Rivaroxaban treatment for six weeks versus three months in patients with symptomatic isolated distal deep vein thrombosis: randomised controlled trial

Six-week low-molecular-weight heparin versus 12-week warfarin for calf deep vein thrombosis: A randomized, prospective, open-label study

Current guidelines suggest a 3-month anticoagulant treatment course for isolated distal deep vein thrombosis (IDDVT), but shorter durations of treatment are frequently prescribed in clinical practice. We investigated whether a 6-week treatment with low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) at intermediate dosage can be an effective and safe alternative to vitamin K antagonists (VKA) in patients with IDDVT (non-inferiority trial). In a multicenter, open-label, randomized trial, 260 outpatients with symptomatic IDDVT were randomly assigned to receive either LMWH followed by VKA for 12 weeks or LMWH 1 mg/kg subcutaneously twice a day for 2 weeks followed by 1 mg/kg subcutaneously once a day for 4 weeks. The follow-up was 6 months and the primary endpoint was the composite measure of recurrent venous thromboembolism (VTE) defined as: recurrence or extension of IDDVT, proximal DVT, and pulmonary embolism (PE). The study was stopped prematurely due to slow recruiting rates. The primary efficacy outcome occurred in 14 patients receiving LMWH (10.8%) and in five patients receiving VKA (3.8%); risk difference was 0.069 (95% CI: 0.006-0.132), hazard ratio 2.8 (95% CI: 1.04-7.55). There was one PE in the VKA group and one proximal DVT in the LMWH group. IDDVT recurrence was 10.0% in the LMWH group versus 3.1% in the VKA group (p = .024). Two patients had clinically relevant bleedings (1.6%) in the LMWH group versus one (0.8%) in VKA group (p = .56). In conclusion, VKA for 12 weeks seems superior to LMWH for 6 weeks in reducing the risk of VTE recurrences in our cohort of outpatients with IDDVT.

Management of isolated distal deep vein thrombosis

Isolated distal deep vein thrombosis (DVT) represents up to 50% of all lower limb DVT in ultrasound series and is a frequent medical condition, which management is not well established. Data arising from registries and non-randomized studies suggest that most distal DVTs do not extend to the proximal veins and have an uneventful follow-up when left untreated. This data had some impact on international recommendations like the American College of Chest Physicians (ACCP), whose last version stated that ultrasound surveillance might be an option for selected low-risk patients. However, robust data arising from randomized studies are scarce. Indeed, only seven randomized trials assessing the need for anticoagulation for calf DVT have been published. Many of these trials had an open-label design and were affected by methodological limitations. When considering randomized placebo-controlled trials, one included low-risk patients and was hampered by a limited statistical power (CACTUS study). Nevertheless, data from this trial tend to confirm that the use of therapeutic anticoagulation in low-risk patients with symptomatic calf DVT is not superior to placebo in reducing VTE but is associated with a higher risk of bleeding. A second randomized placebo-controlled trial did not assess the necessity of anticoagulant treatment but rather the long-term risk of recurrence and compared 6 weeks versus 12 weeks of treatment with rivaroxaban (RIDTS study). Finally, the last available randomized trial compared a 3-month versus a 12-month edoxaban treatment in patients with cancer and mainly asymptomatic distal DVT, detected by systematic compression ultrasonography. Overall, available data suggest that the use of therapeutic anticoagulation in low-risk patients with symptomatic calf DVT is not superior to placebo in reducing VTE. High risk patients (previous VTE, active cancer, inpatients) might benefit from a course of anticoagulant treatment. However, the optimal anticoagulant intensity and duration are uncertain and further studies are needed.

Cancer-Associated Thrombosis: Management of a Patient With an Isolated Calf Deep Vein Thrombosis

The Oncology Grand Rounds series is designed to place original reports published in the Journal into clinical context. A case presentation is followed by a description of diagnostic and management challenges, a review of the relevant literature, and a summary of the authors' suggested management approaches. The goal of this series is to help readers better understand how to apply the results of key studies, including those published in Journal of Clinical Oncology, to patients seen in their own clinical practice.Venous thromboembolism occurs frequently in patients with cancer and is the second leading cause of death, after the cancer itself. There is a well-established consensus of the need for anticoagulation in patients with a proximal deep vein thrombosis or pulmonary embolism. But with improved imaging technology and widescale use of contrast imaging for cancer staging, many incidental pulmonary emboli are detected in patients with cancer. Furthermore, many isolated distal deep vein thromboses and subsegmental pulmonary emboli are identified. There have been questions if these small or asymptomatic thromboses require anticoagulation management similar to more proximal or symptomatic thromboses. In this Oncology Grand Rounds, we will review the existing evidence for these situations. We will also review management strategies for cancer-associated thrombosis, reflecting the evolving drugs and evidence over the past 20 years.

Edoxaban for 12 Months Versus 3 Months in Patients With Cancer With Isolated Distal Deep Vein Thrombosis (ONCO DVT Study): An Open-Label, Multicenter, Randomized Clinical Trial

BACKGROUND

The optimal duration of anticoagulation therapy for isolated distal deep vein thrombosis in patients with cancer is clinically relevant, but the evidence is lacking. The prolonged anticoagulation therapy could have a potential benefit for prevention of thrombotic events; however, it could also increase the risk of bleeding.

METHODS

In a multicenter, open-label, adjudicator-blinded, randomized clinical trial at 60 institutions in Japan, we randomly assigned patients with cancer with isolated distal deep vein thrombosis, in a 1-to-1 ratio, to receive either a 12-month or 3-month edoxaban treatment. The primary end point was a composite of a symptomatic recurrent venous thromboembolism (VTE) or VTE-related death at 12 months. The major secondary end point was major bleeding at 12 months, according to the criteria of the International Society on Thrombosis and Haemostasis. The primary hypothesis was that a 12-month edoxaban treatment was superior to a 3-month edoxaban treatment with respect to the primary end point.

RESULTS

From April 2019 through June 2022, 604 patients were randomized, and after excluding 3 patients who withdrew consent, 601 patients were included in the intention-to-treat population: 296 patients in the 12-month edoxaban group and 305 patients in the 3-month edoxaban group. The mean age was 70.8 years, 28% of the patients were men, and 20% of the patients had symptoms of deep vein thrombosis at baseline. The primary end point of a symptomatic recurrent VTE event or VTE-related death occurred in 3 of the 296 patients (1.0%) in the 12-month edoxaban group and in 22 of the 305 patients (7.2%) in the 3-month edoxaban group (odds ratio, 0.13; 95% CI, 0.03-0.44). The major secondary end point of major bleeding occurred in 28 of the 296 patients (9.5%) in the 12-month edoxaban group and in 22 of the 305 patients (7.2%) in the 3-month edoxaban group (odds ratio, 1.34; 95% CI, 0.75-2.41). The prespecified subgroups did not affect the estimates on the primary end point.

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with cancer with isolated distal deep vein thrombosis, 12 months was superior to 3 months for an edoxaban treatment with respect to the composite outcome of a symptomatic recurrent VTE or VTE-related death.

REGISTRATION

URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT03895502.

A two-sample Mendelian randomization study of circulating lipids and deep venous thrombosis

In view of the current debate about the relationship between lipids and deep venous thrombosis (DVT) in clinical studies, a two-sample Mendelian randomization (MR) study was conducted to clarify the effects of five circulating lipids (apolipoprotein A1, apolipoprotein B, low-density lipoprotein, high-density lipoprotein and triglycerides) on DVT from the perspective of genetic inheritance. Five lipids (exposure) were analysed by MR with DVT (outcome) from two different data sources. For the analysis, we used inverse variance weighting and a weighted mode, weighted median, simple mode and MR-Egger regression to analyse the effect of circulating lipids on DVT. In addition, we used the MR-Egger intercept test, Cochran's Q test and "leave-one-out" sensitivity analysis to evaluate horizontal multiplicity, heterogeneity and stability, respectively, in the analysis. In the analysis, the two-sample Mendelian randomization analysis of five common circulating lipids and DVT showed that common circulating lipids had no causal effect on DVT, which is somewhat inconsistent with the findings of many published observational studies. Based on our results, our two-sample MR analysis failed to detect a statistically significant causal relationship between five common circulating lipids and DVT.

High systemic inflammation response index level is associated with an increased risk of lower extremity deep venous thrombosis: a large retrospective study

BACKGROUND

The association between inflammation and venous thromboembolism (VTE) has attracted increasing research interest. Recently, the systemic inflammation response index (SIRI) has been proposed as a novel inflammatory biomarker, but its potential association with lower extremity deep venous thrombosis (LEDVT) has not been investigated. Thus, this study aimed to explore the association between SIRI and LEDVT risk in a large sample over a 10-year period (2012-2022).

METHODS

All hospitalized patients who underwent lower extremity compression ultrasonography (CUS) examinations were consecutively identified from our hospital information system database. Multivariate logistic regression analysis was used to investigate the association between SIRI and LEDVT risk. Sensitivity, restricted cubic spline and subgroup analyses were also performed.

RESULTS

In total, 12643 patients were included, and 1346 (10.6%) LEDVT events occurred. After full adjustment, a higher SIRI level was significantly associated with an increased risk of LEDVT (odds ratio [OR] = 1.098, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.068-1.128, p < 0.001), and patients in quartile 4 had a 2.563-fold higher risk of LEDVT than those in quartile 1 (95% CI: 2.064-3.182, p < 0.001). A nonlinear relationship was observed (P for nonlinearity < 0.001), with an inflection point of 4.17. Below this point, each unit increase in SIRI corresponded to a 35.3% increase in LEDVT risk (95% CI: 1.255-1.458, p < 0.001). No significant difference was found above the inflection point (OR = 1.015, 95% CI: 0.963-1.069, p = 0.582). Sensitivity and subgroup analyses confirmed the robustness of the association. This association also existed in both distal and proximal LEDVT.

CONCLUSION

A High SIRI is significantly associated with an increased risk of LEDVT in hospitalized patients. Given that the SIRI is a readily available biomarker in clinical settings, its potential clinical use deserves further exploration.