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

Comparison of important factors to patients recovering from pulmonary embolism and items covered in patient-reported outcome measures: A mixed-methods systematic review

OBJECTIVE

Up to 50 % of patients recovering from pulmonary embolism (PE) experience negative long-term outcomes. Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) are important in identifying what matters to patients. We aimed to identify PROMs used in clinical studies and recommended by the International Consortium of Health Outcomes (ICHOM) and compare individual items with factors considered important by patients recovering from PE.

METHODS

This was a convergent mixed-methods systematic review, including quantitative studies, using PROMs and qualitative studies with non-cancer-related PE patients. Items from each PROM and qualitative findings were categorised using an International Classification of Function linking process to allow for integrated synthesis.

RESULTS

A total of 68 studies using 34 different PROMs with 657 items and 13 qualitative studies with 408 findings were included. A total of 104 individual ICF codes were used, and subsequently sorted into 20 distinct categories representing patient concerns. Identified PROMs were found to adequately cover 17/20 categories, including anxiety, fear of bleeding, stress, depression, dizziness/nausea, sleep disturbance, pain, dyspnea, fatigue, activity levels, family and friends, socializing, outlook on life, and medical treatment. PROMs from the ICHOM core set covered the same categories, except for dizziness/nausea.

CONCLUSIONS

No single PROM covered all aspects assessed as important by the PE population. PROMs recommended in the ICHOM core set cover 16/20 aspects. However, worrisome thoughts, hypervigilance around symptoms, and uncertainty of illness were experienced by patients with PE but were not covered by PROMS.

Care pathways for patients with cancer-associated thrombosis: From diagnosis to long-term follow-up

Venous thromboembolism (VTE) in patients with cancer is associated with a high risk of bleeding complications and hospitalisation, as well as with increased mortality. Good practice recommendations for diagnosis and treatment of VTE in patients with cancer have been developed by a number of professional bodies. Although these guidelines provide consistent recommendations on what treatment should be offered to patients presenting with cancer-associated thromboembolism (CAT), many questions remain unanswered, in particular about the modalities of management (Who? When? Where?) and, for this reason, we have developed a consensus proposal for an appropriate multidisciplinary care pathway for patients with CAT, which is presented in this article. The proposal was informed by the recent scientific literature retrieved through a systematic literature review. This proposal is centred on the development of a shared care plan individualised to each patient's needs and expectations, patient information and shared decision-making to promote adherence, involvement of all relevant hospital- and community- based healthcare providers in the development and implementation of the care plan, and regular re-evaluation of the treatment strategy.

Safety and Efficacy of Direct Oral Anticoagulants for Treatment of Venous Thromboembolism in Pediatric Oncology Patients

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES

Children with cancer have an increased risk for developing a venous thromboembolism (VTE) during their treatment course. Direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) represent a relatively new class of oral medications to treat VTE; however, data are limited to support use in this patient group. Given the safety and efficacy data from numerous perspective adult studies, providers now consider off-label use in select children.

METHODS

We performed a single-center, retrospective review of children 0 to 20 years of age from 2012 to 2020 with malignancy and confirmed VTE, with the objective to evaluate the hypothesis that the safety and the efficacy of DOACs are noninferior to enoxaparin in this population. The primary composite efficacy outcome comprises symptomatic recurrent VTE, death due to VTE, and thrombus progression. The principal safety outcome is a combination of major and clinically relevant nonmajor bleeding.

RESULTS

The safety and efficacy outcomes collected revealed that DOAC use was equivalent when compared with the enoxaparin group for treatment of VTE. One patient in the DOAC group had clinically relevant, nonmajor bleeding compared with 2 patients in the enoxaparin group. No treatment failures were observed.

CONCLUSIONS

This single-center study suggests that DOACs are both safe and efficacious for the treatment of VTE in children with cancer. It also highlights the need for larger studies to address this clinical question.

DOACs or VKAs or LMWH – What is the optimal regimen for cancer-associated venous thromboembolism? A systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

Clinical guidelines have supported the use of direct anticoagulants (DOACs) for the treatment of cancer-associated venous thromboembolism (Ca-VTE). However, recent trials have reported increased bleeding risks associated with DOACs usage, raising concerns regarding its efficacy.

Objectives

The authors conducted a meta-analysis to study the efficacy and safety of DOACs for the treatment of VTE in cancer patients, compared with Low-weight molecular heparin (LMWH) and Vitamin-K antagonists (VKAs).

Methods

PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) were searched according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines from inception to June 17th, 2021.The primary outcomes studied were VTE recurrence and major bleeding.

Results

A total of 8 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) enrolling almost 7000 patients were included. Direct oral anticoagulants significantly reduced VTE Recurrence in cancer patients when compared to patients treated with LMWH or VKAs (Hazard ratio [HR] 0.62, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.46–0.83; P = 0.002; I² = 26%). There were no statistically significant differences for major bleeding (HR 0.86, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.56–1.33; P = 0.50; I² = 34%), clinically relevant non-major bleeding (HR 1.23, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.79–1.91; P = 0.35; I² = 66%), pulmonary embolism (HR 0.71, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.47–1.06; P = 0.10; I² = 7%), and all-cause mortality (HR 0.98, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.86–1.12; P = 0.78; I² = 1%), between DOACs and LMWH.

Conclusion

This analysis shows that DOACs are the optimal regimen to treat Ca-VTE. They have a similar to slightly increased bleeding risk compared with LMWH and are a safer alternative to VKAs.

•

Patients receiving DOACs show a significant decrease for VTE recurrence.

•

Rivaroxaban pertaining to the most effective DOAC.

•

Edoxaban proving to be more useful in reducing bleeding risk more than LMWHs.

•

Further research is needed to investigate the correlation between cancer types and the efficacy of DOACs in treating Ca-VTE.

The relationship between self-efficacy and treatment satisfaction among patients with anticoagulant therapy: a cross-sectional study from a developing country

BACKGROUND

Thromboembolic events are a common complicated health problem. Although anticoagulants have several positive effects on these conditions, they also have several characteristics that strongly affect compliance and satisfaction. The purpose of this investigation is to explore the association between treatment satisfaction and self-efficacy in a sample of patients using anticoagulation therapy and determine the influence of sociodemographic and clinical factors on both aspects.

METHODS

This was a cross-sectional exploratory study carried out in Palestine. The Arabic version of the Anti-Coagulant Treatment Satisfaction Scale (ACTS) assessed treatment satisfaction. In addition, the Arabic version of the 6-Item Self-Efficacy for Managing Chronic Diseases (SES6C) was used to assess self-efficacy.

RESULTS

A total of 300 patients using anticoagulants (average age 51.95 and SD 17.98) were included. There is a modest correlation between treatment satisfaction and self-efficacy (r = 0.345; p <  0.001). The mean and median self-efficacy scores were 38.41 ± 9.88 and 39.00 (interquartile range: 33.00-46.00), respectively. Overall, patients reported a moderate burden and benefit score. The mean and median of the acting burden were 43.30 ± 10.45, and 43.30 (interquartile range: 36.00 to 51.00), respectively. The results showed that young age, higher education, employment, use of fewer medications, and having fewer diseases were significantly associated with higher self-efficacy behaviors. The results also showed that new oral anti-coagulants (NOACs) had a higher degree of self-efficacy and ACTS benefit scores (41.00 (33.75-47.00), p = 0.002; 13.00 (12.00-15.00), p <  0.001, respectively), than vitamin k antagonists (VKA).

CONCLUSIONS

The results demonstrated a significant relationship between treatment satisfaction and self-efficacy, and certain sociodemographic and clinical characteristics influence both. We found that there is a higher degree of self-efficacy and treatment satisfaction among patients who use NOACs than those who use UFH / VKA. Therefore, patients should be motivated to increase their knowledge about anticoagulant therapy. Healthcare providers should play an active role in educating patients, increasing their self-esteem, and awareness about anticoagulant drugs. Importantly, this study was an explanatory one, and it includes a low proportion of patients with venous thromboembolism. This encourages future research on a large scale of patients, considering the indications of anticoagulant therapy.

Cancer-Associated ThrOmboSIs - Patient-Reported OutcoMes With RivarOxaban (COSIMO) - Baseline characteristics and clinical outcomes

BACKGROUND

Patients with cancer-associated thrombosis (CAT) have a high risk of recurrent venous thromboembolic events, which contribute to significant morbidity and mortality. Direct oral anticoagulants may provide a convenient treatment option for these patients.

OBJECTIVES

To assess clinical characteristics and outcomes of patients with active cancer changing to rivaroxaban after ≥4 weeks of standard therapy for the treatment of venous thromboembolism (VTE) in clinical practice. This analysis focused on secondary outcomes of Cancer-associated thrOmboSIs - Patient-reported outcoMes with rivarOxaban (COSIMO).

PATIENTS

COSIMO was a multinational, prospective, noninterventional, single-arm cohort study. Overall, 505 patients received at least one dose of rivaroxaban; 96.6% changing from low-molecular-weight heparin, 1.6% from a vitamin K antagonist, and 1.8% from fondaparinux.

RESULTS

Most patients had solid tumors (n = 449; 88.9%) and approximately half of these patients had metastases. The qualifying venous thromboembolic event was deep vein thrombosis (DVT) in 45.3% of patients, pulmonary embolism (PE) in 37.2% of patients, DVT with PE in 9.7% of patients, and catheter-associated DVT in 7.5% of patients. Approximately 75.1% of patients received rivaroxaban for at least 3 months; 150 (29.7%) patients received concomitant chemotherapy during the study. VTE recurrence, major bleeding, nonmajor bleeding, and major adverse cardiovascular events occurred in 18 (3.6%), 18 (3.6%), 81 (16.0%), and 12 (2.4%) patients, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with CAT who changed to rivaroxaban treatment after ≥4 weeks of standard therapy, the observed incidence proportions of recurrent VTE and bleeding events were in keeping with the recognized effectiveness and safety profile of rivaroxaban for the treatment of CAT.

The Role of Direct Oral Anticoagulants in Cancer-Associated Thrombosis According to the Current Literature

Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is a common complication among patients suffering from malignancies, leading to an increased mortality rate. Novel randomized trials have added valuable information regarding cancer-associated thrombosis (CAT) management using direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs). The aim of this study is to present an overview of the current literature and recommendations in CAT treatment. A few randomized control trials (RCTs) have been integrated suggesting that DOACs may be effectively applied in CAT patients compared to low molecular weight heparins (LMWHs) with a decreased mortality and VTE recurrence rate. However, the risk of bleeding is higher, especially in patients with gastrointestinal malignancies. Real-world data are in accordance with these RCT findings, while in the currently available recommendations, DOACs are suggested as a reliable alternative to LMWH during the initial, long-term, and extended phase of treatment. Data retrieved from the current literature, including RCTs and “real-world” studies, aim to clarify the role of DOACs in CAT management, by highlighting their benefits and remarking upon the potential adverse outcomes. Current recommendations suggest the use of DOACs in well-selected patients with an increasing level of evidence through years.

Cancer-associated venous thromboembolism and the non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants: a review of clinical outcomes and patient perspectives

INTRODUCTION

Cancer-associated venous thromboembolism remains an important but challenging aspect in the treatment of patients with cancer. Recently, alternatives to injection of low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) have been introduced, the non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants (NOACs), which could potentially alleviate patients from burdensome daily injections.

AREAS COVERED

This review discusses the available evidence exploring the role of NOACs in the treatment and secondary prevention of cancer-associated venous thromboembolism, from randomized trials, observational data, contemporary guideline recommendations, and patient perspectives.

EXPERT OPINION

Edoxaban, rivaroxaban, and apixaban have proven attractive alternatives to LMWH for the treatment of cancer-associated venous thromboembolism. Contemporary guidelines have promptly endorsed the use of NOACs in patients with most cancer types. Nonetheless, issues remain regarding bleeding risk, interactions with medical cancer treatment, and the effectiveness and safety for extended treatment periods. There are head-to-head comparisons of the NOACs, and therefore no data favoring the use of one NOAC over the others. Patient's preferences are highly diverse and should be part of routine considerations when weighing risks and benefits associated with various available anticoagulant drugs.

Anticoagulation Treatment in Cancer-Associated Venous Thromboembolism: Assessment of Patient Preferences Using a Discrete Choice Experiment (COSIMO Study)

Introduction  Clinical guidelines recommend anticoagulation therapy for the treatment of cancer-associated venous thromboembolism (VTE), but little is known about preferences. Therefore, the objective of this discrete choice experiment (DCE) was to elucidate patient preferences regarding anticoagulation convenience attributes.

Methods  Adult patients with cancer-associated VTE who switched to direct oral anticoagulants were included in a single-arm study (COSIMO). Patients were asked to decide between hypothetical treatment options based on a combination of the following attributes: route of administration (injection/tablet), frequency of intake (once/twice daily), need for regular controls of the international normalized ratio (INR) at least every 3 to 4 weeks (yes/no), interactions with food/alcohol (yes/no), and distance to treating physician (1 vs. 20 km) as an additional neutral attribute. DCE data were collected by structured telephone interviews and analyzed based on a conditional logit regression.

Results  Overall, 163 patients (mean age 63.7 years, 49.1% female) were included. They strongly preferred oral administration compared with self-injections (importance of this attribute for overall treatment decisions: 73.8%), and a treatment without dietary restrictions (11.8%). Even if these attributes were less important (7.2% and 6.5%, respectively), patients indicated a preference for a shorter distance to the treating physician and once-daily dosing compared with twice-daily intake. “Need for regular controls of INR at least every 3 to 4 weeks” showed no significant impact on the treatment decision (0.7%).

Conclusion  This study showed that treatment-related decision making in cancer-associated VTE, assuming comparable effectiveness and safety of anticoagulant treatments, is predominantly driven by “route of administration,” with patients strongly preferring oral administration.

Drug-Drug Interactions of 257 Antineoplastic and Supportive Care Agents With 7 Anticoagulants: A Comprehensive Review of Interactions and Mechanisms

Data on drug–drug interactions (DDI) of antineoplastic drugs with anticoagulants is scarce. We aim to evaluate factors associated with DDI of antineoplastic and supportive care drugs with anticoagulants resulting in modification of pharmacokinetics of these last mentioned. A literature review on DDI databases and summaries of products characteristics (SmPC) was done. Drug–drug interactions of 257 antineoplastic and supportive care drugs with direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs), warfarin, enoxaparin, or fondaparinux were categorized as no clinically significant expected DDI, potentially weak DDI, potentially clinically significant DDI, and recommendation against coadministration. Logistic regression models were performed to analyze the association between the dependent variable potentially clinically significant interaction/recommendation against coadministration and the mechanisms of DDI. Of the 1799 associations, 84.4% were absence of DDI, 3.6% potentially weak DDI, 10.2% potentially clinically relevant DDI, and 2.0% recommendation against coadministration. Warfarin has higher DDI potential than other anticoagulants. Enoxaparin and fondaparinux have fewer DDI than others. There was no difference between DOACs. Drug–drug interactions with apixaban and rivaroxaban was independently associated with the absence of CYP3A4 competition, P-glycoprotein inhibition, CYP3A4 induction, and drug class of tyrosine kinase inhibitors. Drug–drug interactions with dabigatran and edoxaban was associated with inhibition of P-glycoprotein and tyrosine kinase inhibitors. Warfarin, induction of CYP3A4, and inhibition of CYP2C9. Enoxaparin and fondaparinux, only tyrosine kinase inhibitors. Direct oral anticoagulants did not differ regarding DDI with antineoplastic agents. Warfarin presented more DDI than other anticoagulants. P-glycoprotein inhibition and CYP3A4 induction were independently associated with DDI of antineoplastic agents with DOACs.

Cancer-associated venous thromboembolism: Treatment and prevention with rivaroxaban

Cancer-associated venous thromboembolism (VTE) is a frequent, potentially life-threatening event that complicates cancer management. Anticoagulants are the cornerstone of therapy for the treatment and prevention of cancer-associated thrombosis (CAT); factor Xa-inhibiting direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs; apixaban, edoxaban, and rivaroxaban), which have long been recommended for the treatment of VTE in patients without cancer, have been investigated in this setting. The first randomized comparisons of DOACs against low-molecular-weight heparin for the treatment of CAT indicated that DOACs are efficacious in this setting, with findings reflected in recent updates to published guidance on CAT treatment. However, the higher risk of bleeding events (particularly in the gastrointestinal tract) with DOACs highlights the need for appropriate patient selection. Further insights will be gained from additional studies that are ongoing or awaiting publication. The efficacy and safety of DOAC thromboprophylaxis in ambulatory patients with cancer at a high risk of VTE have also been assessed in placebo-controlled randomized controlled trials of apixaban and rivaroxaban. Both studies showed efficacy benefits with DOACs, but both studies also showed a nonsignificant increase in major bleeding events while on treatment. This review summarizes the evidence base for rivaroxaban use in CAT, the patient profile potentially most suited to DOAC use, and ongoing controversies under investigation. We also describe ongoing studies from the CALLISTO (Cancer Associated thrombosis-expLoring soLutions for patients through Treatment and Prevention with RivarOxaban) program, which comprises several randomized clinical trials and real-world evidence studies, including investigator-initiated research.

Venous Thromboembolism Treatment and Prevention in Cancer Patients: Can We Use Pills Yet?

OPINION STATEMENT

Cancer increases a patient's risk for developing a venous thromboembolism (VTE) and is a relatively common finding in this population. Traditionally, anticoagulants used to treat VTE have included low molecular weight heparin (LMWH) or vitamin K antagonists (VKA). However, within the last several years, a newer class of anticoagulant, the direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs), has emerged as a potential option for pharmacologic thromboprophylaxis and for treatment of VTE in patients with cancer. While data is still limited and evolving, DOACs offer several benefits that are worth considering, including ease of administration and similar efficacy compared to LMWH in preventing recurrent VTE. However, some studies have reported a notable risk of increased bleeding associated with the use of DOACs. Additional studies are underway to evaluate the role of DOACs compared to LMWH in the setting of cancer. In our practice, based on existing data, we have been using DOACs for the chronic treatment of acute VTE and prevention of recurrent VTE in patients who do not have contraindications to anticoagulation and do not have severe renal insufficiency (creatinine clearance < 30 mL/min). For cancer patients admitted to the hospital with an acute medical illness, we use LMWH for primary prevention of VTE. In the perioperative setting, for patients undergoing major surgery with an active cancer, we prefer pharmacologic thromboprophylaxis with LMWH, although there is some emerging evidence that DOACs may be safe in this setting.

Evaluation of direct oral anticoagulants for the treatment of cancer-associated thrombosis: an update

Cancer is associated with an increased risk of venous thromboembolism of four to sixfold. Cancer-related interventions such as chemotherapy, hormonal therapy and indwelling central venous catheters also increase the risk of venous thromboembolism. Low molecular weight heparin for at least 3-6 months is the current standard of care for the treatment of cancer associated venous thromboembolism. Anticoagulation should be continued as long as the cancer is active. Over the past few years, direct oral anticoagulants have emerged, including one direct thrombin inhibitor (dabigatran etexilate) and three factor Xa inhibitors (apixaban, edoxaban and rivaroxaban). In the randomized controlled trials comparing direct oral anticoagulants with vitamin K antagonists, the direct oral anticoagulants all provide non-inferior in prevention of thromboembolic events in patients with atrial fibrillation, for the prevention and treatment of venous thromboembolism and in acute coronary syndrome. In people with cancer, these drugs have emerged as attractive alternatives for the treatment of venous thromboembolism with the potential to overcome the limitations of low molecular weight heparin. Randomized controlled studies comparing direct oral anticoagulants to low molecular weight heparin in cancer patients are still limited and direct oral anticoagulants are not recommended for the treatment of cancer associated venous thromboembolism yet. However, new emerging data are supporting the use of direct oral anticoagulants in cancer-associated thrombosis. Here, we review recent data on the evidence related to the efficacy and safety of direct oral anticoagulants for the treatment of venous thromboembolism in patients with cancer.

Rivaroxaban and the EINSTEIN clinical trial programme

: Rivaroxaban, a direct oral anticoagulant, is widely used for the treatment of venous thromboembolism (VTE) in adult patients. The approval of rivaroxaban for the treatment of deep vein thrombosis and pulmonary embolism and the extended secondary prevention of recurrent VTE is based on the results of the EINSTEIN DVT and EINSTEIN PE trials, and the EINSTEIN EXT and EINSTEIN CHOICE trials, respectively. This review provides an updated overview of these completed EINSTEIN studies in adult patients, including results of subanalyses in patients at high risk of recurrent VTE, and discusses the emerging data from the EINSTEIN Junior programme, which is evaluating the use of rivaroxaban for the treatment of paediatric VTE. In the EINSTEIN DVT and EINSTEIN PE trials, rivaroxaban (15 mg twice daily for 21 days, followed by 20 mg once daily thereafter) was shown to be an effective and safe alternative to standard anticoagulation for the treatment of deep vein thrombosis and pulmonary embolism in a broad range of adult patients. These results are supported by increasing amounts of real-world data from patients treated with rivaroxaban in routine clinical practice worldwide. In the EINSTEIN EXT and EINSTEIN CHOICE trials, rivaroxaban was superior to placebo and acetylsalicylic acid, respectively, for the extended treatment of VTE - physicians can now choose between two doses of rivaroxaban (20 mg once daily or 10 mg once daily) for the extended prevention of recurrent VTE, based on a patient's risk of recurrence, bleeding and personal preferences.

Rivaroxaban for prevention and treatment of venous thromboembolism

Until recently, heparins and vitamin K antagonists (VKAs) were the cornerstones for prevention and treatment of venous thromboembolism (VTE). This situation changed with the introduction of the direct oral anticoagulants, which are now replacing low-molecular-weight heparin for thromboprophylaxis after elective hip or knee arthroplasty and VKAs for VTE treatment. Rivaroxaban, an oral factor Xa inhibitor, was the first direct oral anticoagulant licensed for VTE prevention and treatment. This paper provides the rationale for factor Xa as a target for anticoagulants, describes the development of rivaroxaban, reviews its pharmacological profile, discusses the clinical trials with rivaroxaban for VTE prevention and treatment and highlights areas of uncertainty.