primary thromboprophylaxis in the setting of hospitalized surgical and medical patients, (2) extended thromboprophylaxis after hospital discharge, (3) performance of risk assessment tools for CAT, and (4) primary thromboprophylaxis in ambulatory patients with cancer. The aim is to provide support to physicians in identifying ambulatory patients with cancer at high VTE risk who benefit most from medical thromboprophylaxis according to current recommendations from international guidelines.

Expanding the Role of Heparin Derivatives in Oncology: From Anticoagulation to Antitumor Activity

Current research demonstrates the expanding therapeutic potential of heparin derivatives in oncology, extending beyond traditional anticoagulation mechanisms. This systematic analysis examines the structural characteristics, molecular mechanisms, and therapeutic applications of heparin-based compounds in malignancy treatment. The essential antithrombin binding pentasaccharide sequence has enabled development of specialized molecular variants, particularly fractionated heparins and their non-anticoagulant counterparts. These agents exert antineoplastic effects via multiple pathways, particularly through modulation of heparanase enzymatic activity and specific protein-glycosaminoglycan interactions. Evidence from pivotal clinical trials (FRAGMATIC, MAGNOLIA, GASTRANOX) confirms efficacy in managing cancer-associated thrombosis while indicating potential enhancement of chemotherapeutic outcomes. The preparation methods utilize enzymatic cleavage reactions and selective chemical derivatization to generate structurally modified heparins exhibiting unique molecular characteristics and biological activities. Analysis of the glycosaminoglycan analog dociparstat sodium reveals significant activity in myeloid malignancies, mediated by specific interference with CXCL12/CXCR4 signaling cascades. Significant challenges remain in manufacturing scale-up, analytical validation, and long-term safety assessment. Future studies must address dose optimization, combination strategies, and controlled clinical trials to determine the full therapeutic potential of these compounds in clinical oncology.

Anticoagulation for the prevention of arterial thromboembolism in cancer patients by primary tumour site: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized trials

AIMS

The incidence of arterial thromboembolism (ATE) among ambulatory cancer patients varies by primary tumour site. However, it is unclear whether this alters the benefit-to-harm profile of prophylactic anticoagulation for ATE prevention. Therefore, we systematically evaluated the efficacy and safety of anticoagulants for ATE prevention among ambulatory cancer patients according to the primary tumour site.

METHODS AND RESULTS

We conducted a systematic review using Medline, Embase, SCOPUS, and CENTRAL, and included randomized trials comparing prophylactic anticoagulation to no anticoagulation among ambulatory cancer patients who initiated tumour-directed systemic therapy. The incidence of symptomatic ATE (acute ischaemic stroke, acute myocardial infarction, or peripheral artery occlusion) and major bleeding, as well as risk differences (RDs) attributable to anticoagulation, were meta-analysed by primary tumour site using random-effects modelling. We included 10 randomized controlled trials with 9875 patients with follow-up ranging from 3.3 to 68 (median 6.6) months. While prophylactic anticoagulation did not reduce ATE risks overall (RD -0.49%; 95% CI -0.49% to 0.01%; I2 = 0%), it conferred a protective effect among pancreatic cancer patients (RD -3.2%; 95%CI -5.7% to -0.8%; I2 = 0%) without a detectable increase in major bleeding (RD -1.4%; 95% CI -4.6% to 1.8%; I2 = 0%). Prophylactic anticoagulation was not associated with ATE risk reduction in other tumour sites.

CONCLUSION

Based on available evidence, prophylactic anticoagulation did not reduce ATE risk among ambulatory cancer patients overall. However, we observed a lower incidence of ATE among pancreatic cancer patients randomized to receive anticoagulation. Prophylactic anticoagulant use to reduce ATEs in pancreatic cancer should be evaluated in future research.

Preventative and curative treatment of venous thromboembolic disease in cancer patients

Cancer-associated venous thromboembolism (CAT) is common in patients with cancer and associated with significant morbidity and mortality. The incidence of CAT continues to rise, complicating patient care and burdening healthcare systems. Patients with cancer experiencing VTE face poorer prognoses, making prevention and effective management imperative. This narrative review synthesizes evidence on thromboprophylaxis in ambulatory patients with cancer receiving systemic therapy and acute treatment strategies for CAT. Risk assessment models (e.g., Khorana score) aid in identifying high-risk patients who may benefit from thromboprophylaxis. Pharmacological thromboprophylaxis with low molecular weight heparins (LMWHs) and direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) has been shown to reduce the risk of CAT without significantly increasing the risk of bleeding complications. However, implementation of risk-based strategies remains limited in clinical practice. For acute CAT management, LMWHs have been the standard of care, but DOACs are increasingly favored due to their convenience and efficacy. However, challenges persist, including bleeding risks and drug interactions. Emerging therapies targeting Factor XI inhibitors present promising alternatives, potentially addressing current limitations in anticoagulation management for CAT.

SEOM clinical guidelines on venous thromboembolism (VTE) and cancer (2023)

The Spanish Society of Medical Oncology (SEOM) last published clinical guidelines on venous thromboembolism (VTE) and cancer in 2019, with a partial update in 2020. In this new update to the guidelines, SEOM seeks to incorporate recent evidence, based on a critical review of the literature, to provide practical current recommendations for the prophylactic and therapeutic management of VTE in patients with cancer. Special clinical situations whose management and/or choice of currently recommended therapeutic options (low-molecular-weight heparins [LMWHs] or direct-acting oral anticoagulants [DOACs]) is controversial are included.

Venous thromboembolism in patients with pancreatic adenocarcinoma: Disease burden and initiation of ambulatory thromboprophylaxis

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES

Ambulatory thromboprophylaxis (AT) in patients with pancreatic adenocarcinoma (PAC) reduces venous thromboembolism (VTE) risk and is recommended for patients receiving systemic chemotherapy. We evaluated VTE rates, severity, timing, and risk factors in PAC patients as well as AT rates and initiation times.

METHODS

Patients diagnosed with PAC were included. Data collected included patient demographics, medical history, PAC diagnosis, development of VTE, AT, and bleeding episodes. VTE was defined as a DVT or a PE. Patients were classified as receiving AT for VTE prevention if they received a prescription for outpatient anticoagulation.

RESULTS

The cohort included 243 PAC patients. VTE occurred in 24 %. Overall, 52 % developing VTE were hospitalized and 5 % died as a result of the VTE. Of those who developed VTE 50 % were diagnosed within the first 2 months of PAC diagnosis. Univariate predictors of elevated VTE risk included an elevated Onkotev score, metastasis at diagnosis, male gender and not receiving AT. Multivariate predictors of elevated VTE risk included male gender (P = 0.014) and not receiving AT (P = 0.001). Overall, 30 % of patients received AT. The median time from diagnosis to initiation of AT was 43 days. Major bleeding occurred in 5.8 %. Patients receiving AT were not at a significantly increased risk of major bleeding (p = 0.5). Patients with intestinal tumor invasion were at significantly increased risk of major bleeding (P = 0.021).

CONCLUSION

VTE risk is significant and morbid in PAC patients. AT rates are low, and initiation is often delayed. Therapeutic endoscopists diagnosing PAC may be helpful in AT initiation.

Incidence, risk factors and the prognostic role of thromboembolic events (TEEs) amongst patients with metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma (PAAD): a retrospective, single-center analysis

Background

Thromboembolic events (TEEs) are frequent among patients with pancreatic adenocarcinoma (PAAD). We set out to estimate the incidence and establish predictive risk factors for TEE and estimate the impact of TEEs on the overall survival (OS) of patients with metastatic PAAD.

Methods

This is a retrospective, single-center study. We included patients with a pathologically confirmed diagnosis of PAAD with distant metastases treated at AC Camargo Cancer Center from 2016 to 2021. We used the competitive risk survival models to estimate the cumulative incidence of TEE. Risk factors for the development of TEEs were evaluated using the competitive risk and logistic regression models. The impact of TEEs on OS was assessed using both landmark and time-dependent covariate Cox survival analyses.

Results

The study population consists of 199 patients. The cumulative incidence of TEEs in 1, 6 and 24 months were 10.1%, 19.3% and 30.2%, respectively. Log10(CA 19-9) was the only factor independently associated with increased risk of TEEs in the logistic regression (Odds ratio = 1.03; 95% confidence interval (95%CI), 1.00-1.06; p = 0.030) and competitive risk survival (Subdistribution hazard ratio = 1.14; 95%CI, 1.02-1.27; p = 0.019) models. In the landmark analysis, early TEEs (within 1 month of diagnosis) were not associated with inferior OS. In the time-dependent covariate Cox proportional hazard model, TEEs were not found to be statistically associated with inferior OS, although there was a trend towards it (Hazard ratio = 1.59; 95%CI, 0.99-2.54; p = 0.051).

Conclusion

TEEs occur in a large fraction of patients with metastatic PAAD. Statistical models with higher predictive performance are currently needed. For the time being, consideration for prophylactic anticoagulation should be done on an individual basis.

Cancer-associated venous thrombosis in adults (second edition): A British Society for Haematology Guideline

A shared decision on the most appropriate agent for the treatment of cancer-associated thrombosis should consider the following factors, which should be reassessed as patients continue along their cancer care pathway: risk of bleeding; tumour site; suitability of oral medications; potential for drug-drug interactions; and patient preference and values regarding choice of drug. Continuing anticoagulation beyond 6 months in patients with cancer-associated venous thromboembolism and active cancer is recommended.

Primary thromboprophylaxis in cancer outpatients - real-world evidence

INTRODUCTION

Cancer-associated thrombosis (CAT) is a significant concern among patients with malignant diseases, leading to increased mortality. While current guidelines recommend primary thromboprophylaxis for venous thromboembolism (VTE) in medium-to-high-risk outpatients, this practice remains controversial. A better understanding of primary thromboprophylaxis is crucial, yet there is a lack of Real-World Evidence (RWE) in Portugal.

AIMS

This RWE study aimed to elucidate primary thromboprophylaxis practices among cancer outpatients in Portugal.

METHODS

A five-year observational multicentric study in eight Portuguese health institutions enrolled 124 adult cancer outpatients under primary thromboprophylaxis for VTE. The endpoints were CAT, bleeding, cancer progression and death.

RESULTS

High thrombotic risk tumours were prevalent, with 57% (71) of the patients presenting with pancreatic and gastric cancers. Regarding primary thromboprophylaxis, 55% (68) received Low-Molecular-Weight Heparin (LMWH). VTE was presented in 11% (14) of the patients and major bleeding in 2% (2). Vascular compression, elevated D-dimer and previous VTE were significantly associated with VTE occurrence under primary thromboprophylaxis. The Onkotev model was shown to be the best risk assessment model (RAM) in this population (p = 0.007). CAT patients exhibited a lower progression-free survival than non-CAT patients (p = 0.021), while thrombosis did not influence overall survival (p = 0.542).

CONCLUSION

Primary thromboprophylaxis in medium-to-high-risk cancer outpatients is a safe and effective practice in real-world settings. This study is the first Portuguese RWE on primary thromboprophylaxis, highlighting evidence for improving prophylactic strategies in this population.

Pancreatic Cancer and Venous Thromboembolism

Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) accounts for more than 90% of all pancreatic cancers and is the most fatal of all cancers. The treatment response from combination chemotherapies is far from satisfactory and surgery remains the mainstay of curative strategies. These challenges warrant identifying effective treatments for combating this deadly cancer. PDAC tumor progression is associated with the robust activation of the coagulation system. Notably, cancer-associated thrombosis (CAT) is a significant risk factor in PDAC. CAT is a concept whereby cancer cells promote thromboembolism, primarily venous thromboembolism (VTE). Of all cancer types, PDAC is associated with the highest risk of developing VTE. Hypoxia in a PDAC tumor microenvironment also elevates thrombotic risk. Direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) or low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) are used only as thromboprophylaxis in PDAC. However, a precision medicine approach is recommended to determine the precise dose and duration of thromboprophylaxis in clinical setting.

Cellular Components Contributing to the Development of Venous Thrombosis in Patients with Pancreatic Cancer

Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) is an aggressive type of cancer and has a poor prognosis. Patients with PDAC are at high risk of developing thromboembolic events, which is a leading cause of morbidity and mortality following cancer progression. Plasma-derived coagulation is the most studied process in cancer-associated thrombosis. Other blood components, such as platelets, red blood cells, and white blood cells, have been gaining less attention. This narrative review addresses the literature on the role of cellular components in the development of venous thromboembolism (VTE) in patients with PDAC. Blood cells seem to play an important role in the development of VTE. Altered blood cell counts, i.e., leukocytosis, thrombocytosis, and anemia, have been found to associate with VTE risk. Tumor-related activation of leukocytes leads to the release of tissue factor-expressing microvesicles and the formation of neutrophil extracellular traps, initiating coagulation and forming a scaffold for thrombi. Tissue factor-expressing microvesicles are also thought to be released by PDAC cells. PDAC cells have been shown to stimulate platelet activation and aggregation, proposedly via the secretion of podoplanin and mucins. Hypofibrinolysis, partially explained by increased plasminogen activator inhibitor-1 activity, is observed in PDAC. In short, PDAC-associated hypercoagulability is a complex and multifactorial process. A better understanding of cellular contributions to hypercoagulability might lead to the improvement of diagnostic tests to identify PDAC patients at highest risk of VTE.

Challenging anticoagulation therapy for multiple primary malignant tumors combined with thrombosis: A case report and review of literature

BACKGROUND

Venous thromboembolism significantly contributes to patient deterioration and mortality. Management of its etiology and anticoagulation treatment is intricate, necessitating a comprehensive consideration of various factors, including the bleeding risk, dosage, specific anticoagulant medications, and duration of therapy. Herein, a case of lower extremity thrombosis with multiple primary malignant tumors and high risk of bleeding was reviewed to summarize the shortcomings of treatment and prudent anticoagulation experience.

CASE SUMMARY

An 83-year-old female patient was admitted to the hospital due to a 2-wk history of left lower extremity edema that had worsened over 2 d. Considering her medical history and relevant post-admission investigations, it was determined that the development of left lower extremity venous thrombosis and pulmonary embolism in this case could be attributed to a combination of factors, including multiple primary malignant tumors, iliac venous compression syndrome, previous novel coronavirus infection, and inadequate treatment for prior thrombotic events. However, the selection of appropriate anticoagulant medications, determination of optimal drug dosages, and establishment of an appropriate duration of anticoagulation therapy were important because of concurrent thrombocytopenia, decreased quantitative fibrinogen levels, and renal insufficiency.

CONCLUSION

Anticoagulant prophylaxis should be promptly initiated in cases of high-risk thrombosis. Individualized anticoagulation therapy is required for complex thrombosis.

Venous Thromboembolism Prophylaxis in Inflammatory Bowel Disease Inpatients: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

INTRODUCTION

Inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) patients are three times more likely to develop venous thromboembolism (VTE), and guidelines recommend prophylaxis during all hospitalizations. In this systematic review, we sought to assess for the benefits and risks of VTE prophylaxis in hospitalized IBD patients.

METHODS

We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis. We searched MEDLINE and others up to 2/2022, for studies on IBD inpatients treated with prophylactic anticoagulation during hospitalization, compared to no prophylaxis. Primary efficacy and safety outcomes were any VTE and major bleeding, respectively. Results were pooled using random-effects models, calculating odds ratios (OR), and 95% confidence intervals (CI). The ROBINS-I tool was used to assess bias.

RESULTS

We extracted data from 18 observational studies and 2 randomized-trial subgroups. The studies were highly variable regarding the included populations, interventions, and outcome definitions. Meta-analysis of all studies showed a nonsignificant effect of prophylaxis on VTEs (OR: 0.97 [95% CI: 0.49-1.95]). An analysis of eight lower-risk-of-bias studies showed a significant reduction in VTEs (OR: 0.27 [95% CI: 0.13-0.55], number needed to treat (NNT) 34.8 [95% CI: 26.8-49.8]). A significant protective effect persisted in several subgroups. Major bleeding was reported in three studies and showed a significant increase with prophylaxis (OR: 2.02 [95% CI: 1.11-3.67], number needed to harm (NNH) 113.6 [95% CI: 40.7-very-large-number]).

CONCLUSION

In studies with lower-risk-of-bias, a significant reduction in VTEs was shown in patients treated with VTE prophylaxis (NNT = 35), which should be carefully considered against an increased major-bleeding risk (NNH = 114). However, current data are limited and randomized trials dedicated to IBD inpatients would aid in understating whether universal prophylaxis should be recommended.

Cancer-associated thrombosis: What about microRNAs targeting the tissue factor coagulation pathway?

Cancer patients are often diagnosed with venous thromboembolism (VTE), a cardiovascular disease that substantially decreases their quality of life and survival rate. Haemostasis in these patients is deregulated, which is reflected in the common presentation of a blood hypercoagulation state. Despite the inconsistent results, existing evidence suggests that the expression of microRNAs (miRNAs) is deregulated in the context of venous thrombogenesis in the general population. However, few miRNAs are known to be linked to cancer-associated VTE due to the lack of studies with oncological patients. Parallelly, coagulation factor III, also known as tissue factor (TF), tissue factor pathway inhibitor 1 (TFPI1) and tissue factor pathway inhibitor 2 (TFPI2) have been proposed to have a central role in cancer-associated VTE and tumour progression. Yet, contrary to what was expected, the role of miRNAs targeting the TF coagulation pathway (or extrinsic coagulation pathway) is poorly explored in cancer-induced thrombogenesis. In this review, in addition to miRNAs implicated in VTE, TF and TFPI1/2-targeting miRNAs were revised. Future studies should clarify the implications of these non-coding RNAs in tumour coagulome.

Ambulatory cancer patients: who should definitely receive antithrombotic prophylaxis and who should never receive

Up to 15-20% of cancer patients experience one or more episodes of venous thromboembolism during cancer disease. Approximately 80% of all cancer-associated venous thromboembolic events occur in non-hospitalized patients. Routine thromboprophylaxis for outpatients with cancer who start new anticancer treatment is currently not recommended by the international guidelines due to the high heterogeneity of these patients in terms of VTE or bleeding risks, the difficulties in selecting patients at high risk, and the uncertainty of duration of prophylaxis. Although the international guidelines endorsed the Khorana score for estimating the thrombotic risk in ambulatory cancer patients, the discriminatory performance of this score is not completely convincing and varies according to the cancer type. Consequently, a minority of ambulatory patients with cancer receive an accurate screening for primary prophylaxis of VTE. The aim of this review is to provide support to physicians in identifying those ambulatory patients with cancer for whom thromboprophylaxis should be prescribed and those that should not be candidate to thromboprophylaxis. In absence of high bleeding risk, primary thromboprophylaxis should be recommended in patients with pancreatic cancer and, probably, in patients with lung cancer harboring ALK/ROS1 translocations. Patients with upper gastrointestinal cancers are at high risk of VTE, but a careful assessment of bleeding risk should be made before deciding on antithrombotic prophylaxis. Primary prevention of VTE is not recommended in cancer patients at increased risk of bleeding as patients with brain cancer, with moderate-to-severe thrombocytopenia or severe renal impairment.

Anticoagulation for the Prevention of Arterial Thrombosis in Ambulatory Cancer Patients: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Background

The risk of arterial thrombotic events (ATEs) is high among patients on systemic anticancer therapies. Despite the efficacy of anticoagulants in the prevention of cancer-associated venous thromboembolism, it is unknown whether anticoagulation is effective to prevent ATEs.

Objectives

This study sought to examine the efficacy and safety of anticoagulants in ATE prevention among ambulatory cancer patients.

Methods

We performed a systematic review using Medline, Embase, Scopus, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) from inception to May 21, 2022, and included studies comparing oral or parenteral anticoagulation with no anticoagulation among ambulatory patients receiving systemic anticancer therapy with no other indication for anticoagulation. The primary outcome was ATE (myocardial infarction, ischemic stroke, intra-abdominal arterial embolism, or peripheral artery occlusion). The secondary outcomes were major and nonmajor bleeding and all-cause mortality.

Results

Fourteen randomized trials involving low-molecular-weight heparins, direct oral anticoagulants, and warfarin were included. ATEs were captured as coefficacy endpoints or adverse events. Anticoagulant use was not associated with a reduction in ATEs compared with placebo or standard treatment (RR: 0.73, 95% CI: 0.50-1.04; P = 0.08; I2 = 0%). RRs of major and minor bleeding were 1.56 (95% CI: 1.12-2.17) and 2.25 (95% CI: 1.45-3.48) with anticoagulant use. In 13 trials that reported all-cause mortality, risk of death was not reduced with anticoagulants (RR: 0.99; 95% CI: 0.95-1.02; P = 0.38; I2 = 0%).

Conclusions

Anticoagulants did not reduce ATE risk among ambulatory patients on systemic anticancer therapy and were associated with increased bleeding. Based on the current data, anticoagulants have a limited role in ATE prevention in this population as a whole.

Venous Thromboembolism and Primary Thromboprophylaxis in Perioperative Pancreatic Cancer Care

Recent studies have shown that patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) treated with neoadjuvant chemo(radio)therapy followed by surgery have an improved outcome compared to patients treated with upfront surgery. Hence, patients with PDAC are more and more frequently treated with chemotherapy in the neoadjuvant setting. PDAC patients are at a high risk of developing venous thromboembolism (VTE), which is associated with decreased survival rates. As patients with PDAC were historically offered immediate surgical resection, data on VTE incidence and associated preoperative risk factors are scarce. Current guidelines recommend primary prophylactic anticoagulation in selected groups of patients with advanced PDAC. However, recommendations for patients with (borderline) resectable PDAC treated with chemotherapy in the neoadjuvant setting are lacking. Nevertheless, the prevention of complications is crucial to maintain the best possible condition for surgery. This narrative review summarizes current literature on VTE incidence, associated risk factors, risk assessment tools, and primary thromboprophylaxis in PDAC patients treated with neoadjuvant chemo(radio)therapy.

Rate of prophylactic anti-Xa achievement and impact on venous thromboembolism following oncologic hepato-pancreatico-biliary surgery: A prospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

Hepato-pancreatico-biliary (HPB) patients experience competing risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE) and bleeding. We sought to evaluate the effect of anti-Xa levels on VTE and bleeding, and to characterize factors associated with subprophylaxis.

METHODS

This prospective cohort study evaluated adult HPB surgical patients; cohorts were described by anti-Xa levels as subprophylactic (<0.2 IU/mL), prophylactic (0.2-0.5 IU/mL), and supraprophylactic (>0.5 IU/mL). Primary outcome evaluated bleeding and VTE complications. Secondary outcomes evaluated factors associated with subprophylaxis.

RESULTS

We included 157 patients: 68 (43.6%) attained prophylactic anti-Xa and 89 (56.7%) were subprophylactic. Subprophylactic patients experienced more VTE compared to prophylactic patients (6.9% vs 0%; p = 0.028) without differences in bleeding complications (14.6% vs 5.9%; p = 0.081). Factors associated with subprophylactic anti-Xa included female sex (OR 2.90, p = 0.008), and Caprini score (OR 1.30, p = 0.035). Enoxaparin was protective against subprophylaxis compared to tinzaparin (OR 0.43, p = 0.029).

CONCLUSIONS

Many HPB patients have subprophylactic anti-Xa levels, placing them at risk of VTE. Enoxaparin may be preferential, however, studies evaluating optimized prophylaxis are needed.

Prevention of venous thromboembolism in patients with cancer

Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is a major cause of both morbidity and mortality in patients with cancer. Venous thromboembolism, which includes both deep vein thrombosis and pulmonary embolism, affects a sizable portion of patients with malignancy and can have potentially life threatening complications. Accurate assessment of risk as well as diagnosis and treatment of this process is paramount to preventing death in this high risk population. Various risk models predictive of venous thromboembolism in patients with cancer have been developed, and knowledge of these rubrics is essential for the treating oncologist. Subgroups of particular interest are inpatients receiving chemotherapy, postoperative patients after surgical debulking, and patients undergoing radiotherapy. Numerous newer drugs have become available for the prevention of venous thromboembolism in patients with cancer who are at high risk of developing the disease. These include the class of drugs called direct oral anticoagulants, (DOACs) which do not require the same monitoring that other modalities have previously required and are taken by mouth, preventing the discomfort associated with subcutaneous strategies. The appropriate risk stratification and intervention to prevent venous thromboembolism are vital to the treatment of patients with cancer.

A Clinical-Genetic Risk Score for Predicting Cancer-Associated Venous Thromboembolism: A Development and Validation Study Involving Two Independent Prospective Cohorts

PURPOSE

Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is a leading cause of death among patients with cancer. The Khorana score was developed for assessing the risk of VTE in outpatients with cancer receiving chemotherapy, but its accuracy in identifying patients at high risk has been questioned. The aim of this study was to develop and validate a clinical-genetic score that improves the assessment of VTE risk in oncology outpatients within 6 months of diagnosis.

METHODS

The new score was developed using the data of 364 outpatients belonging to the Spanish ONCOTHROMB 12-01 population. In this cohort, clinical data associated with the risk of VTE were collected at the time of diagnosis, including the Khorana score. These patients were also genotyped for the 51 genetic variants known to be associated with VTE. Multivariate logistic regression was performed to determine the weight of each genetic and clinical variable in relation to VTE risk, allowing a clinical-genetic risk score (the ONCOTHROMB score) to be developed. The Khorana and the ONCOTHROMB scores were then compared via the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC), calibration, and the number of patients needed to treat. The new score was then validated in a study of 263 patients in the Vienna Cancer and Thrombosis Study population.

RESULTS

Nine genetic variants, tumor site, TNM stage, and a body mass index of > 25 kg/m2 were found to be associated with VTE and were used to build the ONCOTHROMB score, which better predicted the overall risk of VTE than did the Khorana score (AUC, 0.781 v 0.580; P < .001). Similar AUC results were recorded in the validation study the Vienna Cancer and Thrombosis Study cohort involving patients with the same type of tumor (AUC for the ONCOTHROMB score v the Khorana score: 0.686 v 0.577; P < .001) and with all type of tumors (AUC for the ONCOTHROMB score v the Khorana score: 0.720 v 0.561; P < .0001).

CONCLUSION

The ONCOTHROMB score for VTE risk in outpatients with cancer, which takes into account both clinical and genetic variables, better identifies patients who might benefit from primary thromboprophylaxis than does the Khorana score.

Validation of the ONKOTEV Risk Prediction Model for Venous Thromboembolism in Outpatients With Cancer

IMPORTANCE

The assessment of the risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE) among outpatients with cancer represents an unsolved topic. Current international guidelines recommend primary prophylaxis for patients at intermediate to high risk of VTE, indicated by a Khorana score of 2 or more. A previous prospective study developed the ONKOTEV score, a 4-variable risk assessment model (RAM) consisting of a Khorana score of more than 2, metastatic disease, vascular or lymphatic compression, and previous VTE event.

OBJECTIVE

To validate the ONKOTEV score as a novel RAM to assess the risk of VTE among outpatients with cancer.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

ONKOTEV-2 is a noninterventional prognostic study conducted in 3 European centers located in Italy, Germany, and the United Kingdom among a prospective cohort of 425 ambulatory patients with a histologically confirmed diagnosis of a solid tumor who were receiving active treatments. The total study duration was 52 months, with an accrual period of 28 months (from May 1, 2015, to September 30, 2017) and an overall follow up-period of 24 months (data were censored September 30, 2019). Statistical analysis was performed in October 2019.

EXPOSURES

The ONKOTEV score was calculated for each patient at baseline by collecting clinical, laboratory, and imaging data from tests performed for routine practice. Each patient was then observed to detect any thromboembolic event throughout the study period.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

The primary outcome of the study was the incidence of VTE, including deep vein thrombosis and pulmonary embolism.

RESULTS

A total of 425 patients (242 women [56.9%]; median age, 61 years [range, 20-92 years]) were included in the validation cohort of the study. The cumulative incidences for the risk of developing VTE at 6 months were 2.6% (95% CI, 0.7%-6.9%), 9.1% (95% CI, 5.8%-13.2%), 32.3% (95% CI, 21.0%-44.1%), and 19.3% (95% CI, 2.5%-48.0%), respectively, among 425 patients with an ONKOTEV score of 0, 1, 2, and greater than 2 (P < .001). The time-dependent area under the curve at 3, 6, and 12 months was 70.1% (95% CI, 62.1%-78.7%), 72.9% (95% CI, 65.6%-79.1%), and 72.2% (95% CI, 65.2%-77.3%), respectively.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

This study suggests that, because the ONKOTEV score has been validated in this independent study population as a novel predictive RAM for cancer-associated thrombosis, it can be adopted into practice and into clinical interventional trials as a decision-making tool for primary prophylaxis.

Incidence, risk factors, and evolution of venous thromboembolic events in patients diagnosed with pancreatic carcinoma and treated with chemotherapy on an outpatient basis

BACKGROUND

Pancreatic carcinoma is one of the tumors associated with a higher risk for thromboembolic events, with incidence rates ranging from 5% to 41% in previous retrospective series.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We conducted a retrospective study in eleven Spanish hospitals that included 666 patients diagnosed with pancreatic carcinoma (any stage) between 2008 and 2011 and treated with chemotherapy. The main objective was to evaluate the incidence of venous thromboembolic events (VTE) in this population, as well as potential risk factors for thrombosis. The impact of VTE on mortality was also assessed.

RESULTS

With a median follow-up of 9.3 months, the incidence of VTE was 22.1%; 52% were diagnosed incidentally. Our study was unable to confirm the ability of the Khorana score to discriminate between patients in the intermediate or high risk category for thrombosis. The presence of VTE proved to be an independent prognostic factor associated with increased risk of death (HR 2.39, 95% CI 1.96-2.92). Symptomatic events correlated with higher mortality than asymptomatic events (HR 1.72; 95% CI, 1.21-2.45; p = 0.002), but incidental VTE, including visceral vein thrombosis (VVT), negatively affected survival compared to patients without VTE. Subjects who developed VTE within the first 3 months of diagnosis of pancreatic carcinoma had lower survival rates than those with VTE after 3 months (HR 1.92, 95% CI 1.30-2.84; p&lt;0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Pancreatic carcinoma is associated with a high incidence of VTE, which, when present, correlates with worse survival, even when thrombosis is incidental. Early onset VTE has a particularly negative impact.

Primary ambulatory thromboprophylaxis in patients with pancreatic cancer receiving chemotherapy: hope or hype?

Thrombosis is the second leading cause of death in cancer patients. Patients with pancreatic cancer (PC) have a very high risk of developing venous thromboembolism (VTE). Even though primary ambulatory thromboprophylaxis (PATP) could decrease this risk, there are uncertain issues with regard to the choice and dose of anticoagulants, duration of anticoagulant therapy, and patient selection criteria. In addition, the current practice guidelines on PATP in PC patients are equivocal. This review critically appraises the evidence on the use of PATP in PC patients receiving chemotherapy.

Retrospective Cohort Analysis of Aspirin Use and Venous Thromboembolism in Patients with Pancreatic Cancer and an Indwelling Central Venous Catheter

Background Patients with pancreatic cancer are at high risk of developing venous thromboembolism (VTE). It is unknown if aspirin reduces the risk of VTE in this setting.

Objectives We sought to determine whether there is an association between aspirin use and VTE risk in patients with pancreatic cancer receiving chemotherapy with a central venous catheter (CVC).

Patients/Methods We conducted a single-center, retrospective cohort study of adult patients diagnosed with pancreatic cancer and treated with chemotherapy using a CVC. Subjects were excluded if they were on anticoagulation at the time of CVC placement. The probability of VTE was analyzed using a time-to-event analysis framework for the development of VTE using the product-limit method of Kaplan and Meier (univariate) and adjusting for important confounding covariates using Cox proportional hazards regression (cause-specific hazard) and again using Fine and Gray regression (subdistributional hazard) with death prior to VTE considered a competing event.

Results The final analysis included 314 cases (125 with any aspirin use and 189 without). Patients with any aspirin use had fewer VTE events (34.4%) compared with those without aspirin use (42.3%; p = 0.021) by log-rank test and after adjustment for multiple covariates using a Cox proportional hazards model (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.60; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.40–0.92; p = 0.019). Using Fine and Gray regression to account for death as a competing event, the effect of aspirin remained in the direction of benefit, but was not statistically significant (HR = 0.70; 95% CI: 0.47–1.05, p = 0.083). Higher body mass index, active smoking, and metastatic stage of cancer were associated with VTE events in the Cox proportional hazards model. Rates of major bleeding or clinically relevant minor bleeding were similar between treatment groups.

Conclusions Aspirin may reduce the risk of VTE in patients with pancreatic cancer with a CVC. We did not observe a significant increase in the rates of major bleeding or clinically relevant nonmajor bleeding.

Thrombotic complications in patients with cancer: Advances in pathogenesis, prevention, and treatment-A report from ICTHIC 2021

Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is a common complication in cancer patients, resulting in deep vein thrombosis (DVT) or pulmonary embolism (PE), and is responsible for high morbidity and mortality. This article discusses evidence and future perspectives on pathogenesis and prevention and treatment of thrombotic complications in patients with cancer. In April 2021, international basic researchers and clinicians met for the virtual edition of the 10th International Conference on Thrombosis & Hemostasis Issues in Cancer. Pathogenic mechanisms, markers and scores for risk assessment, diagnosis and therapy issues, current prophylaxis recommendations, and special settings, such as palliative care, pediatrics, and COVID-19 patients were discussed. Emerging areas of interest in cancer associated VTE are the role of immunotherapy, platelet activation markers, genetic alterations and real-world systems-based approaches to prevention and treatment.

2022 international clinical practice guidelines for the treatment and prophylaxis of venous thromboembolism in patients with cancer, including patients with COVID-19

The International Initiative on Thrombosis and Cancer is an independent academic working group of experts aimed at establishing global consensus for the treatment and prophylaxis of cancer-associated thrombosis. The 2013, 2016, and 2019 International Initiative on Thrombosis and Cancer clinical practice guidelines have been made available through a free, web-based mobile phone application. The 2022 clinical practice guidelines, which are based on a literature review up to Jan 1, 2022, include guidance for patients with cancer and with COVID-19. Key recommendations (grade 1A or 1B) include: (1) low-molecular-weight heparins (LMWHs) for the initial (first 10 days) treatment and maintenance treatment of cancer-associated thrombosis; (2) direct oral anticoagulants for the initial treatment and maintenance treatment of cancer-associated thrombosis in patients who are not at high risk of gastrointestinal or genitourinary bleeding, in the absence of strong drug-drug interactions or of gastrointestinal absorption impairment; (3) LMWHs or direct oral anticoagulants for a minimum of 6 months to treat cancer-associated thrombosis; (4) extended prophylaxis (4 weeks) with LMWHs to prevent postoperative venous thromboembolism after major abdominopelvic surgery in patients not at high risk of bleeding; and (5) primary prophylaxis of venous thromboembolism with LMWHs or direct oral anticoagulants (rivaroxaban or apixaban) in ambulatory patients with locally advanced or metastatic pancreatic cancer who are treated with anticancer therapy and have a low risk of bleeding.

Consensus on prevention and treatment of cancer-associated thrombosis (CAT) in controversial clinical situations with low levels of evidence

BACKGROUND

Cancer patients suffer high risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE). Cancer-associated VTE (CAT) causes hospitalization, morbidity, delayed cancer treatment, and mortality; therefore, exceptional CAT prevention and management are imperative.

METHODS

This review offers practical recommendations and treatment algorithms for eight complex, clinically relevant situations posing great uncertainty regarding management and requiring an urgent decision: VTE prophylaxis in ambulatory cancer patients with pancreatic pancreas (1) or lung cancer with molecular alterations (2); optimal management of VTE during antineoplastic treatment with antiangiogenics (3) or chemotherapy (4); protracted VTE treatment, determinants; (5) drugs used (6), and optimal VTE management in situations of high bleeding risk (7) or recurrent VTE (8).

RESULTS

With the evidence available, primary thromboprophylaxis in patients with lung cancer harbouring ALK/ROS1 translocations or pancreatic cancer receiving ambulatory chemotherapy must be appraised. If antiangiogenic therapy can yield a clear benefit and the patient recovers from a grade 3 thrombotic event, it can be cautiously re-introduced in selected cases, provided that the person agrees to assume the risk after being duly informed. Anticoagulation maintenance beyond 6 months is recommended in individuals with metastatic tumours, on active treatment, or at high risk for recurrent VTE without bleeding risk. In such cases, LMWH and DOACs are safe, being mindful that the latter could entail a higher risk of bleeding; consequently, they should be used judiciously in more haemorrhagic tumours, such as gastrointestinal cancers. In cases of recurrent VTE, the presence of active cancer, infra-therapeutic dose, and anticoagulant treatment failure must be ruled out. In individuals with platelet counts of 25,000-50,000 and VTE liable to recur who need anticoagulation, full-dose LMWH and transfusion support can be contemplated to reach values of > 50,000. In CAT unlikely to recur, decreasing the LMWH dose by 25-50% is recommended. Renal impairment associated with thrombosis must be treated with LMWHs; there is no need to adjust the dose in patients with CrCl > 30; with CrCl = 15-30, dose adjustment is advised, and suspended when CrCl is < 15.

CONCLUSION

We provide useful advice for complex, clinically relevant situations that clinicians treating CAT must face devoid of any unequivocal, strong, evidence-based recommendations.

Incidence and Determinants of Chemotherapy Associated Thromboembolic Events among Ethiopian Patients Treated for Solid Malignancy: A Retrospective Cross-Sectional Study

Venous thromboembolism is a common problem in patients treated for cancer, although the reported incidence varies widely between studies. This was the first study in its kind in Ethiopia and aimed to assess the incidence and determinants of chemotherapy associated thromboembolic events among patients treated for solid malignancy. An institution-based retrospective cross-sectional study was conducted from 1st March to 1st June, 2019 at adult oncology center of Tikur Anbessa Specialized Hospital. Systematic random sampling technique was employed to recruit 423 study participants. Patients who have received at least a single cycle of any chemotherapy regimen were included in the study. Khorana risk assessment tool was used to predict chemotherapy associated thrombosis. Descriptive statistics were used to summarize the data while multivariable logistic regression was employed to explore associations among variables of interest. The median age of study participants was 43 years, which ranged from 14 to 83 years. Majority of the study participants were treated for breast cancer. Thromboembolic events encountered in 43(10.2%) of patients, from which the commonest one being deep venous thrombosis 36 (85.7%), followed by myocardial infarction 5(11.9%). In multivariable logistic regression, blood transfusion, a primary site of cancer with gastrointestinal malignancy and performance status showed statistically significant association towards the occurrences of thromboembolic events. The incidence of chemotherapy associated thromboembolic events among patients treated for solid malignancy was comparable to other studies. Hence, other prospective randomized trials are needed to see the importance of thrombo-prophylaxis in such high-risk patients.

Challenges and Opportunities Associated With Platelets in Pancreatic Cancer

Pancreatic cancer is one of the most common malignant tumors in the digestive system with a poor prognosis. Accordingly, better understanding of the molecular mechanisms and innovative therapies are warranted to improve the prognosis of this patient population. In addition to playing a crucial role in coagulation, platelets reportedly contribute to the growth, invasion and metastasis of various tumors, including pancreatic cancer. This narrative review brings together currently available evidence on the impact of platelets on pancreatic cancer, including the platelet-related molecular mechanisms of cancer promotion, pancreatic cancer fibrosis, immune evasion, drug resistance mechanisms, thrombosis, targeted platelet therapy, combined radiotherapy and chemotherapy treatment, platelet combined with nanotechnology treatment and potential applications of pancreatic cancer organoids. A refined understanding of the role of platelets in pancreatic cancer provides the foothold for identifying new therapeutic targets.

Do antiangiogenics promote clot instability? Data from the TESEO prospective registry and Caravaggio clinical trial

Background  Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is a common complication in cancer patients. Much of its morbidity stems from the development of fatal pulmonary embolisms (PE). Little is known about the factors involved in clot stability, with angiogenesis possibly being implicated.

Methods  The database is from the TESEO prospective registry that recruits cancer patients with VTE from 41 Spanish hospitals. Independent validation was conducted in a cohort from the Caravaggio trial. The objective is to evaluate the association between exposure to antiangiogenic therapies and the PE/VTE proportion in oncological patients.

Results  In total, 1,536 subjects were evaluated; 58.4% ( n  = 894) had a PE and 7% ( n  = 108) received antiangiogenic therapy (bevacizumab in 75%). The PE/VTE proportion among antiangiogenic-treated individuals was 77/108 (71.3%) versus 817/1,428 (57.2%) among those receiving other alternative therapies ( p  = 0.004). The effect of the antiangiogenics on the PE/VTE proportion held up across all subgroups except for active smokers or those with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Exposure to antiangiogenics was associated with increased PEs, odds ratio (OR) 2.27 (95% CI, 1.42–3.63). In the Caravaggio trial, PE was present in 67% of the individuals treated with antiangiogenics, 50% of those who received chemotherapy without antiangiogenic treatment, and 60% without active therapy ( p  = 0.0016).

Conclusion  Antiangiogenics are associated with increased proportion of PE in oncological patients with VTE. If an effect on clot stability is confirmed, the concept of thrombotic risk in cancer patients should be reconsidered in qualitative terms.

Prediction models for venous thromboembolism in ambulatory adults with pancreatic and gastro-oesophageal cancer: protocol for systematic review and meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is a common complication of cancer. Pancreatic and gastro-oesophageal cancers are among malignancies that have the highest rates of VTE occurrence. VTE can increase cancer-related morbidity and mortality and disrupt cancer treatment. The risk of VTE can be managed with measures such as using anticoagulant drugs, although the risk of bleeding may be an impeding factor. Therefore, a VTE risk assessment should be performed before the start of anticoagulation in individual patients. Several prediction models have been published, but most of them have low sensitivity and unknown clinical applicability in pancreatic or gastro-oesphageal cancers. We intend to do this systematic review to identify all applicable published predictive models and compare their performance in those types of cancer.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

All studies in which a prediction model for VTE have been developed, validated or compared using adult ambulatory patients with pancreatic or gastro-oesphageal cancers will be identified and the reported predictive performance indicators will be extracted. Full text peer-reviewed journal articles of observational or experimental studies published in English will be included. Five databases (Medline, EMBASE, Web of Science, CINAHL and Cochrane) will be searched. Two reviewers will independently undertake each of the phases of screening, data extraction and risk of bias assessment. The quality of the selected studies will be assessed using Prediction model Risk Of Bias Assessment Tool. The results from the review will be used for a narrative information synthesis, and if the same models have been validated in multiple studies, meta-analyses will be done to pool the predictive performance measures.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

There is no need for ethics approval because the review will use previously peer-reviewed articles. The results will be published.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42021253887.

Early detection of venous thromboembolism after the initiation of chemotherapy predicts a poor prognosis in patients with unresectable metastatic pancreatic cancer who underwent first-line chemotherapy with gemcitabine plus nab-paclitaxel

BACKGROUND

Pancreatic cancer is associated with a high thromboembolism risk. We investigated the significance of early venous thromboembolism (VTE) detection in patients with unresectable metastatic pancreatic cancer (UR-MPC) who received first-line chemotherapy with gemcitabine plus nab-paclitaxel (GnP).

METHODS

This single-center retrospective study enrolled 174 patients with UR-MPC who underwent GnP as a first-line chemotherapy from April 2017 to March 2020. The early detection of VTE (deep venous thrombosis and pulmonary thromboembolism) was defined as diagnosis by the first follow-up CT scan after the initiation of chemotherapy. We compared the patients with early detection of VTE (VTE (+) group) with the others (VTE (-) group). We examined overall survival (OS), progress free survival (PFS), severe adverse events, and predictors associated with OS using the Cox proportional hazards model.

RESULTS

Early detection of VTE was observed in 17 patients (9.8%). Thirteen patients were diagnosed with VTE at treatment initiation, and four patients were diagnosed after treatment initiation. The median time to diagnosis after treatment initiation was 55 days (range: 31-71 days). Only 3 patients were symptomatic. The VTE (+) group exhibited worse OS and PFS than the VTE (-) group (OS: 259 days vs. 400 days, P < 0.001; PFS: 120 days vs. 162 days, P = 0.008). The frequency of grade 3-4 adverse events was not significantly different. Although the performance status was poorer in the VTE (+) group, VTE was identified as a statistically significant independent predictor for OS in multivariate analyses (HR, 1.87; 95% CI, 1.02-3.44; P = 0.041).

CONCLUSIONS

Early VTE detection is a predictor of a poor prognosis in UR-MPC patients who receive GnP as first-line chemotherapy, suggesting that screening VTE for patients with UR-MPC is crucial, even if patients are asymptomatic.

Venous Thromboembolism In Cancer Patients: "From Evidence to Care"

This article seeks to review the current status of treatment and prevention of venous thromboembolic disease (VTE) in cancer patients after the addition of direct oral anticoagulants (DOAC) to the therapeutic arsenal available. The suitability of DOAC use in complex clinical situations, poorly represented in clinical trials, is controversial and difficult for care activity, making the recommendations in clinical practice guidelines the focus of special attention in this area. Recently, several randomized trials have compared low molecular weight heparin (LMWH) to DOAC for the management of CAT. Potential drug interactions with DOACs or the increased risk of bleeding in intraluminal tumors require special precautions, as do metastatic or primary brain disease and comorbid conditions, such as renal or liver failure, which are not suitably represented in pivotal studies. Furthermore, few data are available for situations involving elevated bleeding risk, with thrombocytopenia levels below the inclusion criterion of clinical trials, or recurrence during active anticoagulant therapy. Similarly, it is less clear that patients and physicians accept the presumption that oral DOAC administration is more convenient than subcutaneous LMWH, particularly when drug absorption may be compromised. The non-inclusion or under-representation of patients at higher risk for complications with anticoagulation in randomized clinical trials, makes their use complex in certain situations in health care. This paper provides a practical review of current clinical guideline recommendations regarding LMWH and/ or DOAC to treat and prevent CAT, as well as the most controversial clinical conditions for their use.

Incidence, timing and risk factors of venous thromboembolic events in patients with pancreatic cancer

INTRODUCTION

Pancreatic cancer is associated with a high risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE). However, comprehensive data on incidence, timing and relevant determinants of VTE in this particular population are scarce. Current study assesses incidence, timing and predictors of VTE in pancreatic cancer through different phases of disease.

METHODS

All pancreatic cancer patients treated in our tertiary referral center between 2013 through 2017 were studied. Occurrence of VTE was evaluated from diagnosis through end of follow-up or death. Relevant determinants of VTE were identified in logistic regression models. Hazard ratios were calculated to evaluate impact of VTE on overall survival.

RESULTS

In total, 361 patients were followed for a median period of 43 months; 64 were diagnosed with VTE (18%). Most were tumor related thrombosis (59%), incidental (75%) and occurred after anti-cancer treatment had been stopped (80%), only 1.6% occurred during remission phase. Stage IV pancreatic cancer was a predictor for VTE (hazard ratio (HR) 2.46, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.9-6.8). Biliary drainage (HR 0.52, 95%CI 0.28-0.98) and tumor resection (HR 0.45, 95%CI 0.45-1.83) were protective factors. VTE was not associated with worse survival (HR 1.3; 95% CI 0.97-1.74).

CONCLUSIONS

VTE in pancreatic cancer is disease-stage dependent, with 80% occurring in advanced phases of disease when patients no longer receive active treatment. We speculate that this is the main reason for the absence of a survival effect of VTE in our cohort. These practice-based findings should be taken into account when considering wide-spread introduction of primary thromboprophylaxis in patients with pancreatic cancer.

Primary Thromboprophylaxis in Patients with Malignancies: Daily Practice Recommendations by the Hemostasis Working Party of the German Society of Hematology and Medical Oncology (DGHO), the Society of Thrombosis and Hemostasis Research (GTH), and the Austrian Society of Hematology and Oncology (ÖGHO)

Patients with cancer, both hematologic and solid malignancies, are at increased risk for thrombosis and thromboembolism. In addition to general risk factors such as immobility and major surgery, shared by non-cancer patients, cancer patients are exposed to specific thrombotic risk factors. These include, among other factors, cancer-induced hypercoagulation, and chemotherapy-mediated endothelial dysfunction as well as tumor-cell-derived microparticles. After an episode of thrombosis in a cancer patient, secondary thromboprophylaxis to prevent recurrent thromboembolism has long been established and is typically continued as long as the cancer is active or actively treated. On the other hand, primary prophylaxis, even though firmly established in hospitalized cancer patients, has only recently been studied in ambulatory patients. This recent change is mostly due to the emergence of direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs). DOACs have a shorter half-life than vitamin K antagonists (VKA), and they overcome the need for parenteral application, the latter of which is associated with low-molecular-weight heparins (LMWH) and can be difficult for the patient to endure in the long term. Here, first, we discuss the clinical trials of primary thromboprophylaxis in the population of cancer patients in general, including the use of VKA, LMWH, and DOACs, and the potential drug interactions with pre-existing medications that need to be taken into account. Second, we focus on special situations in cancer patients where primary prophylactic anticoagulation should be considered, including myeloma, major surgery, indwelling catheters, or immobilization, concomitant diseases such as renal insufficiency, liver disease, or thrombophilia, as well as situations with a high bleeding risk, particularly thrombocytopenia, and specific drugs that may require primary thromboprophylaxis. We provide a novel algorithm intended to aid specialists but also family practitioners and nurses who care for cancer patients in the decision process of primary thromboprophylaxis in the individual patient.

The Impact of Thromboprophylaxis on the Survival of Patients with Advanced Pancreatic Cancer. The Pancreatic Cancer and Tinzaparin (PaCT) Study

Simple Summary

Pancreatic cancer (PaC) induces a prothrombotic and hypercoagulable state. Thrombosis occurs in 20% of PaC patients and is associated with worse prognosis and reduced progression-free survival (PFS). The aim of this retrospective observational study (PaCT) was to investigate the effect of thromboprophylaxis with an intermediate dose of tinzaparin on the PFS of patients treated with nab-paclitaxel and gemcitabine. Data obtained from 110 patients with active PaC administered prophylaxis with tinzaparin during the study resulted in median PFS of 7.9 months; data for the PFS of patients without simultaneous anticoagulation were obtained bibliographically from 14 studies, and after applying meta-analysis was 5.6 months. Patients receiving anticoagulation with tinzaparin had 39.5% higher PFS than patients without such thromboprophylaxis (p < 0.05). During follow-up, three (2.7%) thrombotic events and two (1.9%) clinically relevant non-major bleeding events occurred. Concluding, PFS in advanced PaC patients undergoing chemotherapy was positively impacted by thromboprophylaxis with intermediate dose tinzaparin.

Abstract

Pancreatic cancer (PaC) induces a prothrombotic and hypercoagulable state. The aim of this study was to investigate the effect of tinzaparin in combination with chemotherapy. The PaCT (pancreatic cancer and tinzaparin) study was a retrospective observational study that collected data regarding progression free survival (PFS) in advanced or metastatic PaC patients who received thromboprophylaxis with tinzaparin during chemotherapy with nab-paclitaxel (N) and gemcitabine (G). The primary end point was to compare, from already published data, the PFS of patients receiving thromboprophylaxis with tinzaparin with the PFS of patients receiving chemotherapy with N–G but no thromboprophylaxis. Secondary end points were efficacy and safety of anticoagulation. In total, 110 PaC patients, 93% with advanced or metastatic disease, treated with N–G and tinzaparin (10,291 ± 1176 Anti-Xa IU, OD, median duration 8.7, IQR: 5.6–11.9 months) were enrolled. Of these, 52% were males and; the median age was 68 (40–86 years). The tumor was located to in the pancreatic head at in 45% of the patients. The median PFS was 7.9 months (IQR: 5.0–11.8 months). Out of 14 similar studies (involving 2994 patients) identified via systematic search, it was determined that the weighted PFS of patients receiving N–G but no anticoagulation was 5.6 months. Therefore, patients receiving tinzaparin had 39.54% higher PFS than patients without thromboprophylaxis (p < 0.05). During the follow-up period of 18.3 ± 11.7 months, three (2.7%) thrombotic events were recorded while two clinically relevant non-major bleeding events occurred (1.9%). In conclusion, PFS in advanced PaC patients undergoing chemotherapy is positively impacted by anticoagulation. Thromboprophylaxis with tinzaparin in treatment dose is efficient and safe.

Venous and Arterial Thromboembolism in Patients With Cancer: JACC: CardioOncology State-of-the-Art Review

Venous thromboembolism (VTE), including deep vein thrombosis and pulmonary embolism, represents a major cause of morbidity and mortality in patients with cancer. Arterial thromboembolism, including myocardial infarction and stroke, is also prevalent. Risk differs in subgroups, with higher rates observed in specific cancers including pancreas, stomach, and multiple myeloma. Thromboprophylaxis is recommended for most patients with active cancer hospitalized for medical illnesses and after major cancer surgery. Outpatient thromboprophylaxis is not routinely recommended, but emerging data suggest that a high-risk population that benefits from pharmacological thromboprophylaxis can be identified using a validated risk tool. Direct oral anticoagulants are emerging as the preferred new option for the treatment of cancer-associated VTE, although low-molecular-weight heparin remains a standard for patients at high bleeding risk. Management of VTE beyond the first 6 months and challenging clinical situations including intracranial metastases and thrombocytopenia require careful management in balancing the benefits and risks of anticoagulation and remain major knowledge gaps in evidence.

Burden of venous thromboembolism in patients with pancreatic cancer

Pancreatic cancer (PC) is a devastating malignancy with fewer than 10% of patients being alive at 5 years after diagnosis. Venous thromboembolism (VTE) occurs in approximatively 20% of patients with PC, resulting in increased morbidity, mortality and significant health care costs. The management of VTE is particularly challenging in these frail patients. Adequate selection of the most appropriate anticoagulant for each individual patient according to the current international guidelines is warranted for overcoming treatment challenges. The International Initiative on Thrombosis and Cancer multi-language web-based mobile application (downloadable for free at www.itaccme.com) has been developed to help clinicians in decision making in the most complex situations. In this narrative review, we will discuss the contemporary epidemiology and burden of VTE in PC patients, the performances and limitations of current risk assessment models to predict the risk of VTE, as well as evidence from recent clinical trials for the primary prophylaxis and treatment of cancer-associated VTE that support up-dated clinical practice guidelines.

The Clinical Applicability of Primary Thromboprophylaxis in Ambulatory Patients With Pancreatic Cancer

ABSTRACT

Thromboembolism is a leading cause of death in ambulatory patients with cancer. Patients with pancreatic adenocarcinoma have a very high risk of developing venous thromboembolism, especially within the first 6 months of diagnosis. Although primary thromboprophylaxis could reduce this risk, there are unresolved questions concerning choice of agents for anticoagulation, duration of anticoagulation treatment, and criteria for patient selection. Furthermore, the current clinical guidelines on primary thromboprophylaxis in ambulatory patients with pancreatic cancer are ambiguous. This review seeks out to understand and critically appraise the evidence supporting the use of primary thromboprophylaxis in patients with pancreatic cancer and its clinical applicability.

American Society of Hematology 2021 guidelines for management of venous thromboembolism: prevention and treatment in patients with cancer

BACKGROUND

Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is a common complication among patients with cancer. Patients with cancer and VTE are at a markedly increased risk for morbidity and mortality.

OBJECTIVE

These evidence-based guidelines of the American Society of Hematology (ASH) are intended to support patients, clinicians, and other health care professionals in their decisions about the prevention and treatment of VTE in patients with cancer.

METHODS

ASH formed a multidisciplinary guideline panel balanced to minimize potential bias from conflicts of interest. The guideline development process was supported by updated or new systematic evidence reviews. The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) approach was used to assess evidence and make recommendations.

RESULTS

Recommendations address mechanical and pharmacological prophylaxis in hospitalized medical patients with cancer, those undergoing a surgical procedure, and ambulatory patients receiving cancer chemotherapy. The recommendations also address the use of anticoagulation for the initial, short-term, and long-term treatment of VTE in patients with cancer.

CONCLUSIONS

Strong recommendations include not using thromboprophylaxis in ambulatory patients receiving cancer chemotherapy at low risk of VTE and to use low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) for initial treatment of VTE in patients with cancer. Conditional recommendations include using thromboprophylaxis in hospitalized medical patients with cancer, LMWH or fondaparinux for surgical patients with cancer, LMWH or direct oral anticoagulants (DOAC) in ambulatory patients with cancer receiving systemic therapy at high risk of VTE and LMWH or DOAC for initial treatment of VTE, DOAC for the short-term treatment of VTE, and LMWH or DOAC for the long-term treatment of VTE in patients with cancer.

Discordant reporting of VTE in pancreatic cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis of thromboprophylaxis versus chemotherapeutic trials

BACKGROUND

Despite the frequency of venous thromboembolism (VTE) in pancreatic cancer, it is inconsistently reported as an adverse event in clinical trials. We hypothesized that reported rates of VTE in pancreatic cancer clinical trials are influenced by the objectives of the trial, with higher rates reported in thromboprophylaxis compared with chemotherapeutic trials. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized, controlled trials (RCT) in pancreatic cancer to quantify differences in reported rates of VTE in thromboprophylaxis and chemotherapeutic trials.

METHODS

We systematically searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Clinicaltrials.gov. Eligible thromboprophylaxis RCTs were required to report rates of thrombosis in non-anticoagulant pancreatic cancer cohorts. Eligible chemotherapy studies were RCTs evaluating chemotherapy regimens in advanced pancreatic cancer and reported thrombosis as adverse events. Pooled event rates of VTE and arterial thrombosis were calculated using a random-effects model.

RESULTS

The pooled VTE rate in 13 chemotherapy studies (5694 patients) was 5.9% (95% confidence interval [CI], 3.9-9.0%) compared with 16.5% (95% CI, 11.7%-23.3%; P < .001) in 9 thromboprophylaxis studies (631 patients). The pooled symptomatic VTE rate from chemotherapy studies was 5.4% (95% CI, 3.5%-8.3%), which was significantly lower than the pooled rate from thromboprophylaxis studies of 10.5% (95% CI, 7.3%-14.9%; P = .02).

CONCLUSION

The VTE incidence reported in chemotherapy RCTs in pancreatic cancer is significantly lower than reported in thromboprophylaxis studies. This finding highlights the underrecognition of VTE in chemotherapeutic trials and emphasizes the need to standardize approaches towards monitoring and reporting of VTE in clinical trials.

Venous Thromboembolism in Cancer Patients Undergoing Chemotherapy: Risk Factors and Prevention

Ambulatory cancer patients undergoing chemotherapy are at a substantial risk for venous thromboembolism (VTE) over the course of therapy and beyond it. Factors accounting for this risk include the activation of extrinsic and intrinsic coagulation pathways, platelet activation, impaired fibrinolysis, use of catheters, infusion of blood products, and thrombogenic potential of several chemotherapeutic drugs. A few stratification models can help identify patients at a higher risk of chemotherapy-associated VTE, who may benefit from preventive strategies. Although low-molecular-weight heparins (LMWHs) effectively reduce the risk of VTE, current guidelines recommend against their routine use. Based on the results of recent randomized controlled clinical trials, the administration of prophylactic doses of the novel direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) to ambulatory cancer patients undergoing chemotherapy has the potential to offer an effective and safe protection against VTE, obviating the inconveniences of heparins. Except for patients in whom the novel drugs are unsuitable or are contraindicated, in all other patients LMWHs should be replaced by low-dose DOACs.

Primary prophylaxis for venous thromboembolism in ambulatory cancer patients receiving chemotherapy

BACKGROUND

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

OBJECTIVES

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

SEARCH METHODS

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

SELECTION CRITERIA

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

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

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

MAIN RESULTS

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

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

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