scholarly journals Subgroup Analysis of Patients with Cancer in XALIA: A Noninterventional Study of Rivaroxaban versus Standard Anticoagulation for VTE

TH Open ◽  
2017 ◽  
Vol 01 (01) ◽  
pp. e33-e42 ◽  
Author(s):  
Walter Ageno ◽  
Lorenzo Mantovani ◽  
Sylvia Haas ◽  
Reinhold Kreutz ◽  
Danja Monje ◽  
...  

Background The noninterventional XALIA study compared rivaroxaban with standard anticoagulation for deep vein thrombosis treatment. This substudy describes the demographics, clinical characteristics, and outcomes of the patients with cancer. Methods Therapy type, dose, and duration were at the physician's discretion. The cohorts identified were rivaroxaban (rivaroxaban alone or after heparin or fondaparinux for ≤48 hours); early switchers (rivaroxaban after heparin or fondaparinux for >48 hours to 14 days and/or a vitamin K antagonist [VKA] for 1–14 days); standard anticoagulation (heparin or fondaparinux and a VKA); low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) alone; and miscellaneous (other heparins, fondaparinux alone, VKA alone). Primary outcomes were major bleeding, recurrent venous thromboembolism, and all-cause mortality. Results In XALIA, 587 patients (11.4% of the XALIA cohort) were with cancer: 146 (24.9%) rivaroxaban, 30 (5.1%) early switchers, 141 (24.0%) standard anticoagulation, 223 (38.0%) LMWH, and 47 (8.0%) miscellaneous. Patients with gastrointestinal or lung cancer more commonly received LMWH than rivaroxaban; the opposite occurred in patients with breast or genitourinary cancer. Rates of primary outcome in the rivaroxaban group were as follows: major bleeding, 1.4% (n = 2); recurrent venous thromboembolism, 3.4% (n = 5); and all-cause mortality, 4.8% (n = 7). Conclusion In XALIA, physicians treated cancer-associated thrombosis with various anticoagulant regimens, most commonly LMWH. In addition, the choice of anticoagulant varied with cancer type. In rivaroxaban-treated patients, rates for the primary outcomes were low, suggesting that patients administered rivaroxaban were a good prognosis group.

Circulation ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 142 (Suppl_3) ◽  
Author(s):  
Sunil Upadhaya ◽  
Seetharamprasad Madala ◽  
Sunil Badami

Introduction: Patients with cancer are at high risk for recurrent thromboembolic phenomenon. Use of novel oral anticoagulants (NOAC) for treatment of venous thromboembolism (VTE) in such patients is controversial. We conducted this updated meta-analysis to evaluate the pooled efficacy and safety of NOAC in patients with cancer. Methods: We did systematic search of PubMed and Cochrane library databases for randomized controlled trials comparing NOAC with low molecular weight heparin (LMWH) for VTE treatment in cancer patients till April 2020. The efficacy outcomes were recurrent VTE and all-cause mortality rates, and the primary safety outcome was incidence of major bleeding rate. Results: Four randomized controlled studies comparing NOAC with LMWH (1446 patients in NOAC group and 1448 patients in LMWH group) were included in our study. Use of NOAC lead to significant reduction in recurrent VTE rate (odds ratio (OR): 0.55 [0.36-0.84], I 2 = 45 %, p value = 0.006) (Figure 1). However, we did not find any significant difference in rate of major bleeding (OR: 1.30 [0.76-2.23], I 2 = 35%, p value = 0.34) (Figure 2) and all-cause mortality (OR: 1 [0.80 - 1.26], I 2 = 33%, p value = 0.98). Conclusions: This updated meta-analysis showed comparatively lower pooled recurrent VTE rate in patient being treated with NOAC, whereas similar rates of major bleeding and all-cause death. NOAC are more efficacious and has similar safety profile compared with LMWH.


Blood ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 133 (4) ◽  
pp. 291-298 ◽  
Author(s):  
Noémie Kraaijpoel ◽  
Marc Carrier

Abstract Venous thromboembolism (VTE), which includes deep vein thrombosis and pulmonary embolism, is a common complication of cancer and is associated with significant morbidity and mortality. Several cancer-related risk factors contribute to the development of VTE including cancer type and stage, chemotherapy, surgery, and patient-related factors such as advanced age and immobilization. Patients with cancer frequently undergo diagnostic imaging scans for cancer staging and treatment response evaluation, which is increasing the underlying risk of VTE detection. The management of cancer-associated VTE is challenging. Over the years, important advances have been made and, recently, randomized controlled trials have been published helping clinicians’ management of this patient population. In this review, we will discuss common cancer-associated VTE scenarios and critically review available evidence to guide treatment decisions.


2019 ◽  
Vol 40 (Supplement_1) ◽  
Author(s):  
I Cavallari ◽  
G Verolino ◽  
G Patti

Abstract Background Anticoagulation in patients with cancer and atrial fibrillation (AF) is particularly challenging given the higher risk of both thrombotic and bleeding complications in this setting. Data regarding the efficacy and safety of non-vitamin K oral anticoagulants (NOACs) in AF patients with malignancy remain unclear. Purpose In the present meta-analysis we further investigate the efficacy and safety of NOACs compared to warfarin in patients with AF and cancer assuming that available studies may be individually underpowered for endpoints at low incidence, i.e. stroke, major and intracranial bleeding. Methods We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of studies comparing the use of NOACs vs. warfarin in AF patients with cancer. Efficacy outcome measures included stroke or systemic embolism, venous thromboembolism and mortality. Safety outcome measures were major bleeding and intracranial hemorrhage. Results We pooled data from 6 identified studies enrolling a total of 31,756 AF patients with cancer. Mean follow-up was 1.7 years. Patients with cancer had significantly increased annualized rates of venous thromboembolism (1.38% vs. 0.74%), major bleeding (9.01% vs. 5.13%), in particular major gastrointestinal bleeding (2.38% vs. 1.60%), and all-cause mortality (17.73% vs. 8.50%) vs. those without (all P values <0.001), whereas the incidence of stroke or systemic embolism and intracranial hemorrhage did not differ. Compared with warfarin, treatment with NOACs nominally decreased the risk of stroke or systemic embolism (5.41% vs. 2.70%; odds ratio, OR; 95% confidence intervals, CI 0.51, 0.26–1.01; P=0.05; Figure), mainly of ischemic stroke (OR 0.56; 95% CI 0.35–0.89; P=0.01), and the risk of venous thromboembolism (OR 0.51; 95% CI 0.42–0.61; P<0.001). In cancer patients receiving NOACs there was a significant reduction of major bleeding (3.95% vs. 4.66%; OR 0.66, 95% CI 0.46–0.94; P=0.02; Figure) and intracranial hemorrhage (0.26% vs. 0.66%; OR 0.25, 95% CI 0.08–0.82; P=0.02) vs. warfarin, with no difference in gastrointestinal major bleeding rates. Conclusion AF patients on oral anticoagulation and concomitant cancer are at higher risk of venous thromboembolism, major bleeding and all-cause mortality. NOACs may represent a safer and more effective alternative to warfarin also in this setting of patients.


Blood ◽  
2016 ◽  
Vol 128 (22) ◽  
pp. 1438-1438 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alexander G G Turpie ◽  
Lorenzo G Mantovani ◽  
Sylvia Haas ◽  
Reinhold Kreutz ◽  
Danja Monje ◽  
...  

Abstract Background: XALIA is a prospective, non-interventional study of rivaroxaban in the treatment of acute deep vein thrombosis. The overall XALIA results showed that rivaroxaban was associated with similarly low rates of major bleeding and symptomatic recurrent venous thromboembolism (VTE) as standard anticoagulation. A subset of patients in XALIA had active cancer at the time of enrolment into the study. Purpose: To describe the demographics, clinical characteristics, treatment strategies and outcomes of patients in XALIA with cancer and VTE. The primary outcomes were major bleeding, recurrent VTE and all-cause mortality. Methods: Patients with deep vein thrombosis with or without concomitant pulmonary embolism aged ≥18 years who had active cancer and were scheduled to receive ≥3 months of anticoagulation with rivaroxaban or standard therapy were eligible. Therapy type, dose and duration were at the physician's discretion. For the purpose of this substudy, we defined the following treatment cohorts: rivaroxaban cohort (patients treated with rivaroxaban alone or who received heparin/fondaparinux for ≤48 hours before switching to rivaroxaban); early switchers cohort (patients treated with rivaroxaban who received heparin/fondaparinux for >48 hours-14 days and/or a vitamin K antagonist [VKA] for 1-14 days before changing to rivaroxaban); standard anticoagulation cohort (patients treated with heparin/fondaparinux and a VKA or a VKA only); and heparin/fondaparinux cohort (patients treated with heparin/fondaparinux alone). Results: Of 5136 patients in XALIA who received study medication, 587 (11.4%) had active cancer at baseline. Of these, 146 (24.9%) received rivaroxaban, 30 (5.1%) were early switchers, 167 (28.4%) received standard anticoagulation (of which 26 [4.4%] received a VKA only) and 244 (41.6%) received heparin/fondaparinux only, of whom 223 (38.0%) received low molecular weight heparin and the remainder other heparins or fondaparinux. Demographics are shown in Table 1. The most common type of active cancer at baseline in all cohorts was genitourinary, with the exception of the heparin/fondaparinux cohort where gastrointestinal cancer was the most common type (Table 2). The incidence rates for the primary outcomes for each cohort are shown in Figure 1. The rates of major bleeding were highest in the standard anticoagulation cohort (n=8 [4.8%]) and lowest in the early switchers (no major bleeding events occurred). The rates of recurrent VTE were similar in the in the rivaroxaban, early switcher and standard anticoagulation cohorts (n=5 [3.4%], n=1 [3.3%] and n=6 [3.6%], respectively) and were highest in the heparin/fondaparinux cohort (n=12 [4.9%]). All-cause mortality was highest in the heparin/fondaparinux cohort (n=61 [25.0%]) and lowest in the early switchers (no deaths occurred). Conclusions: In the real-world XALIA study, 38.0% of patients with cancer received treatment with low molecular weight heparin, which was in line with guidelines. The remaining patients received rivaroxaban, standard anticoagulation or were early switchers. For the three primary outcomes, the lowest incidence rates were observed in the early switcher cohort. The highest rates were in the standard anticoagulation cohort for major bleeding and the heparin/fondaparinux cohort for recurrent VTE and all-cause mortality; rates for all three primary outcomes were low in the rivaroxaban cohort, suggesting that rivaroxaban may be a safe and effective treatment option for patients with VTE and active cancer. Figure 1 Primary outcomes in patients with active cancer at baseline by treatment group. VTE, venous thromboembolism. Figure 1. Primary outcomes in patients with active cancer at baseline by treatment group. / VTE, venous thromboembolism. Disclosures Turpie: Janssen Research & Development, LLC: Consultancy, Honoraria; Bayer Pharma AG: Consultancy, Honoraria. Mantovani:Janssen-Cilag Ltd: Research Funding; Boehringer Ingelheim: Research Funding; Daiichi Sankyo: Consultancy; Bayer Pharma AG: Consultancy; Pfizer Inc: Research Funding. Haas:Sanofi SA: Consultancy; Pfizer Inc: Consultancy; Daiichi Sankyo: Consultancy; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy; Bayer Pharma AG: Consultancy; Aspen Pharmacare: Consultancy. Kreutz:Bayer Pharma AG: Honoraria; Servier Laboratories Ltd: Consultancy; Lundbeck Ltd: Consultancy; Daiichi Sankyo: Consultancy; Berlin-Chemie Menarini: Consultancy; Bayer Pharma AG: Consultancy; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Honoraria; Daiichi Sankyo: Honoraria. Monje:Bayer Pharma AG: Employment. Schneider:Bayer Pharma AG: Employment. van Eickels:Bayer Pharma AG: Employment. Gebel:Bayer Pharma AG: Employment. Ageno:Boehringer Ingelheim: Consultancy, Honoraria; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Honoraria; Bayer Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding; Daiichi Sankyo: Consultancy, Honoraria; Bayer Pharma AG: Consultancy, Honoraria.


Blood ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 136 (Supplement 1) ◽  
pp. 18-18
Author(s):  
Doaa Attia ◽  
Xuefei Jia ◽  
Mailey L Wilks ◽  
Barbara Tripp ◽  
Christopher D'Andrea ◽  
...  

Background: The treatment paradigm for cancer associated thrombosis (CAT) has evolved over recent years from using low molecular weight heparin (LMWH) to direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs). Some randomized trials suggest decreased rates of recurrent venous thromboembolism (VTE) in CAT patients treated with DOACs compared to LMWH but also reported increased rates of bleeding. The Cleveland Clinic Taussig Cancer Center has been treating cancer thrombosis in a centralized CAT clinic since 2014. Here we report our rates of bleeding and recurrent VTE in cancer patients treated with anticoagulation. Methods: We prospectively followed cancer patients referred to our clinic from 8/2014-10/2019. A total of 1548 patients were referred to the clinic, of whom 462 were diagnosed with an acute VTE. VTE events, including deep venous thrombosis, pulmonary embolism, and visceral thrombosis, were noted. The comparison of bleeding rates (defined using ISTH criteria for major and clinically relevant non major bleeding, CRNMB) among treatment groups (LMWH vs DOACs) was examined using chi-square test. Rate of recurrent VTE was analyzed using a competing model in which death was treated as a competing risk. Results: The study population comprised 462 patients with acute VTE with a mean age of 62.67±12.23 and 51.8 % males. Of these, 234 (52.9%) received LMWH, 161(36.4%) received DOACs, and 47 (10.6%) received other agents including warfarin for initial anticoagulation. Overall, the 6-month, 1 year, and 2-year VTE recurrence rate was 5.9%, 6.6%, 7.9%, respectively. Recurrent VTE rates were similar for LMWHs, DOACs and other agents (P&gt;0.05). Of 368 patients for whom follow-up data was available, 74 (16.7%) had bleeding event , of which 25 (33.8%) had major bleeding and 49 (66.4%) had CRNMB at 6 month follow-up with no difference across three treatment groups (p=0.56). Conclusion: In this real-world practice setting, rates of recurrent VTE and bleeding were similar for DOACs and LMWH suggesting that with careful patient selection the concern for higher bleeding with DOACs in cancer patients can be safely overcome. Disclosures McCrae: Momenta Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy; Novartis: Honoraria; Rigel: Consultancy; Dova: Consultancy. Khorana:Merck: Research Funding; Medscape: Honoraria; Leo Pharma: Honoraria; Seattle Genetics: Honoraria; Pharmacyte: Honoraria; Pharmacyclics: Honoraria; Array: Other: Research funding (to institution); Janssen: Honoraria; Bayer: Honoraria; Pfizer: Honoraria; Sanofi: Honoraria; BMS: Honoraria, Research Funding; Leap: Research Funding.


2019 ◽  
Vol 37 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. e14692-e14692
Author(s):  
Shima Sidahmed ◽  
Ahmed Abdalla ◽  
Babikir Kheiri ◽  
Areeg Bala ◽  
Mohammed Salih ◽  
...  

e14692 Background: Cancer-associated venous thromboembolism (VTE) is common. Although low molecular weight heparin (LMWH) is the standard therapy in this setting, little is known with regard to non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants (NOACs). Therefore, we thought about evaluating the safety and efficacy of various anticoagulants in this vulnerable population. Methods: Electronic database search was conducted to identify randomized clinical trials (RCTs) that compared LMWH, NOACs, and/or vitamin-K-antagonists (VKA) in cancer patients. We performed frequentist direct and Bayesian network meta-analysis using random-effects model to calculate odds ratios (ORs), 95% confidence intervals (CIs), and 95% credible intervals (CrIs). The primary outcome was VTE (pulmonary embolism and deep-vein thrombosis) recurrence. Secondary outcomes were major bleeding and all-cause mortality. Results: We identified 13 RCTs with 6,595 total patients (mean age 62.4 ± 12.2; 50.4% female; 17.7% hematological malignancies; and 6 months median follow-up). The most common cancer type was colorectal and 48% of the population had metastatic cancer at baseline. NOACs were associated with significantly reduced VTE recurrence compared with VKA (OR = 0.58; 95% CI = 0.40-0.83; P < 0.01; number needed to treat [NNT] = 40) and LMWH (OR = 0.46; 95% CI = 0.25-0.85; P = 0.01; NNT = 20). LMHW was associated with significantly reduced VTE recurrence compared with VKA (OR = 0.52; 95% CI = 0.39-0.71; P < 0.01; NNT = 18). NOACs were associated with significantly reduced major bleeding compared with VKA (OR = 0.56; 95% CI = 0.35-0.91; P = 0.02; NNT = 64). There was no significant difference identified between the anticoagulant groups in regard to all-cause mortality. Conclusions: Among cancer patients with VTE, NOACs were associated with significantly reduced VTE recurrence compared to LMWH and VKA, and significantly reduced major bleeding compared with VKA. LMWH was associated with significantly reduced VTE recurrence compared with VKA.


Blood ◽  
2002 ◽  
Vol 100 (10) ◽  
pp. 3484-3488 ◽  
Author(s):  
Paolo Prandoni ◽  
Anthonie W. A. Lensing ◽  
Andrea Piccioli ◽  
Enrico Bernardi ◽  
Paolo Simioni ◽  
...  

A small proportion of patients with deep vein thrombosis develop recurrent venous thromboembolic complications or bleeding during anticoagulant treatment. These complications may occur more frequently if these patients have concomitant cancer. This prospective follow-up study sought to determine whether in thrombosis patients those with cancer have a higher risk for recurrent venous thromboembolism or bleeding during anticoagulant treatment than those without cancer. Of the 842 included patients, 181 had known cancer at entry. The 12-month cumulative incidence of recurrent thromboembolism in cancer patients was 20.7% (95% CI, 15.6%-25.8%) versus 6.8% (95% CI, 3.9%- 9.7%) in patients without cancer, for a hazard ratio of 3.2 (95% CI, 1.9-5.4) The 12-month cumulative incidence of major bleeding was 12.4% (95% CI, 6.5%-18.2%) in patients with cancer and 4.9% (95% CI, 2.5%-7.4%) in patients without cancer, for a hazard ratio of 2.2 (95% CI, 1.2-4.1). Recurrence and bleeding were both related to cancer severity and occurred predominantly during the first month of anticoagulant therapy but could not be explained by sub- or overanticoagulation. Cancer patients with venous thrombosis are more likely to develop recurrent thromboembolic complications and major bleeding during anticoagulant treatment than those without malignancy. These risks correlate with the extent of cancer. Possibilities for improvement using the current paradigms of anticoagulation seem limited and new treatment strategies should be developed.


2009 ◽  
Vol 102 (09) ◽  
pp. 493-500 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marie-Antoinette Sevestre-Pietri ◽  
Jean-Luc Bosson ◽  
Jean-Pieere Laroche ◽  
Marc Righini ◽  
Dominique Brisot ◽  
...  

SummaryThere is a lack of consensus on the value of detecting and treating symptomatic isolated distal deep-vein thrombosis (DVT) of the lower limbs. In our study, we compared the risk factors and outcomes in patients with isolated symptomatic distal DVT with those with proximal symptomatic DVT. We analysed the data of patients with objectively confirmed symptomatic isolated DVT enrolled in the national (France), multicenter, prospective OPTIMEV study.This sub-study outcomes were recurrent venous thromboembolism, major bleeding and death at three months. Among the 6141 patients with suspicion of isolated DVT included between November 2004 and January 2006, DVT was confirmed in 1643 patients (26.8%). Isolated distal DVT was more frequent than proximal DVT (56.8% vs. 43.2%, respectively; p=0.01). Isolated distal DVT was significantly more often associated with transient risk factors (recent surgery, recent plaster immobilisation, recent travel), whereas proximal DVT was significantly more associated with more chronic states (active cancer, congestive heart failure or respiratory insufficiency, age >75 years). Most patients (96.8%) with isolated distal DVT received anticoagulant therapies.There was no difference in the percentage of recurrent venous thromboembolism and major bleeding in patients with proximal DVT and isolated distal DVT. However, the mortality rate was significantly higher (p<0.01) in patients with proximal DVT (8.0%) than in those with isolated distal DVT (4.4%). Symptomatic isolated distal DVT differs from symptomatic proximal DVT both in terms of risk factors and clinical outcome. Whether these differences should influence the clinical management of these two events remains to be determined.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document