Venous thromboembolic disease

Asymptomatic pulmonary thromboembolism diagnosed based on prolonged fever after gastric cancer surgery: A case report with literature review

Introduction

Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is a serious postoperative complication with potentially fatal outcome. However, asymptomatic VTE is difficult to diagnose and is often discovered by chance. We report a case of suspected VTE diagnosed based on prolonged fever after surgery and discuss the literature.

Presentation of case

A 48-year-old man was referred to us with a diagnosis of gastric cancer. Upper gastrointestinal endoscopy revealed a neoplastic lesion from the anterior wall of the mid-gastric mass to the upper part of the gastric body, and biopsy revealed adenocarcinoma. Contrast-enhanced computed tomography (CT) showed no obvious distant metastasis. The preoperative diagnosis was gastric cancer, cT4aN1M0 cStage III, and radical surgery was performed. During surgery, an intermittent pneumatic compression pump was used. Subcutaneous injection of enoxaparin was started postoperatively. A high fever continued on postoperative day 4, and high D-dimer level of 14.3 μg/mL was found. Contrast-enhanced CT scanning showed thrombus in the left upper lobe pulmonary artery A4/5. Lower extremity venous ultrasonography revealed a thrombus in the right soleal vein, and apixaban 20 mg/day was started that day. Thereafter, fever resolved quickly, and the D-dimer level gradually decreased. The patient was discharged from hospital on day 21 having made good progress.

Discussion

It sould be rememberd that there are VTE found in persistent fever after gastric cancer surgery. The main complaint was simply fever, and the fever disappeared with anticoagulant.

Conclusion

This cases suggests the importance of perioperative measures against VTE. Peri operative treatment with apixaban was safe and effective.

•

The patient who had undergone gastrectomy had fever from post operative day(POD) 2. A CT scan was performed that showed a thrombus in the left upper lobe pulmonary artery and deep vein thrombosis.

•

Apixaban 20 mg/day was administered.

•

The thrombus in the left upper lobe pulmonary artery A4/5 disappeared.

Prophylaxis of thromboembolism during therapy with asparaginase in adults with acute lymphoblastic leukaemia

BACKGROUND

The risk of venous thromboembolism is increased in adults and enhanced by asparaginase-based chemotherapy, and venous thromboembolism introduces a secondary risk of treatment delay and premature discontinuation of key anti-leukaemic agents, potentially compromising survival. Yet, the trade-off between benefits and harms of primary thromboprophylaxis in adults with acute lymphoblastic leukaemia (ALL) treated according to asparaginase-based regimens is uncertain.  OBJECTIVES: The primary objectives were to assess the benefits and harms of primary thromboprophylaxis for first-time symptomatic venous thromboembolism in adults with ALL receiving asparaginase-based therapy compared with placebo or no thromboprophylaxis. The secondary objectives were to compare the benefits and harms of different groups of primary systemic thromboprophylaxis by stratifying the main results per type of drug (heparins, vitamin K antagonists, synthetic pentasaccharides, parenteral direct thrombin inhibitors, direct oral anticoagulants, and blood-derived products for antithrombin substitution).

SEARCH METHODS

We conducted a comprehensive literature search on 02 June 2020, with no language restrictions, including (1) electronic searches of Pubmed/MEDLINE; Embase/Ovid; Scopus/Elsevier; Web of Science Core Collection/Clarivate Analytics; and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) and (2) handsearches of (i) reference lists of identified studies and related reviews; (ii) clinical trials registries (ClinicalTrials.gov registry; the International Standard Randomized Controlled Trial Number (ISRCTN) registry; the World Health Organisation's International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP); and pharmaceutical manufacturers of asparaginase including Servier, Takeda, Jazz Pharmaceuticals, Ohara Pharmaceuticals, and Kyowa Pharmaceuticals), and (iii) conference proceedings (from the annual meetings of the American Society of Hematology (ASH); the European Haematology Association (EHA); the American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO); and the International Society on Thrombosis and Haemostasis (ISTH)). We conducted all searches from 1970 (the time of introduction of asparaginase in ALL treatment). We contacted the authors of relevant studies to identify any unpublished material, missing data, or information regarding ongoing studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs); including quasi-randomised, controlled clinical, cross-over, and cluster-randomised trial designs) comparing any parenteral/oral preemptive anticoagulant or mechanical intervention with placebo or no thromboprophylaxis, or comparing two different pre-emptive anticoagulant interventions in adults aged at least 18 years with ALL treated according to asparaginase-based chemotherapy regimens. For the description of harms, non-randomised observational studies with a control group were eligible for inclusion.  DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Using a standardised data collection form, two review authors independently screened and selected studies, extracted data, assessed risk of bias for each outcome using standardised tools (RoB 2.0 tool for RCTs and ROBINS-I tool for non-randomised studies) and the certainty of evidence for each outcome using the GRADE approach. Primary outcomes included first-time symptomatic venous thromboembolism, all-cause mortality, and major bleeding. Secondary outcomes included asymptomatic venous thromboembolism, venous thromboembolism-related mortality, adverse events (i.e. clinically relevant non-major bleeding and heparin-induced thrombocytopenia for trials using heparins), and quality of life. Analyses were performed according to the guidelines of the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. For non-randomised studies, we evaluated all studies (including studies judged to be at critical risk of bias in at least one of the ROBINS-I domains) in a sensitivity analysis exploring confounding.  MAIN RESULTS: We identified 23 non-randomised studies that met the inclusion criteria of this review, of which 10 studies provided no outcome data for adults with ALL. We included the remaining 13 studies in the 'Risk of bias' assessment, in which we identified invalid control group definition in two studies and judged outcomes of nine studies to be at critical risk of bias in at least one of the ROBINS-I domains and outcomes of two studies at serious risk of bias. We did not assess the benefits of thromboprophylaxis, as no RCTs were included. In the main descriptive analysis of harms, we included two retrospective non-randomised studies with outcomes judged to be at serious risk of bias. One study evaluated antithrombin concentrates compared to no antithrombin concentrates. We are uncertain whether antithrombin concentrates have an effect on all-cause mortality (risk ratio (RR) 0.55, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.26 to 1.19 (intention-to-treat analysis); one study, 40 participants; very low certainty of evidence). We are uncertain whether antithrombin concentrates have an effect on venous thromboembolism-related mortality (RR 0.10, 95% CI 0.01 to 1.94 (intention-to-treat analysis); one study, 40 participants; very low certainty of evidence). We do not know whether antithrombin concentrates have an effect on major bleeding, clinically relevant non-major bleeding, and quality of life in adults with ALL treated with asparaginase-based chemotherapy, as data were insufficient. The remaining study (224 participants) evaluated prophylaxis with low-molecular-weight heparin versus no prophylaxis. However, this study reported insufficient data regarding harms including all-cause mortality, major bleeding, venous thromboembolism-related mortality, clinically relevant non-major bleeding, heparin-induced thrombocytopenia, and quality of life. In the sensitivity analysis of harms, exploring the effect of confounding, we also included nine non-randomised studies with outcomes judged to be at critical risk of bias primarily due to uncontrolled confounding. Three studies (179 participants) evaluated the effect of antithrombin concentrates and six studies (1224 participants) evaluated the effect of prophylaxis with different types of heparins. When analysing all-cause mortality; venous thromboembolism-related mortality; and major bleeding (studies of heparin only) including all studies with extractable outcomes for each comparison (antithrombin and low-molecular-weight heparin), we observed small study sizes; few events; wide CIs crossing the line of no effect; and substantial heterogeneity by visual inspection of the forest plots. Although the observed heterogeneity could arise through the inclusion of a small number of studies with differences in participants; interventions; and outcome assessments, the likelihood that bias due to uncontrolled confounding was the cause of heterogeneity is inevitable. Subgroup analyses were not possible due to insufficient data.  AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: We do not know from the currently available evidence, if thromboprophylaxis used for adults with ALL treated according to asparaginase-based regimens is associated with clinically appreciable benefits and acceptable harms. The existing research on this question is solely of non-randomised design, seriously to critically confounded, and underpowered with substantial imprecision. Any estimates of effect based on the existing insufficient evidence is very uncertain and is likely to change with future research.

Can Biomarkers of Coagulation, Platelet Activation, and Inflammation Predict Venous Thromboembolism in Patients with Haematological Malignancies?

BACKGROUND

The incidence of venous thromboembolism (VTE) in haematological malignancies varies according to the type and grade of the disease and clinical variables, and there is a need to develop a tool to predict the occurrence of VTE in cancer patients at diagnosis to tailor prophylactic anticoagulation use during treatment.

OBJECTIVE

To study the incidence of VTE in haematological malignancies and clarify whether vascular and inflammatory biomarkers could be used as predictors of VTE in those patients.

METHODS

This was a prospective observational cohort study. Hypercoagulability and inflammatory biomarkers were assayed in a group of 171 patients with haematological malignancies at diagnosis. These markers included (1) coagulation and fibrinolysis activation markers (D-dimer, fibrinogen, antithrombin, plasminogen activator inhibitor 1), (2) endothelial and platelet activation markers (von Willebrand factor and soluble P-selectin), and (3) inflammatory markers (tumour necrosis factor αand interleukin 6). The end point was mortality or symptomatic VTE.

RESULTS/CONCLUSION

The incidence of symptomatic VTE was 7%. None of the tested biomarkers showed statistical significance as predictors for the occurrence of VTE in haematological malignancies. However, there were statistically significant associations between the occurrence of VTE and central venous access device insertion, the prothrombin time, and the erythrocyte sedimentation rate. An ESR above 106.5 mm/h is associated with increased VTE occurrence.

Recent Advances in the Management of Cancer-Associated Thrombosis: New Hopes but New Challenges

Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is a common cause of morbidity and mortality in cancer patients and leads to a significant increase in health care costs. Cancer patients often suffer from multiple co-morbidities and have both a greater risk of VTE recurrence and bleeding compared to non-cancer patients. Anticoagulation is therefore challenging. For many years, long-term therapy with Low-Molecular-Weight Heparin (LMWH) was the standard of care for the management of cancer-associated VTE. Direct oral anticoagulants (DOAC), which offer the convenience of an oral administration and have a rapid onset of action, have recently been proposed as a new option in this setting. Head-to-head comparisons between DOAC and LMWHs for the treatment of established VTE are now available, and data on the efficacy and safety of these drugs for primary prophylaxis of VTE in ambulatory cancer patients receiving systemic anticancer therapy are emerging. This narrative review aims to summarize the main recent advances in the prevention and treatment of cancer-associated VTE, including recent data on the use of individualized factors to stratify the risk of VTE in each individual patient, quality-of-life in patients treated with LMWH, and the place that DOACs will likely take in the cancer-associated VTE management landscape.

Could sodium imbalances predispose to postoperative venous thromboembolism? An analysis of the NSQIP database

Background

Hyponatremia is common among patients with pulmonary embolism, while hypernatremia increases the risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE). Our objective was to evaluate the association between sodium imbalances and the incidence of VTE and other selected perioperative outcomes.

Methods

We conducted a retrospective cohort study using the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (ACS NSQIP) and identified 1,108,704 patients undergoing major surgery from 2008 to 2012. We evaluated 30-day perioperative outcomes, including mortality and cardiac, respiratory, neurological, urinary, wound, and VTE outcomes. Multivariate logistic regressions were used to estimate the odds of 30-day perioperative outcomes.

Results

Compared with the normal sodium group, in which VTE occurred in 1.0% of patients, 1.8% of patients in the hyponatremia group (unadjusted odds ratio (OR) 1.84) and 2.4% of patients in the hypernatremia group (unadjusted OR 2.49) experienced VTE. Crude mortality was 1.3% in the normal sodium group, 4.9% in the hyponatremia group (unadjusted OR 3.93) and 8.4% in the hypernatremia group (unadjusted OR 7.01). Crude composite morbidity was 7.1% for the normal sodium group, 16.7% for the hyponatremia group (unadjusted OR 2.63) and 20.6% for the hypernatremia group (unadjusted OR 3.43). After adjusting for potential confounders, hyponatremia and hypernatremia remained significantly and independently associated with an increased risk of VTE (adjusted OR 1.43 and 1.56, respectively), mortality (adjusted OR 1.39 and 1.39, respectively) and composite morbidity (adjusted OR 2.15 and 3.34, respectively).

Conclusions

Pre-operative hyponatremia and hypernatremia are potential prognostic markers for perioperative 30-day morbidity, mortality and VTE.

Thrombosis in Thyroid Cancer

BACKGROUND

The number of studies on venous thromboembolism (VTE) and thyroid cancer is very scarce and existing data are contradictory. This paper reviews VTE in thyroid cancer.

METHODS

The following words were used for a comprehensive literature review using MEDLINE database: Blood coagulation factors; thyroid hormones; blood coagulation tests; venous thromboembolism; receptors thyroid hormone; hemostasis; fibrinolysis; bleeding; blood coagulation disorders; thyroid neoplasms; Thyroid cancer, papillary; Thyroid cancer, follicular; Thyroid carcinoma, anaplastic; Thyroid cancer, Hurthle cell; Familial medullary thyroid carcinoma; venous thrombosis; Pulmonary embolism; Blood coagulation factors. The studies, which include any changes in hemostasis and thyroid cancer were included and reviewed.

RESULTS

Although few studies have shown a possible increase in VTE occurrence in thyroid cancer in patients ≥ 60 years old and in proximity to cancer diagnosis, other studies could not find any difference compared to general population. New thyroid cancer classification excluding common subtype(s) with benign nature, may affect the results of the future studies on association of VTE and thyroid cancer.

CONCLUSIONS

Prospective studies on the occurrence of VTE in various types and severities of thyroid cancer and in different age groups are warranted, as the results would affect clinical practice on the necessity of usage of anticoagulants in some thyroid cancer groups.

After deep vein thrombosis, which patients refer to vascular specialist for anticoagulant withdrawal? A Delphi study results between general practitioners and vascular specialists

AIM

Deep vein thrombosis (DVT) is a potential serious common disease. Its management is, except in particular cases, on an outpatient basis. General practitioner's (GP) role usually includes the treatment risk/benefit reassessment. The treatment duration can vary and is difficult to define. The national and international guidelines do not explain clearly when to refer, or not, to a vascular specialist in order to stop treatment. The study's objective was to identify, for DVT, when a GP has to refer or not to a vascular specialist, for anticoagulant withdrawal.

METHODS

A modified Delphi consensus study had been conducted by a panel of general practitioners and vascular specialists to identify, in which situations all clinicians agree that GPs can stop anticoagulation on their own and other situations in which GP have to refer to vascular specialists. Clinical situations and their respective duration of anticoagulant therapy have been identified by a DVT management guideline literature research.

RESULTS

After two rounds, a strong agreement had been reached for each clinical situation. For 7 clinical situations, GPs were able to stop anticoagulation on their own, for 13 clinical situations; it was necessary to refer to a vascular specialist. We obtained a consensus regarding 3 modulating factors.

DISCUSSION

Consensual situations, in which the general practitioners may be able to stop anticoagulation themselves, are isolated distal DVT without cancer and proximal DVT caused by a major reversible risk factor. Situations justifying a vascular medical advice were unprovoked DVT, DVT in a context of pregnancy, postpartum, cancer and proximal DVT in a context of hormonal therapy.

Venous Thromboembolism in Children with Cancer and Blood Disorders

Venous thromboembolism (VTE) in children is multifactorial and most often related to a combination of inherited and acquired thrombophilias. Children with cancer and blood disorders are often at risk for VTE due to disease-related factors such as inflammation and abnormal blood flow and treatment-related factors such as central venous catheters and surgery. We will review risk factors for VTE in children with leukemia, lymphoma, and solid tumors. We will also review risk factors for VTE in children with blood disorders with specific focus on sickle cell anemia and hemophilia. We will present the available evidence and clinical guidelines for prevention and treatment of VTE in these populations.

The strong but nonspecific relationship between 18F-FDG uptake in the lower-extremity veins and venous thromboembolism

Venous thromboembolism (VTE) can present as deep vein thrombosis (DVT) and/or acute pulmonary embolism (PE). In fluorine-18 fluorodeoxyglucose (18F-FDG) PET/CT, 18F-FDG activity along the deep veins of the lower extremities (LE) is often observed and, unless it is associated with focal intense activity, is not considered abnormal. However, anecdotally it has been associated with the placement of an inferior vena cava filter. In this short paper we intend to investigate this association. We found 10 patients who were investigated in the vascular laboratory by means of either LE or upper-extremity duplex or a chest computed tomography with PE protocol, or who had undergone the placement of an inferior vena cava filter between 27 April 2010 and 7 January 2013 and who had also undergone one or more 18F-FDG-PET scan(s) that included the LE. Seventeen patients without venous 18F-FDG uptake were added as controls. 18F-FDG uptake visualized in the LE was scored as the number of positive LE veins and the extent of the radiotracer uptake. The time intervals between the VTE event and the 18F-FDG-PET scan(s) were recorded. The time intervals between the most remote and the closest 18F-FDG-PET before a VTE event averaged 79 ± 101 and 49 ± 82 days, respectively, and the closest and the most remote 18F-FDG-PET after the VTE event averaged 58 ± 50 and 122 ± 124 days. The extent of uptake in the LE veins averaged 7 ± 2 for the patients with an acute DVT on LE duplex and 5 ± 3 for those with negative or chronic DVT on LE duplex (P=nonsignificant). Two patients (n=3 and 10) were negative for VTE events and had an extent of 0. The number of positive events correlated slightly with the extent of venous uptake (r=0.69). The 17 control patients without venous uptake on 18F-FDG-PET had no history of VTE. There was an association between LE venous uptake of 18F-FDG and risk for VTE. The association was not related to the location of the VTE, nor to the timing of the VTE.

Risk of venous thromboembolism in people with lung cancer: a cohort study using linked UK healthcare data

Background:

Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is a potentially preventable cause of death in people with lung cancer. Identification of those most at risk and high-risk periods may provide the opportunity for better targeted intervention.

Methods:

We conducted a cohort study using the Clinical Practice Research Datalink linked to Hospital Episode Statistics and Cancer Registry data. Our cohort comprises 10 598 people with lung cancer diagnosed between 1997 and 2006 with follow-up continuing to the end of 2010. Cox regression analysis was performed to determine which demographic, tumour and treatment-related factors (time-varying effects of chemotherapy and surgery) independently affected VTE risk. We also determined the effect of a VTE diagnosis on the survival of people with lung cancer.

Results:

People with lung cancer had an overall VTE incidence of 39.2 per 1000 person-years (95% confidence interval (CI), 35.4–43.5), though rates varied depending on the patient group and treatment course. Independent factors associated with increased VTE risk were metastatic disease (hazard ratio (HR)=1.9, CI 1.2–3.0 vs local disease); adenocarcinoma subtype (HR=2.0, CI 1.5–2.7, vs squamous cell; chemotherapy administration (HR=2.1, CI 1.4–3.0 vs outside chemotherapy courses); and diagnosis via emergency hospital admission (HR=1.7, CI 1.2–2.3 vs other routes to diagnosis). Patients with VTE had an approximately 50% higher risk of mortality than those without VTE.

Conclusions:

People with lung cancer have especially high risk of VTE if they have advanced disease, adenocarcinoma or are undergoing chemotherapy. The presence of VTE is an independent risk factor for death.

Pattern of Venous Thromboembolism Occurrence in Gynecologic Malignancy: Incidence, Timing, and Distribution a 10-Year Retrospective Single-institutional Study

The aim of this single-institutional 10-year retrospective study was to investigate the clinical pattern (incidence, type, timing, and location) of venous thromboembolism (VTE) in Chinese patients with gynecologic cancer. Cases were identified by searching institutional Electronic Discharge Database. A comprehensive review of medical documentation was then performed to collect relevant data. The detection of VTE was symptom-triggered. A total of 155 VTE events were identified out of 7562 cases over the past 10-year period in our hospital. The incidence of clinically significant VTE was 2.0% in gynecologic malignancy, with vulvar cancer (3.7%) and ovarian cancer (2.5%) being the high-risk types (P = 0.01, Chi-square test). Perioperative period (35.1%) and preoperation (29.1%) were the 2 incidence peaks. Seventeen cases of pulmonary embolism (PE) occurred prior to surgery. Ovarian cancer patients were more likely to present preoperative PE compared to other site of cancer (76.4%; P = 0.01, Chi-square test). More preoperative VTE cases were complicated by PE than those in the perioperative period (39.5% vs 17.3%, P = 0.02, Chi-square test). Bilateral lower extremity deep vein thrombosis (DVT) accounted for 32.6% and there existed a preponderance of left-sided DVT (47.5% vs 17.0%, ratio 2.79:1). Femoral vein (36.6%) was the most common location for DVT. About 2.0% of the Chinese patients with gynecologic carcinoma developed clinical VTE, mostly during perioperative period and the time of diagnosis. The true incidence might have been under-estimated due to several reasons. The need for increased patient education and awareness of VTE is of importance.

Inferior vena cava filters: current best practices

Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is a common cause of inpatient and outpatient morbidity and mortality. While anticoagulant therapy is considered the primary means of prevention and treatment of VTE, inferior vena cava filters (IVCFs) are often used as an alternative or adjunct to anticoagulation. With the advent of retrievable filters indications have liberalized, to include placement for primary prophylaxis in high-risk patients. However, this practice is based on limited evidence supporting their efficacy in preventing clinically relevant outcomes. Since indiscriminate use of IVCFs can be associated with net patient harm and increased health care costs, knowledge of the literature surrounding IVCF utilization is critical for providers to adopt best practices. In this review, we will provide an overview of the literature as it relates to specific clinical questions that arise when considering IVCF utilization in the prevention and treatment of VTE. Practice-based recommendations will be reviewed to provide the clinician with guidance on challenging clinical scenarios.

ICD-9 Code-Based Venous Thromboembolism Performance Targets Fail to Measure Up

Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is a common complication among hospitalized patients. Suboptimal prevention practices have prompted payers to consider hospital-associated VTE as a potentially preventable condition for which financial incentives or penalties exist to drive practice improvement. The authors reviewed all cases of hospital-associated VTE at the Johns Hopkins Hospital between July 1, 2010, and June 30, 2011, that were identified by ICD-9 codes used by a state-run pay-for-performance quality improvement program. Of 157 patients identified as having developed hospital-associated, potentially preventable VTE, only 92 (58.6%) patients developed radiographically confirmed VTE that were potentially preventable. This misclassification of VTE overestimates the marginal additional treatment cost by more than $860 000 and amounts to nearly $200 000 in lost reward in one year alone. ICD-9 codes alone have extremely low positive predictive value to identify true VTE events. The authors recommend linking provision of risk-appropriate prophylaxis to VTE outcomes as a better target for performance improvement.

Structural analysis and anticoagulant activities of the novel sulfated fucan possessing a regular well-defined repeating unit from sea cucumber

Sulfated fucans, the complex polysaccharides, exhibit various biological activities. Herein, we purified two fucans from the sea cucumbers Holothuria edulis and Ludwigothurea grisea. Their structures were verified by means of HPGPC, FT-IR, GC–MS and NMR. As a result, a novel structural motif for this type of polymers is reported. The fucans have a unique structure composed of a central core of regular (1→2) and (1→3)-linked tetrasaccharide repeating units. Approximately 50% of the units from L. grisea (100% for H. edulis fucan) contain sides of oligosaccharides formed by nonsulfated fucose units linked to the O-4 position of the central core. Anticoagulant activity assays indicate that the sea cucumber fucans strongly inhibit human blood clotting through the intrinsic pathways of the coagulation cascade. Moreover, the mechanism of anticoagulant action of the fucans is selective inhibition of thrombin activity by heparin cofactor II. The distinctive tetrasaccharide repeating units contribute to the anticoagulant action. Additionally, unlike the fucans from marine alga, although the sea cucumber fucans have great molecular weights and affluent sulfates, they do not induce platelet aggregation. Overall, our results may be helpful in understanding the structure-function relationships of the well-defined polysaccharides from invertebrate as new types of safer anticoagulants.

Venous thromboembolism in children with cancer - a population-based cohort study

Introduction

Cancer is a known risk factor for venous thromboembolism (VTE) in adults, but population-based data in children are scarce.

Materials and methods

We conducted a cohort study utilising linkage of the Clinical Practice Research Database (primary care), Hospital Episodes Statistics (secondary care), UK Cancer Registry data and Office for National Statistics cause of death data. From these databases, we selected 498 children with cancer diagnosed between 1997 and 2006 and 20,810 controls without cancer. We calculated VTE incidence rates in children with cancer vs. controls, and hazard ratios (HRs) using Cox regression.

Results

We identified four VTE events in children with cancer compared with four events in the larger control population corresponding to absolute risks of 1.52 and 0.06 per 1000 person-years respectively. The four children with VTE and cancer were diagnosed with hematological, bone or non-specified cancer. Childhood cancer was hence associated with a highly increased risk of VTE (HR adjusted for age and sex: 28.3; 95%CI = 7.0-114.5).

Conclusions

Children with cancer are at increased relative risk of VTE compared to those without cancer. Physicians could consider thromboprophylaxis in children with cancer to reduce their excess risk of VTE however the absolute risk is extremely small and the benefit gained therefore would need to be balanced against the risk invoked of implementing such a strategy.

Novelty & Impact Statements

While there is a reasonable level of knowledge about the risk of VTE in adult populations, it is not well known whether this risk is reflected in paediatric patients. We found a substantial increase in risk of VTE in children with cancer compared to a child population without cancer. While this finding is important, the absolute risk of VTE is still low and must be balanced with the risks of anticoagulation.

Thromboprophylaxis in ambulatory lung cancer treatment

Venous thromboembolism (VTE), including deep vein thrombosis and pulmonary embolism, are common problems experienced by patients with lung cancer that can impact treatment plans, prognoses, and survival. Patients with lung cancer are at greatest risk for development of VTE in the ambulatory care treatment setting. Literature does exist on VTE management for medical and surgical oncology inpatients, as well as clinical guidelines for inpatient prophylaxis; however, published evidence is lacking on outpatient risk and thromboprophylaxis in medical oncology outpatients, particularly patients with lung cancer. Because patients with lung cancer treated in the ambulatory setting have established risks for VTE, they may benefit from thromboprophylaxis. Clinical guidelines for outpatient thromboprophylaxis direct the clinical practice for thromboprophylaxis in lung cancer treatment. The purpose of the current article is to explore the VTE risks associated with ambulatory lung cancer treatment and to review the recommended guidelines for thromboprophylaxis to guide clinical decision making for patients with lung cancer.

Bridging efforts to longitudinally improve and evaluate VEnous thromboembolism prophylaxis uptake in hospitalized cancer patients through Interprofessional Teamwork (BELIEVE IT): a study by Princess Margaret Cancer Centre

INTRODUCTION

Despite demonstrable risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE), thromboprophylaxis continues to be underutilized in hospitalized cancer patients. Our study evaluated institutional VTE prophylaxis rates after devising a series of strategic interventions to longitudinally improve adherence rates over a period of eight years.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

Between 2004 and 2012, a series of interventions were implemented to improve the thromboprophylaxis rate among patients with solid tumours hospitalized at our institution using quality improvement methodology. Interventions included development of guidelines and institutional policies coupled with educational in-services for physicians, nurses and pharmacists and engagement of the Cancer Quality Committee. Thromboprophylaxis rates were monitored to assess response to interventions.

RESULTS

At the outset in 2004, 11 of 57 (19.3%) eligible patients received appropriate pharmacological prophylaxis and formed the baseline of our analysis. Post-2009 policy implementation and educational sessions, 46.5% of an eligible 185 inpatients were administered thromboprophylaxis. Following a two-year grace period to allow for policy acceptance, three audits were conducted in 2011 for which an average prophylaxis rate of 62.3% resulted. In 2012, following another round of educational sessions, a 96.7% rate was achieved and maintained ten weeks later. Minimal bleeding risk was observed during this eight year initiative.

CONCLUSION

A reproducible 96.7% prophylaxis uptake rate was the result of our perseverance and persistence in believing that culture change was inevitable through continuously collaborating with stakeholders at all levels.

Venous thromboembolism risk in patients with cancer receiving chemotherapy: a real-world analysis

The occurrence of malignant disease increases the risk for venous thromboembolism (VTE). Here we evaluate the risk for VTE in a large unselected cohort of patients with cancer receiving chemotherapy.

METHODS

The United States IMPACT health care claims database was retrospectively analyzed to identify patients with a range of solid tumors who started chemotherapy from January 2005 through December 2008. International Classification of Diseases, 9th revision, Clinical Modification Codes were used to identify cancer location, presence of VTE 3.5 months and 12 months after starting chemotherapy, and incidence of major bleeding complications. Health care costs were assessed one year before initiation of chemotherapy and one year after initiation of chemotherapy.

RESULTS

The overall incidence of VTE 3.5 months after starting chemotherapy was 7.3% (range 4.6%-11.6% across cancer locations) rising to 13.5% at 12 months (range 9.8%-21.3%). The highest VTE risk was identified in patients with pancreatic, stomach, and lung cancer. Patients in whom VTE developed had a higher risk for major bleeding at 3.5 months and at 12 months (11.0% and 19.8% vs. 3.8% and 9.6%, respectively). Health care costs were significantly higher in patients in whom VTE developed.

CONCLUSION

Those undergoing chemotherapy as outpatients are at increased risk for VTE and for major bleeding complications. Thromboprophylaxis may be considered for such patients after carefully assessing the risks and benefits of treatment.

Evolution of heparin anticoagulants to ultra-low-molecular-weight heparins: a review of pharmacologic and clinical differences and applications in patients with cancer

The burden of venous thromboembolism (VTE) is high in patients with cancer, particularly those with metastatic disease and those receiving chemotherapy. The use of heparin and heparin derivatives should be considered for primary prevention of VTE in hospitalized patients with cancer and in patients undergoing cancer surgery. Preliminary evidence also suggests that heparins may have direct anticancer benefits owing to effects on tumor growth, angiogenesis, and metastasis. Despite the potential benefits of heparin-derived anticoagulants, many at-risk patients do not receive adequate thromboprophylaxis. The evolution of unfractionated heparin to low-molecular-weight and ultra-low-molecular-weight heparins has provided practitioners with alternatives for VTE prevention in cancer, although these alternatives present challenges related to clinically relevant pharmacologic differences between agents. In this review, we present results from our review of the medical literature focusing on the use of the heparin-derived anticoagulants in prospective interventional studies of primary thromboprophylaxis in patients with cancer in surgical, hospitalized, and ambulatory settings.

The efficacy and safety of low-molecular-weight heparin use for cancer treatment: a meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) has an anti-tumour effect in-vitro and in animal models of malignancy; however, the evidence from clinical trials is controversial. Thus, we performed a meta-analysis from the results of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) to assess LMWH efficacy and safety in cancer patients who had no venous thromboembolism (VTE).

METHODS

We searched the MEDLINE, EMBASE and CENTRAL (The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trails) databases covering all papers published up until April 2012. Two reviewers (D. H. Che and J. Y. Cao) extracted the data independently. The inclusion criteria used were patients with cancer who had no VTE and were treated with LMWH. The outcomes of interest included the 1-year mortality rate, VTE, bleeding and major bleeding complications. The results were presented as a relative risk (RR), and the STATA 11.0 package was used for comprehensive quantitative analysis.

RESULTS

A total of 11 studies with 3835 cases and 3449 controls were included. The meta-analysis showed significant differences in the rates of bleeding with an RR: 1.32 [95% confidence interval (95% CI, 1.08-1.62)] and VTE with an RR: 0.53 (95% CI, 0.42-0.67) in cancer patients when LMWH was compared with placebo or no anticoagulant. There were no significant differences in the 1-year mortality rate with an RR: 0.97 (95% CI, 0.92-1.02) and major bleeding with an RR: 1.22 (95% CI, 0.87-1.71).

CONCLUSION

LMWH does not significantly reduce the 1-year mortality rate for cancer patients. Although LMWH can prevent VTE, we should consider the risk-effect ratio (in case of an increased bleeding event) when we use LMWH in the patients with cancer. Thus, further research is still needed to confirm these results.

Incidence of venous thromboembolism in patients with cancer - a cohort study using linked United Kingdom databases

BACKGROUND

Accurate population-based data are needed on the incidence of venous thromboembolism (VTE) in patients with different cancers in order to inform guidelines on which hospitalised and ambulatory cancer patients should receive VTE prophylaxis.

METHODS

We conducted a cohort study using data from the Clinical Practice Research Datalink, linked to Hospital Episode Statistics, Cancer Registry data and Office for National Statistics cause of death data. We determined the incidence rates (cases per 1000 person-years) of VTE separately for 24 cancer sites. To determine relative risk, incidence rates were compared to frequency-matched controls (by age) with no record of cancer.

FINDINGS

We identified 83,203 cancer patients and 577,207 controls. New cases of VTE were diagnosed in 3352 cancer patients, and 6353 controls. The absolute rate of VTE in all cancers was 13.9 per 1000 person-years (95% confidence interval [CI] 13.4-14.4), corresponding to an age, sex and calendar year adjusted hazard-ratio of 4.7 (CI 4.5-4.9) between cancer patients and the general population. Rates varied greatly by cancer site (range; 98 (CI 80-119) in pancreatic cancer to 3.1 (CI 1.5-6.5) in thyroid cancer), age (range; 16.9 for patients over 80 years to 4.9 for those under 30 years) and time from diagnosis (range; 75 in the first three months to 8.4, >1 year after diagnosis).

INTERPRETATION

VTE is strongly linked to cancer, but the annual rate varies greatly by cancer site, proximity to diagnosis and age. Prophylaxis guidelines should take account of cancer site and such intervention should also be targeted towards the three months following diagnosis.

Venous Thromboembolism in Hospitalized Patients With Active Cancer

Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is a common complication of cancer and chemotherapy. We evaluated the baseline clinical characteristics, thromboprophylaxis patterns, frequency and timing of VTE, and clinical outcomes in 1000 adult hospitalized patients with active cancer. Overall, symptomatic VTE occurred in 5.4% of hospitalized patients with cancer. The VTE occurred in 2.3% of patients with cancer during hospitalization and in 3.4% between hospital discharge and day 90. Few (13.9%) hospitalized patients with cancer received extended duration pharmacological prophylaxis after hospital discharge. Cancer was the most frequent known cause of death in both the groups. In conclusion, VTE was common in hospitalized patients with cancer, especially after discharge. Inhospital death and death between discharge and day 90 were frequent in hospitalized patients with cancer who developed VTE.

Comparison of physicochemical characteristics and anticoagulant activities of polysaccharides from three sea cucumbers

In order to search for sulfated polysaccharides in different invertebrate connective tissues and to examine their biological activities, we have isolated three types of polysaccharides from the body wall of the three sea cucumbers Holothuria edulis, Apostichopus japonicas and Holothuria nobilis. The physicochemical properties and anticoagulant activities of these polysaccharides were examined and compared. The chemical composition analysis and nuclear magnetic resonance (NMR) analysis indicate that two types of polysaccharides, sulfated fucan and fucosylated chondroitin sulfate (FuCS), were found in all of the three species and in addition a neutral glycan was observed in H. edulis. The neutral α-glucan was firstly obtained from sea cucumber. The same type of polysaccharides from different species of sea cucumbers have similar physicochemical properties and anticoagulant activities, but those of different types of glycans are significantly different, possibly due to their different monosaccharide compositions, electric charges and average molecular weights. The FuCSs have stronger anticoagulant activities than the sulfated fucans, although the molecular sizes of the FuCSs are lower than those of the sulfated fucans, whereas the neutral glucan has no activity, as expected from the absence of sulfate. Thus, anticoagulant activities of the different type of polysaccharides are likely to relate to monosaccharide composition and sulfate content. Preliminary analysis suggests that the sulfation patterns of the FuCSs may result in the difference in anticoagulant activities. Our data could help elucidate the structure-activity relationship of the sea cucumber polysaccharides.

Coagulation and cancer: biological and clinical aspects

Malignancy affects the hemostatic system and the hemostatic system affects malignancy. In cancer patients there are a number of coagulation abnormalities which provide the background for an increased tendency of these patients to both thrombosis and hemorrhage. The causes of this coagulation impairment rely on general risk factors which are common to other categories of patients, and other factors which are specific to cancer, such as tumor type and disease stage. In addition, data from basic research indicate that the hemostatic components and the cancer biology are interconnected in multiple ways. Notably, while cancer cells are able to activate the coagulation system, the hemostatic factors play a role in tumor progression. This opens the way to the development of bifunctional therapeutic approaches that are both capable of attacking the malignant process and resolving the coagulation impairment. On the other hand, the management of thrombosis and hemorrhages in cancer patients can be different. To approach these problems, some guidelines have been released by prominent international scientific societies. Also actively investigated is the issue of identifying new biomarkers to classify the subjects at a higher risk, thus improving the prevention of thrombohemorrhagic events in these patients. Finally, novel prophylactic and therapeutic approaches are currently under development. This review provides an overview of the hemostatic complications in cancer, together with new insights into the interaction between hemostasis and cancer biology. We also review the assessment of the risk of thrombohemorrhagic events in cancer patients, and the prophylaxis and treatment of such manifestations.

CXCL4-platelet factor 4, heparin-induced thrombocytopenia and cancer

Platelet factor 4 (CXCL4-PF4) is a chemokine that binds to and neutralizes heparin and other negatively charged proteoglycans, but is also involved in angiogenesis and cancer development. In some patients exposed to heparin, antibodies are generated against the CXCL-PF4/heparin complex that may activate platelets and coagulation and lead to thrombocytopenia and arterial or venous thrombosis, a condition commonly named heparin induced thrombocytopenia (HIT). HIT has been investigated in numerous clinical settings, but there is limited data on the epidemiology and phenotype of HIT in cancer patients. The present review describes the role of CXCL4-PF4 in cancer, the immunobiology, clinical presentation and diagnosis of HIT, and the specific problems faced in cancer patients.

Thromboprophylaxis in non-surgical cancer patients

Acutely ill medical patients with cancer and cancer patients requiring non-surgical therapy are considered as non-surgical cancer patients and are at moderate to high risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE): approximately 10-30% of these patients may develop asymptomatic or symptomatic deep-vein thrombosis (DVT) or pulmonary embolism (PE), and the latter is a leading contributor to deaths in hospital. Other medical conditions associated with a high risk of VTE include cardiac disease, respiratory disease, inflammatory bowel disease, rheumatological and infectious diseases. Pre-disposing risk factors in non-surgical cancer patients include a history of VTE, immobilisation, history of metastatic malignancy, complicating infections, increasing age, obesity hormonal or antiangiogenic therapies, thalidomide and lenalidomide therapy. Heparins, both unfractionated (UFH) and low molecular weight heparin (LMWH) and fondaparinux have been shown to be effective agents in prevention of VTE in the medical setting with patients having a history of cancer. UFH and LMWH along with semuloparin also have a role in outpatients with cancer receiving chemotherapy. However, it has not yet been possible to demonstrate a significant effect on mortality rates in this population. UFH has a higher rate of bleeding complications than LMWH. Thromboprophylaxis has been shown to be effective in medical patients with cancer and may have an effect on cancer outcomes. Thromboprophylaxis in patients receiving chemotherapy remains controversial and requires further investigation. There is no evidence for the use of aspirin, warfarin or mechanical methods. We recommend either LMWH, or fondaparinux for the prevention of VTE in cancer patients with acute medical illnesses and UFH for those with significant severe renal impairment. For ambulatory cancer patients undergoing chemotherapy we recommend LMWH or semuloparin. These are safe and effective agents in the thromboprophylaxis of non-surgical cancer patients.

Thromboprophylaxis guidelines in cancer with a primary focus on ambulatory patients receiving chemotherapy: a review from the Southern Network on Adverse Reactions (SONAR)

Patients with cancer are at increased risk for venous thromboembolism (VTE). Factors related to cancer type, site, stage, duration, and extent of disease contribute to the oncology patient's risk of VTE. Patient-specific factors such as history of prior VTE and comorbidity are also contributory. The role of treatment-related factors, including chemotherapy regimen, has been a focus of recent investigation because most cases of VTE in the oncology setting occur in ambulatory patients. Thus, an emerging area of clinical research is primary VTE prophylaxis in the ambulatory cancer setting. Clinical guidelines currently recommend primary thromboprophylaxis in cancer patients who are undergoing surgery, who are hospitalized, and who are in a specific subset of high-risk ambulatory cancer patients. Validated risk stratification tools are essential for identification of patients who are at high risk of thrombosis. Emerging data from recently published clinical trials, as well as ongoing studies, are likely to advance our understanding of the potential utility of antithrombotic agents for primary prophylaxis in ambulatory patients with cancer and may influence future clinical guideline recommendations.

Thalidomide thromboprophylaxis in multiple myeloma: a review of current evidence

Currently multiple antithrombotic agents are used for thalidomide thromboprophylaxis in multiple myeloma patients. Agents used include low-dose aspirin, fixed low-dose and therapeutic warfarin and prophylactic low molecular weight heparin. To evaluate the evidence for the efficacy and safety of aspirin, warfarin and low molecular weight heparin thromboprophylaxis in multiple myeloma patients on thalidomide a literature search was conducted in May and June 2011. Databases searched included the Cochrane Database of Systemic Reviews and the Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects, Evidence Based Medicine Reviews and Ovid MEDLINE. The search was restricted to English language articles and limited to articles published from 2005 to 2011. Most studies consisted of small prospective cohort studies not originally designed to assess thromboprophylaxis as an outcome. A single comparative randomized trial, several retrospective review articles, two meta-analyses and two clinical practice guidelines were also identified. Current evidence fails to demonstrate a clear advantage of any particular thromboprophylaxis strategy. Results from the only prospective comparative randomized trial found no significant differences among aspirin, warfarin and low molecular weight heparin. More studies are required that consider not only efficacy and safety, but also costs, lifestyle burden and patient preference.

Venous thromboembolism in patients with cholangiocarcinoma: focus on risk factors and impact on survival

BACKGROUND

A high incidence of venous thromboembolism (VTE) has been observed in patients with cancer. However, few data are available on patients with cholangiocarcinoma.

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to evaluate the clinical characteristics and risk factors of VTE and to investigate whether VTE would affect the survival of patients with cholangiocarcinoma.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed 273 patients who were diagnosed with cholangiocarcinoma from January 2004 to December 2008.

RESULTS

We observed 40 cases of VTE, among which 10 patients had VTE at diagnosis. There were 14 cases of pulmonary thromboembolism with or without deep vein thrombosis, 18 cases of portal vein thrombosis, four cases of inferior vena cava thrombosis, and four of hepatic vein thrombosis. We found that progression of stage, C-reactive protein, and chemotherapy were significantly associated with the occurrence of VTE (P=0.022, 0.006, and 0.014, respectively). The median survival in the VTE and non-VTE groups were 13.0 and 25.0 months, respectively (log-rank test, P=0.026). VTE was an unfavorable prognostic factor for cholangiocarcinoma (hazard ratio=1.626, P=0.042).

CONCLUSION

In our study, advanced stage, C-reactive protein, and treatment with chemotherapeutic agents were related to the occurrence of VTE in patients with cholangiocarcinoma. VTE was an independent unfavorable prognostic factor for survivors of cholangiocarcinoma.

Semuloparin for thromboprophylaxis in patients receiving chemotherapy for cancer

BACKGROUND

Patients receiving chemotherapy for cancer are at increased risk for venous thromboembolism. Limited data support the clinical benefit of antithrombotic prophylaxis.

METHODS

In this double-blind, multicenter trial, we evaluated the efficacy and safety of the ultra-low-molecular-weight heparin semuloparin for prevention of venous thromboembolism in patients receiving chemotherapy for cancer. Patients with metastatic or locally advanced solid tumors who were beginning to receive a course of chemotherapy were randomly assigned to receive subcutaneous semuloparin, 20 mg once daily, or placebo until there was a change of chemotherapy regimen. The primary efficacy outcome was the composite of any symptomatic deep-vein thrombosis, any nonfatal pulmonary embolism, and death related to venous thromboembolism. Clinically relevant bleeding (major and nonmajor) was the main safety outcome.

RESULTS

The median treatment duration was 3.5 months. Venous thromboembolism occurred in 20 of 1608 patients (1.2%) receiving semuloparin, as compared with 55 of 1604 (3.4%) receiving placebo (hazard ratio, 0.36; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.21 to 0.60; P<0.001), with consistent efficacy among subgroups defined according to the origin and stage of cancer and the baseline risk of venous thromboembolism. The incidence of clinically relevant bleeding was 2.8% and 2.0% in the semuloparin and placebo groups, respectively (hazard ratio, 1.40; 95% CI, 0.89 to 2.21). Major bleeding occurred in 19 of 1589 patients (1.2%) receiving semuloparin and 18 of 1583 (1.1%) receiving placebo (hazard ratio, 1.05; 95% CI, 0.55 to 1.99). Incidences of all other adverse events were similar in the two study groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Semuloparin reduces the incidence of thromboembolic events in patients receiving chemotherapy for cancer, with no apparent increase in major bleeding. (Funded by Sanofi; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00694382.).

Risk of venous thromboembolism in patients with cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

People with cancer are known to be at increased risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE), and this risk is believed to vary according to cancer type, stage of disease, and treatment modality. Our purpose was to summarise the existing literature to determine precisely and accurately the absolute risk of VTE in cancer patients, stratified by malignancy site and background risk of VTE.

METHODS AND FINDINGS

We searched the Medline and Embase databases from 1 January 1966 to 14 July 2011 to identify cohort studies comprising people diagnosed with one of eight specified cancer types or where participants were judged to be representative of all people with cancer. For each included study, the number of patients who developed clinically apparent VTE, and the total person-years of follow-up were extracted. Incidence rates of VTE were pooled across studies using the generic inverse variance method. In total, data from 38 individual studies were included. Among average-risk patients, the overall risk of VTE was estimated to be 13 per 1,000 person-years (95% CI, 7 to 23), with the highest risk among patients with cancers of the pancreas, brain, and lung. Among patients judged to be at high risk (due to metastatic disease or receipt of high-risk treatments), the risk of VTE was 68 per 1,000 person-years (95% CI, 48 to 96), with the highest risk among patients with brain cancer (200 per 1,000 person-years; 95% CI, 162 to 247). Our results need to be considered in light of high levels of heterogeneity, which exist due to differences in study population, outcome definition, and average duration of follow-up between studies.

CONCLUSIONS

VTE occurs in greater than 1% of cancer patients each year, but this varies widely by cancer type and time since diagnosis. The absolute VTE risks obtained from this review can aid in clinical decision-making about which people with cancer should receive anticoagulant prophylaxis and at what times.

Venous thromboembolism prophylaxis for medical service-mostly cancer-patients at hospital discharge

OBJECTIVE

Many hospitalized Medical Service patients remain at high risk for venous thromboembolism (VTE) after hospital discharge. Our aim was to compare the effect of the use or omission of extended pharmacologic VTE prophylaxis after hospital discharge among Medical Service patients on the incidence of symptomatic deep vein thrombosis (DVT) or pulmonary embolism (PE) over the ensuing 3 months.

METHODS

In this case-control study, we identified a case population of 461 patients for whom parenteral pharmacological VTE prophylaxis was prescribed to continue after discharge and matched them according to age, sex, and VTE risk score to a control group of 922 patients for whom VTE prophylaxis was not continued after discharge.

RESULTS

The primary endpoint of symptomatic DVT or PE at 90 days occurred in 5.0% of patients receiving extended prophylaxis compared with 4.3% of patients who received no prophylaxis after discharge (P=.58). Fewer patients were alive at 90 days in patients receiving extended pharmacologic VTE prophylaxis, compared with those who received no prophylaxis after discharge (56.8% vs 68.4%, P <.001). Major bleeding, defined as those events requiring blood transfusion, medical, or surgical intervention, occurred more frequently in patients receiving extended VTE prophylaxis after discharge than in those patients who received no prophylaxis after discharge (3.9% vs 1.9%, P=.03).

CONCLUSION

Extended pharmacologic thromboprophylaxis in high-risk Medical Service patients did not reduce symptomatic DVT and PE in the ensuing 90 days after hospital discharge. There was a higher incidence of all-cause death and major bleeding episodes in patients receiving extended prophylaxis. Our observations do not support the routine use of extended VTE prophylaxis in Medical Service patients. Further research is needed to identify patients who may benefit from extended pharmacologic VTE prophylaxis and those who may have too great a bleeding risk.