scholarly journals Bleeding Outcomes of Gastrointestinal Cancer Patients Treated with Direct Oral Anticoagulants Vs. Low Molecular Weight Heparin

Blood ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 136 (Supplement 1) ◽  
pp. 27-27
Author(s):  
Dana E Angelini ◽  
Doaa Attia ◽  
Wei Wei ◽  
Mailey L Wilks ◽  
Barbara Tripp ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Molecular Weight ◽  
Cancer Patients ◽  
Research Funding ◽  
Low Molecular Weight Heparin ◽  
Oral Anticoagulants ◽  
Direct Oral Anticoagulants ◽  
Low Molecular Weight ◽  
Bleeding Rate ◽  
Gi Cancer ◽  
Gi Cancers

Introduction: In recent years, direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) have been adopted as a treatment option for cancer associated thrombosis (CAT). Randomized trials comparing anti-Xa drugs to low molecular weight heparin (LMWH) showed treatment with DOACs conferred less risk of recurrent venous thromboembolism (VTE), but found higher rates of clinically important bleeding, especially in patients with gastrointestinal (GI) malignancies. Given these findings, there is a need for additional data regarding the safety of DOAC use in GI malignancies. Here, we report bleeding events of GI cancer patients treated with anticoagulation in a large centralized CAT clinic. Methods: We evaluated a prospective cohort of patients referred to our CAT clinic from 8/2014-10/2019. Patients with primary gastrointestinal malignancies treated with therapeutic anticoagulation with LMWH or a DOAC for acute VTE were included. Bleeding was defined using the ISTH criteria for major and clinically relevant non-major bleeding (CRNMB). Bleeding rates were compared between luminal [anus/anal, colon, esophagus, rectal, stomach] and extraluminal GI cancers [gallbladder, liver/bile duct, and pancreas]. Patient characteristics associated with bleeding were evaluated with Fisher's exact test and the association of age with bleeding was analyzed by Wilcoxan rank sum test. Results: Of 463 patients with acute VTE, 73 patients (15.8%) with primary GI tumors were included in the analysis. Males comprised 57.5% of the population, median age was 62 (range 36-86), and 61.6% had stage 4 disease. Figure 1 shows a breakdown of tumor types. Enoxaparin was the most commonly used anticoagulant (n=48, 65.8%), followed by DOAC (n=25, 34.2%). Overall, 16 (21.9%) patients had a bleeding event within 6 months of treatment (7 major bleeds and 9 CRNMB). There was no difference in 6-month bleeding rate between patients treated with LMWH (n= 9, 18.8%) vs. DOAC (n=7, 28.0%), p=0.39. None of the clinical factors analyzed were significantly associated with bleeding (Table 1). There was no difference in bleeding rate in patients with luminal GI cancers vs. extraluminal GI cancers and no difference was found in a three-way association between site, treatment, and bleeding, p=0.40 (Table 2). Conclusions: In our centralized cancer thrombosis clinic, patients with GI malignancies had similar rates of major and CRNMB when treated with LMWH or DOAC. In both cohorts, bleeding rates were high within 6 months of starting anticoagulation. There were no statistically significant differences in bleeding rates based on several clinical characteristics evaluated in this study. Although limited by a small patient population, this study adds to the knowledge of treating GI malignancies with DOACs. There is a need for further prospective evaluations regarding the safety of DOAC use in GI cancer patients and there remains an unmet need for antithrombotic treatments that do not increase bleeding potential. Disclosures McCrae: Novartis: Honoraria; Momenta Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy; Rigel: Consultancy; Dova: Consultancy. Khorana:Bayer: Honoraria; Pharmacyte: Honoraria; Pharmacyclics: Honoraria; Array: Other: Research funding (to institution); Merck: Research Funding; Leap: Research Funding; BMS: Honoraria, Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Honoraria; Pfizer: Honoraria; Sanofi: Honoraria; Medscape: Honoraria; Leo Pharma: Honoraria; Janssen: Honoraria.

Single-center, retrospective evaluation of safety and efficacy of direct oral anticoagulants versus low-molecular-weight heparin and vitamin K antagonist in patients with cancer

2017 ◽  
Vol 25 (1) ◽  
pp. 52-59 ◽  
Author(s):  
Elizabeth R Pritchard ◽  
Jose R Murillo ◽  
David Putney ◽  
Eleanor C Hobaugh
Keyword(s):  
Molecular Weight ◽  
Venous Thromboembolism ◽  
Cancer Patients ◽  
Vitamin K ◽  
Low Molecular Weight Heparin ◽  
Oral Anticoagulants ◽  
Direct Oral Anticoagulants ◽  
Vitamin K Antagonist ◽  
Low Molecular Weight ◽  
Safety And Efficacy

Introduction The safety and efficacy of direct oral anticoagulants in cancer patients is currently unclear. Low-molecular-weight heparin remains the standard of care for cancer patients with venous thromboembolism, with warfarin, a vitamin K antagonist, as an alternative. Clear recommendations do not exist for patients with both active cancer and non-valvular atrial fibrillation. The objectives of this study were to report safety and efficacy outcomes of direct oral anticoagulants, low-molecular-weight heparin, and vitamin K antagonist in cancer patients with venous thromboembolism or non-valvular atrial fibrillation. Methods Retrospective chart review of adult cancer patients from 2012 to 2015 who received an antineoplastic agent and an anticoagulant. Results A total of 258 patients were reviewed: 80 patients in direct oral anticoagulant group, 95 patients in low-molecular-weight heparin group, and 83 patients in vitamin K antagonist group. Sixty-seven percent of patients were on an anticoagulant for acute or chronic venous thromboembolism. Major bleeding events were similar across the groups (15% direct oral anticoagulant vs 17% low-molecular-weight heparin vs 18% vitamin K antagonist). The most common type of major bleeding event was gastrointestinal bleeding. A total of five fatal bleeding events occurred. Venous thromboembolism recurrence rates were higher in both direct oral anticoagulant (18%) and low-molecular-weight heparin (12%) groups while lower in vitamin K antagonist group (10%) compared to previous studies. Conclusions Cancer patients receiving direct oral anticoagulants, low-molecular-weight heparin, or vitamin K antagonist had similar rates of major bleeding events, with gastrointestinal bleeding being the most common event. Venous thromboembolism recurrence rates were higher in direct oral anticoagulant and low-molecular-weight heparin groups than prior studies. Randomized trials are warranted to establish clear safety and efficacy in this population.

“direct Oral Anticoagulants Versus Low-molecular-weight Heparin for Acute Treatment of Venous Thromboembolism in Patients With Gastrointestinal Cancer: a Systematic Review and Meta-analysis”

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tarinee Rungjirajittranon ◽  
Weerapat Owattanapanich ◽  
Yingyong Chinthammitr ◽  
Theera Ruchutrakool ◽  
Bundarika Suwanawiboon
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Molecular Weight ◽  
Major Bleeding ◽  
Low Molecular Weight Heparin ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Oral Anticoagulants ◽  
Direct Oral Anticoagulants ◽  
Low Molecular Weight ◽  
Gi Cancer ◽  
Cancer Associated Thrombosis

Abstract BackgroundThe association between gastrointestinal (GI) cancer and a high incidence of venous thromboembolism (VTE) is well known. Previous randomized controlled studies demonstrated that direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) effectively treat cancer-associated VTE (CAT). However, some DOACs appeared to increase the risk of bleeding, particularly in patients with GI malignancies. Therefore, the current systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted to evaluate the safety and efficacy of DOACs in GI cancer-associated thrombosis.MethodsAll relevant studies that compared DOACs and low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) in GI cancer-associated thrombosis that were published before December 2020 were individually searched in two databases (MEDLINE and EMBASE) by two investigators. The effect estimates and 95% confidence intervals (CI) from each eligible study were combined using the Mantel-Haenszel method.ResultsA total of 1,418 patients were included in this meta-analysis. The rate of major bleeding was not significantly different between groups (relative risk [RR]: 1.57, 95% CI: 0.93-2.65, P=0.09, I2=34%). However, the rate of clinically relevant non-major bleeding (CRNMB) was significantly higher in the DOACs group (RR: 1.98, 95% CI: 1.34-2.91, P=0.0005, I2=0%). The risk of recurrent VTE was not significantly different between groups (RR: 0.72, 95% CI: 0.41-1.28, P=0.27, I2=0%).ConclusionsThe current data suggests that treatment of GI cancer-associated thrombosis with DOACs significantly increases the risk of CRNMB, and a trend towards major bleeding risk in DOACs group. The efficacy of DOACs for preventing recurrent VTE in GI cancer was comparable to that of LMWHs.Trial registration: INPLASY202180113

scholarly journals Safety and efficacy of direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) vs low molecular weight heparin (LMWH) in malignancy induced venous thromboembolism-a systematic review and meta analysis

2021 ◽  
Vol 10 (Supplement_1) ◽  
Author(s):  
A Abdul Razzack ◽  
N Hussain ◽  
S Adeel Hassan ◽  
S Mandava ◽  
F Yasmin ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Molecular Weight ◽  
Venous Thromboembolism ◽  
Major Bleeding ◽  
Low Molecular Weight Heparin ◽  
Oral Anticoagulants ◽  
Direct Oral Anticoagulants ◽  
Low Molecular Weight ◽  
Efficacy And Safety ◽  
Dichotomous Data ◽  
Significant Difference

Abstract Funding Acknowledgements Type of funding sources: None. Background- Low molecular weight heparin (LMWH) and direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) have been proven to be more effective in the management of venous thromboembolism (MVTE). The efficacy and safety of LMWH or DOACs in treatment of recurrent or malignancy induced VTE is not studied in literature. Objective To compare the efficacy and safety of LMWH and  DOACs in the management of malignancy induced  VTE Methods- Electronic databases ( PubMed, Embase, Scopus, Cochrane) were searched from inception to November  28th, 2020. Dichotomous data was extracted for prevention of VTE and risk of major bleeding in patients taking either LMWH or DOACs. Unadjusted odds ratios (OR) were calculated from dichotomous data using Mantel Haenszel (M-H) random-effects with statistical significance to be considered if the confidence interval excludes 1 and p < 0.05.  Results- Three studies with 2607 patients (DOACs n = 1301 ; LMWH n = 1306) were included in analysis. All the study population had active cancer of any kind diagnosed within the past 6 months. Average follow-up period for each trial was 6 months. Patients receiving DOACs have a lower odds of recurrence of MVTE as compared to LMWH( OR 1.56; 95% CI 1.17-2.09; P = 0.003, I2 = 0). There was no significant difference in major bleeding among patients receiving LMWH or DOACs  (OR-0.71, 95%CI 0.46-1.10, P = 0.13, I2 = 22%) (Figure 1). We had no publication bias in our results (Egger’s regression p > 0.05). Conclusion- DOACs are superior to LMWH in prevention of MVTE and have similar major bleeding risk as that of LMWH. Abstract Figure. A)VTE Recurrence B)Major Bleeding events

A single center retrospective cohort study comparing low-molecular-weight heparins to direct oral anticoagulants for the treatment of venous thromboembolism in patients with cancer – A real world experience

2018 ◽  
Vol 25 (4) ◽  
pp. 793-800 ◽  
Author(s):  
Megan K Phelps ◽  
Tracy E Wiczer ◽  
H Paige Erdeljac ◽  
Kelsey R Van Deusen ◽  
Kyle Porter ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Molecular Weight ◽  
Major Bleeding ◽  
Oral Anticoagulant ◽  
Low Molecular Weight Heparin ◽  
Oral Anticoagulants ◽  
Direct Oral Anticoagulants ◽  
Low Molecular Weight ◽  
Direct Oral Anticoagulant ◽  
Recurrent Cancer ◽  
Cancer Associated Thrombosis

Introduction Low-molecular-weight heparins are the standard treatment for cancer-associated thrombosis. Recently, direct oral anticoagulants are a new option for thrombosis treatment; however, data supporting the use of direct oral anticoagulants for cancer-associated thrombosis are limited. Objectives The primary objective of this study was to determine the rate of recurrent cancer-associated thrombosis and major bleeding within 6 months of starting either low-molecular-weight heparin or direct oral anticoagulant for treatment of cancer-associated thrombosis. Secondary objectives were to determine the rates of clinically relevant-non-major bleeding and all-cause mortality. Patients/methods This is a retrospective cohort study including adults with cancer-associated thrombosis treated with low-molecular-weight heparin or direct oral anticoagulant between 2010 and 2016 at the Ohio State University. Medical records were reviewed for 6 months after initiation of anticoagulation or until the occurrence of recurrent cancer-associated thrombosis, major bleeding, cessation of anticoagulation of interest, or death, whichever occurred first. Results Four hundred and eighty patients were included (290 low-molecular-weight heparin and 190 direct oral anticoagulant). Patients treated with direct oral anticoagulant were found to carry “lower risk” features including cancer with lower VTE risk and lower rate of metastatic disease. After adjustment for baseline differences, there was no significant difference in the rate of recurrent cancer-associated thrombosis (7.2% low-molecular-weight heparin vs 6.3% direct oral anticoagulant, p = 0.71) or major bleeding (7.6% low-molecular-weight heparin vs 2.6% direct oral anticoagulant, p = 0.08). Conclusions Our study demonstrates that in a select population of cancer patients with VTE, direct oral anticoagulant use can be as effective and safe compared to the standard therapy with low-molecular-weight heparin.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document