Treatment Algorithm in Cancer-Associated Thrombosis: Updated Canadian Expert Consensus

Cancer-associated venous thromboembolism: a comprehensive review

It has been 200 years since the first case of cancer-associated thrombosis (CAT) was reported. Venous thromboembolism (VTE) remains a leading cause of morbidity and mortality in cancer patients. Malignant tumors interact with the coagulation system in complex ways. CAT continues to pose a significant challenge in clinical practice. The risk factors for CAT are complex and multifactorial, primarily including patient, cancer, and therapy-related factors. We have introduced assessment models for CAT and bleeding risk, but the performance of these models has been less than satisfactory. Currently, the main anticoagulant drugs for treating CAT include vitamin K antagonists (VKAs), low molecular weight heparin (LMWH), and direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs). We have provided a detailed overview of the advantages and disadvantages of these three types of drugs and suggestions on choosing the appropriate type of medication for different clinical scenarios. CAT incidence, pathophysiology, risk factors, risk prediction models, and recent advancements in treatment and management are summarized in this review.

Management and outcomes in patients with tumor thrombus: a retrospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

Tumor thrombus can be associated with an increased risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE) and poor prognosis. The risks and benefits of anticoagulation remain unclear.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the role of anticoagulation and associated outcomes in patients with tumor thrombus.

METHODS

We conducted a single-center retrospective cohort study in patients with tumor thrombus from 2019 to 2022. All patients were followed for 12 months from the diagnosis of tumor thrombus or until death if death occurred earlier. The primary outcome was the percentage of patients prescribed any dose of anticoagulation for tumor thrombus (or concurrent bland thrombus/VTE). The secondary outcomes included new thrombosis, major bleeding, clinically relevant nonmajor bleeding, and mortality. We calculated the 6- and 12-month cumulative incidence of outcomes with 95% CI and compared those given anticoagulation vs not, considering death as a competing risk.

RESULTS

We included 211 patients, among whom 106 (50.2%; 95% CI, 47.9%-52.6%) were given anticoagulation for tumor thrombus or concurrent VTE (present in 21.8%). The most common type of cancer was hepatocellular carcinoma (28%). Splanchnic veins were the most commonly involved (49.3%). Anticoagulation was more likely used if tumor thrombus involved the inferior vena cava and/or the heart, with concurrent VTE, or if thrombosis service was consulted. The overall 12-month incidence of new VTE was 11.4% (95% CI, 7.3%-16.5%), that of major bleeding + clinically relevant nonmajor bleeding was 36.6% (95% CI, 29.6%-43.5%), and mortality of 52.5% (95% CI, 44.8%-59.6%), with no significant differences among groups given anticoagulation or not.

CONCLUSION

Patients with tumor thrombus carry high risks of VTE, bleeding, and mortality. The impact of anticoagulation remains unclear.

Anticoagulation approach in morbid obesity: a comprehensive review on venous thromboembolism management

Obesity is a recognized risk factor for venous thromboembolism (VTE), associated with distinct challenges in managing anticoagulation therapy. There is still limited evidence regarding the impact of extreme body weight on the pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics, efficacy, and safety of various anticoagulant medications. To our knowledge, this is the first comprehensive review to address both prophylactic and therapeutic anticoagulant dosages specifically for managing VTE in patients with a body mass index (BMI) ≥40 kg/m2 or weight ≥120 kg. Our aim was to synthesize the findings of relevant studies alongside the latest recommendations on anticoagulation in this unique population. We gathered and analyzed data on all classes of anticoagulants available for VTE management, including vitamin K antagonists (VKAs), unfractionated heparin (UFH), low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH), fondaparinux, and direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs), offering insights into their efficacy and safety profiles. Additionally, we explored special subpopulations of morbidly obese patients, such as those with cancer, renal dysfunction, or those undergoing bariatric surgery, recognizing the nuanced therapeutic challenges they present. The current evidence for anticoagulant therapy in morbidly obese patients with VTE is evidently insufficient, underscoring the need for a tailored approach and meticulous monitoring to achieve an optimal therapeutic balance.

Management challenges of recurrent venous thromboembolism in advanced digestive cancers: Case studies and therapeutic strategies

INTRODUCTION

Venous thromboembolism (VTE) poses a significant challenge in cancer patients, particularly those with advanced malignancies. The management of recurrent VTE is complicated by the need for effective anticoagulation while addressing the underlying cancer progression.

CASES

We present two clinical cases from the gastroenterology department at Percy French military hospital involving patients with progressive malignant digestive diseases. Patient 1, a 62-year-old woman, developed recurrent pulmonary embolism despite appropriate anticoagulation with low molecular weight heparin (LMWH). After treatment adjustments, she ultimately succumbed to tumor progression. Patient 2, a 54-year-old man hospitalized for pulmonary embolism, faced upper gastrointestinal bleeding and delayed anticoagulation initiation. Although he showed initial improvement with immunotherapy and stabilization of thrombotic events, he experienced oncological progression and recurrent VTE, leading to palliative care.

DISCUSSION

These cases illustrate the difficulties of managing recurrent VTE, even with curative anticoagulation and dose escalation. In case of VTE recurrence, it is essential to investigate for cancer progression and ensure patient adherence to treatment. A comprehensive management strategy should involve both the malignancy and the thrombotic complications.

CONCLUSION

The management of recurrent VTE in cancer patients requires a multidisciplinary approach to evaluate the benefit-risk ratio of anticoagulation adjustments. These clinical cases highlight the necessity for integrated care that addresses both oncological and thrombotic concerns, emphasizing the importance of timely intervention and collaboration among healthcare providers.

Epidemiology, Pathophysiology, and Management of Cancer-Associated Ischemic Stroke

Cancer and stroke are leading causes of global disability and mortality. With improvements in cancer-associated mortality and advancements in treatment of active malignancy, it is more common to encounter patients with ischemic stroke and active malignancy. Evidence suggests that cancer-associated ischemic stroke is a unique subtype of stroke; however, there is limited guidance when considering diagnostic workup, secondary prevention, rehabilitation, and future directions within this population. In this narrative review, we aim to describe the epidemiology, pathophysiological mechanisms, management, and future directions regarding understanding of cancer-associated ischemic stroke.

Antithrombotic Therapy in Cancer Patients with Cardiovascular Diseases: Daily Practice Recommendations by the Hemostasis Working Party of the German Society of Hematology and Medical Oncology (DGHO) and the Society for Thrombosis and Hemostasis Research (GTH e.V.)

Active cancer by itself but also chemotherapy is associated with an increased risk of cardiovascular disease (CVD) and especially coronary artery disease (CAD) and atrial fibrillation (AF). The frequency of CVD, CAD, and AF varies depending on comorbidities (particularly in older patients), cancer type, and stage, as well as the anticancer therapeutic being taken. Many reports exist for anticancer drugs being associated with CVD, CAD, and AF, but robust data are often lacking. Because of this, each patient needs an individual structured approach concerning thromboembolic and bleeding risk, drug-drug interactions, as well as patient preferences to evaluate the need for anticoagulation therapy and targeting optimal symptom control. Interruption of specific cancer therapy should be avoided to reduce the potential risk of cancer progression. Nevertheless, additional factors like thrombocytopenia and anticoagulation in the elderly and frail patient with cancer cause additional challenges which need to be addressed in daily clinical management. Therefore, the aim of these recommendations is to summarize the available scientific data on antithrombotic therapy (both antiplatelet and anticoagulant therapy) in cancer patients with CVD and in cases of missing data providing guidance for optimal careful decision-making in daily routine.

Risk of recurrent venous thromboembolism and major bleeding according to risk factor profiles in Asian patients: a subgroup analysis EINSTEIN-Extension and EINSTEIN-CHOICE

BACKGROUND

Risks of recurrence and major bleeding with extended anticoagulation in Asian patients with venous thromboembolism (VTE) are similar to those in non-Asian patients but risks according to baseline risk factor profiles is not well documented.

METHODS

Subgroup analysis of two randomized trials, which compared once-daily rivaroxaban (20 mg or 10 mg) with placebo or aspirin (100 mg) for extended treatment in Asian patients with VTE who had completed 6-12 months of anticoagulation. Index events were classified as unprovoked, provoked by major persistent risk factors, minor persistent risk factors, minor transient risk factors, or major transient risk factors. One-year cumulative risks of recurrent VTE were calculated for these risk factor profiles.

RESULTS

367 patients received rivaroxaban, 159 aspirin, and 48 placebo. For patients with unprovoked VTE, one-year cumulative incidences of recurrence in the 202 patients given rivaroxaban, the 89 given aspirin and the 28 given placebo were 1.6%, 5.8%, and 14.8%, respectively. For patients with VTE provoked by minor persistent risk factors, these incidences were 0% in the 74 patients given rivaroxaban, 9.3% in the 36 given aspirin, and 0% in the 12 given placebo. No recurrent VTE occurred in patients with VTE provoked by major persistent or transient risk factors or minor transient risk factors. Rivaroxaban was not associated with a significant increase in major bleeding.

CONCLUSIONS

Rivaroxaban seems to be an effective and safe option for extended treatment in Asian patients, especially those presenting with unprovoked VTE. Subgroups of patients with provoked risk factors were too small to draw meaningful conclusions.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

NCT00439725 and NCT02064439.

Ageing-related considerations for medication used in supportive care in cancer

Both randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and retrospective studies have shown that a comprehensive geriatric assessment (CGA) prior to a patient commencing systemic anti-cancer therapy (SACT) results in improved quality of life outcomes and is associated with a decreased risk of grade 3-5 toxicity; however, data are lacking in relation to adverse drug events (ADE) associated with supportive care medications. Supportive care medications are prescribed as prophylactic agents in a SACT regimen, for management of treatment related toxicity and for symptoms caused by the disease itself. While necessary, the commencement of SACT and supportive medications may cause, or exacerbate, a significant drug burden in older patients, some of whom may have existing comorbidities. For many medications, older adults are underrepresented in pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic modelling studies. In this article we will review ageing-related changes in pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics, as well as how these changes may impact supportive care medications. Additional considerations for prescribing these medications in older adults with cancer, such as polypharmacy, potentially inappropriate medications, drug-drug interactions, and anticholinergic burden, as well as ageing-related considerations and recommendations for supportive care medications commonly used in older adults with cancer are also reviewed.

[Translation into French and republication of: "Management of cancer-associated thromboembolism in vulnerable population"]

Although all patients with cancer-associated thrombosis (CAT) have a high morbidity and mortality risk, certain groups of patients are particularly vulnerable. This may expose the patient to an increased risk of thrombotic recurrence or bleeding (or both), as the benefit-risk ratio of anticoagulant treatment may be modified. Treatment thus needs to be chosen with care. Such vulnerable groups include older patients, patients with renal impairment or thrombocytopenia, and underweight and obese patients. However, these patient groups are poorly represented in clinical trials, limiting the available data on which treatment decisions can be based. Meta-analysis of data from randomised clinical trials suggests that the relative treatment effect of direct oral factor Xa inhibitors (DXIs) and low molecular weight heparin (LMWH) with respect to major bleeding could be affected by advanced age. No evidence was obtained for a change in the relative risk-benefit profile of DXIs compared to LMWH in patients with renal impairment or of low body weight. The available, albeit limited, data do not support restricting the use of DXIs in patients with TAC on the basis of renal impairment or low body weight. In older patients, age is not itself a critical factor for choice of treatment, but frailty is such a factor. Patients over 70 years of age with CAT should undergo a systematic frailty evaluation before choosing treatment and modifiable bleeding risk factors should be addressed. In patients with renal impairment, creatine clearance should be assessed and monitored regularly thereafter. In patients with an eGFR less than 30mL/min/1.72m2, the anticoagulant treatment may need to be adapted. Similarly, platelet count should be assessed prior to treatment and monitored regularly. In patients with grade 3-4, thrombocytopenia (less than 50,000platelets/μL) treatment with a LMWH at a reduced dose should be considered. For patients with CAT and low body weight, standard anticoagulant treatment recommendations are appropriate, whereas in obese patients, apixaban may be preferred.

Incidence and risk factors of venous and arterial thromboembolic events among patients with ovarian cancer- data from a large Canadian database

OBJECTIVES

To determine the incidence of thromboembolic events (TEEs) in ovarian cancer patients and to identify risk factors that are significantly associated with the development of venous thromboembolism (VTE), arterial thromboembolism (ATE), or overall TEEs in this population.

METHODS

This is a retrospective cohort study of 4491 patients with epithelial ovarian cancer identified in the British Columbia cancer registry between 1996 and 2017. The presence of TEEs and risk factors were identified in administrative health records from fee-for-service provider visits and hospital data using ICD-9-CM and ICD-10-CM billing codes. Statistical analysis was performed using Chi-squared test and Fischer's exact test.

RESULTS

Of 4491 patients with epithelial ovarian cancer included in this study, 1.74% experienced ATE and (9.44%) experienced VTE. There was a significant association found between the occurrence of TEEs and all-cause mortality. Sepsis was significantly associated with both venous and arterial thromboembolism. The top three risk factors for arterial thromboembolism included peripheral vascular disease (PVD), open wound, and aneurysm.

CONCLUSIONS

Risk factors predictive of thrombosis in ovarian cancer patients are not consistent between ATE and VTE, thus thrombotic events should not be combined for analysis. Differential thrombosis risk assessment is needed to improve prevention strategies and guide thromboprophylaxis for these patients.

How to manage the dose of drugs in cancer patients with acute kidney injury, practical recommendations

Acute kidney injury (AKI) and chronic kidney disease (CKD) are common in cancer patients. AKI is a brutal and reversible condition which makes it hard to manage from a pharmacological perspective when patients are receiving anticancer regimens and other supportive care drugs, such as anticoagulants, analgesics and other drugs. In contrast to CKD, which is a slow progressive disease, there is no clear guidance on how to manage and/or modify the dosage of drugs during AKI. Indeed, the slow progression of CKD allows physicians to monitor the renal function by using the glomerular filtration rate. Consequently, publications have explored the management of drugs in cancer patients with CKD, which is currently not the same for AKI. There are no recommendations or suggestions on how to manage drug doses in case of AKI in cancer patients. This commentary explores the different options to manage drugs (anticancer drugs, anticoagulants, and other supportive care drugs) during AKI in cancer patients.

Oral Anticoagulants Beyond Warfarin

Direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) have largely replaced vitamin K antagonists, mostly warfarin, for the main indications for oral anticoagulation, prevention and treatment of venous thromboembolism, and prevention of embolic stroke in atrial fibrillation. While DOACs offer practical, fixed-dose anticoagulation in many patients, specific restrictions or contraindications may apply. DOACs are not sufficiently effective in high-thrombotic risk conditions such as antiphospholipid syndrome and mechanical heart valves. Patients with cancer-associated thrombosis may benefit from DOACs, but the bleeding risk, particularly in those with gastrointestinal or urogenital tumors, must be carefully weighed. In patients with frailty, excess body weight, and/or moderate-to-severe chronic kidney disease, DOACs must be cautiously administered and may require laboratory monitoring. Reversal agents have been developed and approved for life-threatening bleeding. In addition, the clinical testing of potentially safer anticoagulants such as factor XI(a) inhibitors is important to further optimize anticoagulant therapy in an increasingly elderly and frail population worldwide.

Management of cancer-associated thromboembolism in vulnerable population

Although all patients with cancer-associated thrombosis (CAT) have a high morbidity and mortality risk, certain groups of patients are particularly vulnerable. This may expose the patient to an increased risk of thrombotic recurrence or bleeding (or both), as the benefit-risk ratio of anticoagulant treatment may be modified. Treatment thus needs to be chosen with care. Such vulnerable groups include older patients, patients with renal impairment or thrombocytopenia, and underweight and obese patients. However, these patient groups are poorly represented in clinical trials, limiting the available data, on which treatment decisions can be based. Meta-analysis of data from randomised clinical trials suggests that the relative treatment effect of direct oral factor Xa inhibitors (DXIs) and low molecular weight heparin (LMWH) with respect to major bleeding could be affected by advanced age. No evidence was obtained for a change in the relative risk-benefit profile of DXIs compared to LMWH in patients with renal impairment or of low body weight. The available, albeit limited, data do not support restricting the use of DXIs in patients with CAT on the basis of renal impairment or low body weight. In older patients, age is not itself a critical factor for choice of treatment, but frailty is such a factor. Patients over 70 years of age with CAT should undergo a systematic frailty evaluation before choosing treatment and modifiable bleeding risk factors should be addressed. In patients with renal impairment, creatine clearance should be assessed and monitored regularly thereafter. In patients with an eGFR<30mL/min/1.72m2, the anticoagulant treatment may need to be adapted. Similarly, platelet count should be assessed prior to treatment and monitored regularly. In patients with grade 3-4, thrombocytopenia (<50,000 platelets/μL) treatment with a LMWH at a reduced dose should be considered. For patients with CAT and low body weight, standard anticoagulant treatment recommendations are appropriate, whereas in obese patients, apixaban may be preferred.

Cancer-Associated Thrombosis: Epidemiology, Pathophysiological Mechanisms, Treatment, and Risk Assessment

Cancer patients represent a growing population with drastically difficult care and a lowered quality of life, especially due to the heightened risk of vast complications. Thus, it is well established so far that one of the most prominent complications in individuals with cancer is venous thromboembolism. Since there are various improved methods for screening and diagnosing cancer and its complications, the incidence of cancer-associated thrombosis has been on the rise in recent years. Therefore, the high mortality and morbidity rates among these patients are not a surprise. Consequently, there is an excruciating need for understanding the mechanisms behind this complex process, as well as the imperative for adequate analysis and application of the most suitable steps for cancer-associated thrombosis prevention. There are various and numerous mechanisms offering potential answers to cancer-associated thrombosis, some of which have already been elucidated in various preclinical and clinical scenarios, yet further and more elaborate studies are crucial to understanding and preventing this complex and harsh clinical entity. This article elaborates on the growing incidence, mortality, morbidity, and risk factors of cancer-associated thrombosis while emphasizing the pathophysiological mechanisms in the light of various types of cancer in patients and summarizes the most novel therapy and prevention guidelines recommendations.

Anti-coagulant Treatment of Cancer-Associated Thrombosis in Frail Patients: Impact of Frailties on the Management of Drug-Drug Interactions

Low molecular weight heparins (LMWH) and anti-Xa direct oral anti-coagulants (DOACs) are recommended for the long-term treatment of cancer-associated thrombosis (CAT) based on well-documented randomised controlled trials. Anti-Xa DOACs are viewed as a first choice for the treatment of patients with CAT. A large number of drug-drug interactions have been reported between DOACs and chemotherapy drugs, modifying circulating levels of DOAC leading to fears of increased bleeding risks or thrombotic recurrence. Progresses in anti-neoplastic therapies have improved the prognosis and the survival, thus increasing the prevalence of frail patients with cancer. However, since frailties tend to be excluded from large trials due to multiple co-morbidities, current guidelines are not fully applicable to this population. The management of these frail patients with CAT is particularly complex and requires a risk assessment on a case-by-case basis with specific focus on cancer, patient-related risk factors and drug-drug interactions. In this brief review we have identified age, co-morbidities and co-medications as key factors of frailty that require careful attention and we have developed a therapeutic decision algorithm to help clinicians optimising the use of anti-coagulants in patients with cancer with CAT, especially in case of anti-Xa DOACs concomitant medications. With the evaluation of the bleeding risk according to the type of cancer, and anticipating drug-drug interactions intensity, taking into account patient frailties allows the optimisation of the anti-coagulant choice. A systematic collaboration between oncologists, vascular pathology specialists and pharmacists is warranted to ensure an optimal patient management. Clinical studies are needed to determine the real impact of these interactions.

Abelacimab in Cancer-Associated Thrombosis: The Right Drug at the Right Time for the Right Purpose. A Comprehensive Review

Cancer-associated thrombosis (CAT) is a devastating complication of cancer that can significantly impact a patient's health and life. The incidence of CAT is approximately 20%, and 1 in 5 cancer patients will develop CAT annually. Indeed, CAT can promote pulmonary embolism and deep vein thrombosis, leading to increased morbidity and mortality that dramatically impact survival. CAT can also provoke delay or discontinuation of anticancer treatment, which may result in a lack of treatment efficacy and high costs for patients, institutions, and society. Current guidelines advocate direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) as the first-line anticoagulant option in CAT. Compared to low-molecular-weight-heparins (LMWHs), DOACs are advantageous in that they typically have an oral route of administration, do not require laboratory monitoring, and have a more predictable anticoagulant effect. However, in patients with thrombocytopenia, renal failure, or those receiving anticancer regimens with potential for drug-drug interactions, LMWH is still the mainstay of care. The main limitation of current anticoagulant agents is related to bleeding risk (BR), both for DOACs and LMWHs. Specifically, DOACs have been associated with high BR in gastrointestinal and genitourinary cancers. In this challenging scenario, abelacimab, an anti-factor XI agent, could represent a viable option in the management of CAT due to its "hemostasis sparing" effect. The safe profile of abelacimab could be useful in patients with active malignancy and CAT, as long-term anticoagulant therapy is often required. Two ongoing international phase III trials (Aster and Magnolia) compare abelacimab with the standard of care (i.e., apixaban in patients with CAT and dalteparin in those with CAT and high BR, respectively). Abelacimab is a new and attractive anticoagulant for the management of CAT, especially in the insidious and critical scenario of active cancer patients with venous thromboembolism and high BR. The aim of this narrative review is to discuss the updated evidence on the performance of DOACs and LMWHs in the treatment of CAT and to focus on the potential role of abelacimab in CAT and its promising associated clinical trials.

The Role of Injectables in the Treatment and Prevention of Cancer-Associated Thrombosis

Cancer-associated thrombosis (CAT) is a leading cause of death among patients with cancer. CAT can manifest itself as venous thromboembolism (VTE), in the form of deep vein thrombosis or pulmonary embolism, or arterial thromboembolism. The pathophysiology of CAT is complex and depends on cancer-, patient-, treatment- and biomarkers-related factors. Treatment of VTE in patients with cancer is complex and includes three major classes of anticoagulant agents: heparin and its derivatives, e.g., low molecular weight heparins, direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs), and vitamin K inhibitors. Given the tremendous heterogeneity of clinical situations in patients with cancer and the challenges of CAT, there is no single universal treatment option for patients suffering from or at risk of CAT. Initial studies suggested that patients seemed to prefer an anticoagulant that would not interfere with their cancer treatment, suggesting the primacy of cancer over VTE, and favoring efficacy and safety over convenience of route of administration. Recent studies show that when the efficacy and safety aspects are similar, patients prefer the oral route of administration. Despite this, injectables are a valid option for many patients with cancer.

Comparative Efficacy of Oral Apixaban and Subcutaneous Low Molecular Weight Heparins in the Treatment of Cancer-Associated Thromboembolism: A Meta-Analysis

Cancer patients' risk of developing venous thromboembolism (VTE) is four to seven times higher than the general population. Cancer-associated VTE (CA-VTE), is a leading cause of morbidity and mortality in cancer patients. Low Molecular Weight Heparin (LMWH) has historically been the mainstay treatment of CA-VTE; however, complications such as bleeding and recurrent VTE make it challenging to manage these patients. Recent randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have proven that direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) are as efficacious as LMWHs in treating CA-VTE. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to ascertain the efficacy and safety of LMWH and Apixaban for the treatment of CA-VTE. A systematic review was conducted using Medline, Embase, and Scopus, databases for all cohort studies, case-control studies, and RCTs in English comparing cancer patients undergoing treatment with Apixaban or LMWH to treat CA-VTE from inception-May 2023. The Review Manager program, version 5.4.1, was used for statistical analysis and the Mantel-Haenszel fixed-effects models to calculate the risk ratio (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) and the inverse variance approach to get the weighted mean difference for the continuous outcomes. Q-test for heterogeneity was used to examine statistical heterogeneity and an I2 statistics value >50% was defined as significant heterogeneity. A total of four studies were included, and the total number of patients was 1,632 across all studies. The Apixaban group was associated with a statistically significant increase in minor bleeding (RR 1.57; 95% CI (1.12, 2.21); p=0.009; I2=0%), but not for major and total bleeding. The Apixaban group showed a statistically significant lower risk of recurrent VTE when compared to the LMWH group (RR: 0.61; 95% CI (0.41, 0.92); p=0.02; I2 = 7%), and there was no statistically significant difference in terms of mortality between the two groups (RR: 0.89; 95% CI (0.73, 1.09); I2=0). Our findings suggest that Apixaban may be a favorable anticoagulant option for managing cancer-associated thromboembolism, as it demonstrated a lower risk of recurrent VTE. The risk of bleeding with DOAC in gastrointestinal cancers warrants further investigation.

Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors-Associated Thrombosis: Incidence, Risk Factors and Management

Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) target programmed cell death (PD) 1 receptor and its ligand PD-L1, and have become an integral part of treatment regimens in many cancers including lung cancer, renal cell carcinoma, melanoma, and more. Cancer is associated with a significantly increased risk of venous thromboembolism compared to non-cancer patients, and the risks increase further with anticancer therapies including ICIs. Cancer-associated thrombosis can lead to hospitalizations, delayed cancer treatment, and mortality. While thrombosis was not reported as a major complication in initial clinical trials leading to the approval of ICIs, emerging evidence from post-marketing studies revealed concerning risks of thrombosis in patients receiving ICIs. However, results remained heterogenous given differences in study designs and populations. Recent studies also showed that C-reactive protein dynamics might be an easily accessible biomarker for thrombosis and disease response in this population. In addition, early findings indicated that a commonly used anticoagulant for cancer-associated thrombosis, factor Xa inhibitors, might have potential synergistic antitumor effects when combined with ICIs. Herein we will review the current literature on the incidence, risk factors, and management of thrombosis in patients with cancer receiving ICIs. We aim to provide valuable information for clinicians in managing these patients.

The 5 most frequently asked questions about factor Xa inhibitors

Direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) are commonly used oral factor Xa inhibitors in recent years. However, in some special clinical situations, the appropriate use of these anticoagulants may be of concern. In this article, we address the 5 commonly asked questions regarding their use for the treatment of venous thromboembolism, including in the setting of obesity, renal impairment, gastrointestinal (GI) malignancy, catheter-related thrombosis, and drug-drug interactions. Data on the use of DOACs in the presence of significant obesity or renal failure are mainly observational. Some DOACs are shown to have an increased risk of bleeding in patients with unresected luminal GI malignancy but not others, so selection of appropriate patients is the key. Furthermore, literature on the use of DOACs for catheter-related thrombosis or when drug-drug interactions are of concern is limited, and more research is welcome.

[Cancer-associated coagulation disorders]

Diagnosis and treatment of paraneoplastic coagulation disorders are a challenge in daily practice. While prophylactic anticoagulation to prevent venous thromboembolism (VTE) is standard of care in all surgical and acutely ill medical cancer patients, particularly careful evaluation of risks and benefits using validated risk assessment models is required during outpatient chemotherapy. Low-molecular-weight heparin and direct oral factor Xa inhibitors are available to treat established cancer-associated VTE, adhering to algorithms for bleeding risk stratification. In patients with overt disseminated intravascular coagulation, therapeutic measures should strictly follow clinical symptoms. An acquired von Willebrand syndrome may evoke a severe bleeding tendency in patients with myeloproliferative neoplasms or plasma cell dyscrasias. In 15% of cases, acquired hemophilia A, due to the formation of inhibitory autoantibodies against coagulation factor VIII, is associated with malignancy.

Practical Considerations for the Management of Cancer-Associated Venous Thromboembolism: A Guide for the General Oncology Practitioner

Cancer-associated venous thromboembolism is a devastating complication of cancer and is associated with significant morbidity and mortality. The cornerstone of cancer-associated venous thromboembolism treatment is anticoagulation, and in recent years, there have been notable randomized clinical trials that have revealed insights into the efficacy and safety of direct oral anticoagulants and low-molecular-weight heparin in the treatment of cancer-associated thrombosis. Deciding on the ideal anticoagulation treatment plan for a patient with a cancer-associated thrombosis is a complex task that requires an understanding of clinical trial data, society guidelines, and, most importantly, consideration of many cancer-related, treatment-related, and patient-related factors. This article summarizes important factors to consider when deciding on anticoagulation therapy for a patient with cancer-associated thrombosis.

The Diagnostic Value of the Systemic Immune-Inflammation Index for Venous Thromboembolism in Lung Cancer Patients: A Retrospective Study

Background

Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is considered a common complication in lung cancer patients. Despite its widespread use, the Khorana score performed moderately in predicting VTE risk. This study aimed to determine the diagnostic utility of the Systemic Immunoinflammatory Index (SII) and to create a novel nomogram for predicting VTE in patients with pulmonary carcinoma.

Materials and Methods

The data, like clinical features and laboratory indicators, of inpatients diagnosed with lung cancer from March 2019 to March 2020 were collected and analyzed. Univariate and multivariate logistic analyses were performed to confirm the risk factors and then construct a nomogram model. The calibration curve and clinical decision curve analysis (DCA) were used to assess the model's fitting performance. The receiver-operating characteristic (ROC) curve and the area under the ROC curve (AUC) were used to evaluate the diagnostic value of SII and the nomogram.

Results

This study enrolled 369 lung patients with a VTE morbidity rate of 23.33%. The patients with VTE had higher SII levels than the non-VTE group (1441.47 ± 146.28 vs. 626.76 ± 26.04, P < 0.001). SII is the stronger correlator for VTE among inflammatory markers, of which the optimal cut-off value was 851.51. Univariate and multivariate analysis revealed that the age, metastasis, antitumor treatment, hemoglobin<100 g/L, SII>851.51 × 10⁹/L, and D-dimer>2 folds were independent risk factors for lung cancer-related VTE, and a new prediction nomogram model was constructed based on them. ROC curve analysis showed the AUC of the new model and Khorana score were 0.708 (0.643-0.772) and 0.600 (0.531-0.699).

Conclusion

The SII was a simple and valuable biomarker for VTE, and the new nomogram model based on it can accurately forecast the occurrence of VTE. They can be utilized in clinical practice to identify those at high risk of VTE in lung cancer patients.

Platelet transfusion and anticoagulation in hematological cancer-associated thrombosis and thrombocytopenia: The CAVEaT multicenter prospective cohort

BACKGROUND

Venous thromboembolism (VTE) in patients with thrombocytopenia represents a complex management challenge.

OBJECTIVES

To describe practice, document outcomes, and compare management to national guidelines.

METHODS

We present a prospective multicenter cohort of 105 patients with hematological cancer, VTE within 28 days, and platelets <50 × 109 /L from May 14, 2019 to April 24, 2021 from 20 sites.

RESULTS

Median age was 64 and median initial platelet count 28 × 109 /L. Thromboses were: 46% catheter-associated, 11% lower limb, 33% pulmonary emboli (PE), and 10% other sites. Management was according to International Society on Thrombosis and Haemostasis (ISTH) guidance in 30 (47%) of 64 patients with high-risk thrombosis and 2 (5%) of low-risk thrombosis (catheter-associated or asymptomatic subsegmental PE). Twelve patients (11%) received no anticoagulation. At 28 days mortality was 15%, 8% experienced VTE progression, 7% experienced major bleeding, and 25% experienced clinically relevant non-major bleeding. Four inferior vena cava filters were placed, two were later removed. The median number of platelet units transfused was 5 (range 0-53). Twenty-seven percent of patients had a change of management strategy by 28 days. There was no clear relationship among platelet transfusion threshold, anticoagulant dose reduction threshold, and risk of thrombosis progression or major bleeding.

CONCLUSIONS

This data set demonstrates the heterogeneity of approaches used in patients presenting with severe thrombocytopenia and acute thrombosis and confirms the high rates of bleeding in this cohort with thrombosis progression rates similar to the wider cancer-associated thrombosis population. Randomized data is required to inform the optimal management.

Unanswered questions in cancer-associated thrombosis

Cancer-associated venous thromboembolism (VTE) is a leading cause of morbidity and mortality in patients with cancer. Treatment of cancer-associated VTE comes with a heightened risk of anticoagulant-related bleeding that differs by choice of anticoagulant as well as by patient- and disease-specific risk factors. Available data from randomized controlled trials and observational studies in cancer-associated VTE suggest that direct oral anticoagulants are effective, continuing anticoagulation beyond six months is indicated in those with active cancer and that patients who develop 'breakthrough' thrombotic events can be effectively treated. We review the evidence that addresses these key clinical questions and offer pragmatic approaches in individualizing care. While significant investigative efforts over the past decade have made impactful advances, future research is needed to better define the factors that contribute to anticoagulant-related bleeding and VTE recurrence, in order to aid clinical decision-making that improves the care of patients with cancer-associated VTE.

Evaluation of Open Surgical and Endovascular Treatment Options for Visceral Artery Erosions after Pancreatitis and Pancreatic Surgery

Purpose: To report and compare the results of endovascular and open surgical treatment for erosion bleeding of visceral arteries following pancreatitis and pancreatic surgery. Materials and Methods: This retrospective study included 65 consecutive patients (46 males, mean age 63 ± 14 years) presenting with visceral artery erosions between January 2011 and December 2020. Endpoints were technical success, freedom from reintervention, stent-graft-related complications, and 30-day and one-year mortality. Results: The causes of erosion bleeding included complications of surgical treatment for the pancreas and upper gastrointestinal tract (75%), pancreatitis (19%), and spontaneous bleeding (6%). Pancreatectomy was performed in 34 (52%) patients, representing 2% of all pancreatectomy procedures (n = 1645) performed in our hospital during the study period. A total of 37 (57%) patients underwent endovascular treatment (EVT), and 28 (43%) patients had open surgery (OS) as a primary treatment. Eight of 37 (22%) patients in the EVT group underwent stent-graft treatment of the eroded vessels and 28 (78%) coil embolization. Six (9%) patients underwent reintervention with no significant differences between EVT and OS groups (11% vs. 7%, p = 0.692). Postoperative morbidity and complications in 52% of all patients were higher in the OS group than in the EVT group (41% vs. 68%, p = 0.029). The in-hospital 30-days mortality rate for all patients was 25%, and it was higher in the OS group than in the EVT group (14% vs. 39%, p = 0.017). Conclusions: An endovascular-first strategy for treating visceral arteries erosions may be preferred to reduce the complications associated with open surgery if patients are hemodynamically stable and have no anastomotic insufficiency. Endovascular treatment may be associated with better in-hospital survival when compared to primary open surgery. Further studies are required to identify the optimal approach.