Primary Thromboprophylaxis in Patients with Malignancies: Daily Practice Recommendations by the Hemostasis Working Party of the German Society of Hematology and Medical Oncology (DGHO), the Society of Thrombosis and Hemostasis Research (GTH), and the Austrian Society of Hematology and Oncology (ÖGHO)

Patients with cancer, both hematologic and solid malignancies, are at increased risk for thrombosis and thromboembolism. In addition to general risk factors such as immobility and major surgery, shared by non-cancer patients, cancer patients are exposed to specific thrombotic risk factors. These include, among other factors, cancer-induced hypercoagulation, and chemotherapy-mediated endothelial dysfunction as well as tumor-cell-derived microparticles. After an episode of thrombosis in a cancer patient, secondary thromboprophylaxis to prevent recurrent thromboembolism has long been established and is typically continued as long as the cancer is active or actively treated. On the other hand, primary prophylaxis, even though firmly established in hospitalized cancer patients, has only recently been studied in ambulatory patients. This recent change is mostly due to the emergence of direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs). DOACs have a shorter half-life than vitamin K antagonists (VKA), and they overcome the need for parenteral application, the latter of which is associated with low-molecular-weight heparins (LMWH) and can be difficult for the patient to endure in the long term. Here, first, we discuss the clinical trials of primary thromboprophylaxis in the population of cancer patients in general, including the use of VKA, LMWH, and DOACs, and the potential drug interactions with pre-existing medications that need to be taken into account. Second, we focus on special situations in cancer patients where primary prophylactic anticoagulation should be considered, including myeloma, major surgery, indwelling catheters, or immobilization, concomitant diseases such as renal insufficiency, liver disease, or thrombophilia, as well as situations with a high bleeding risk, particularly thrombocytopenia, and specific drugs that may require primary thromboprophylaxis. We provide a novel algorithm intended to aid specialists but also family practitioners and nurses who care for cancer patients in the decision process of primary thromboprophylaxis in the individual patient.

Download Full-text

Low-Molecular-Weight Heparin in Cancer Patients: Overview and Indications

Hämostaseologie ◽

10.1055/s-0039-1677796 ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 39 (01) ◽

pp. 067-075 ◽

Cited By ~ 3

Author(s):

Minna Voigtlaender ◽

Florian Langer

Keyword(s):

Molecular Weight ◽

Cancer Patients ◽

Anticancer Agents ◽

Vitamin K Antagonists ◽

Oral Anticoagulants ◽

Direct Oral Anticoagulants ◽

Low Molecular Weight ◽

Vte Prophylaxis ◽

Patients With Cancer ◽

Increased Risk

AbstractAlthough venous thromboembolism (VTE) is a well-known cause of death in patients with cancer, both its treatment and prevention remain a challenge in daily practice. Direct oral anticoagulants have emerged as safe and efficacious alternatives to vitamin K antagonists in the general population, and recent clinical trials also support their use in select patients with cancer-associated VTE. Despite this, low-molecular-weight heparins (LMWHs), a comparatively ancient class of antithrombotic drugs, remain the anticoagulants of choice in many indications relevant to modern haematology and oncology. In addition to the treatment of established VTE, these indications include VTE prophylaxis in surgical or acutely ill, hospitalized medical cancer patients as well as the prevention of VTE in high-risk patients undergoing ambulatory chemotherapy. In a constantly changing landscape of approved anticancer agents, this review article summarizes pivotal clinical trial data and guideline recommendations regarding the use of LMWH in haematological and oncological patients, who constitute a highly vulnerable patient population due to their increased risk for both bleeding and VTE recurrence.

Download Full-text

Direct oral anticoagulants for the treatment of cancer-associated venous thromboembolism

Phlebologie ◽

10.1055/s-0038-1625439 ◽

2017 ◽

Vol 46 (06) ◽

pp. 340-351

Author(s):

M. Voigtlaender ◽

F. Langer

Keyword(s):

Venous Thromboembolism ◽

Cancer Patients ◽

Vitamin K Antagonists ◽

Oral Anticoagulants ◽

Direct Oral Anticoagulants ◽

Treatment Phase ◽

Standard Of Care ◽

Longterm Treatment ◽

Increased Risk ◽

Direct Head

SummaryCancer patients with venous thromboembolism (VTE) are at increased risk for both bleeding and VTE recurrence. Anticoagulation with low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) is the standard of care during the initial and longterm treatment phase (i.e. during the first 3–6 months of therapy) based on its overall beneficial safety and efficacy profile compared to vitamin K antagonists (VKAs). The direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) rivaroxaban, apixaban, edoxaban, and dabigatran are approved for the treatment of acute VTE, and the combined six phase-3 trials have included > 1 500 patients with active cancer, as defined by variable selection criteria. Subgroup analyses of these patients, either pooled or separately reported, suggest that DOACs could be a safe and efficacious alternative to VKA therapy for the treatment of cancer-associated VTE. However, the populations of cancer patients included in the DOAC and LMWH trials are not comparable with regard to mortality and VTE risk, and no specific data from direct head-to-head comparisons of DOACs with LMWHs are currently available. The use of DOACs for the management of VTE in cancer is thus not recommended by clinical practice guidelines.

Download Full-text

Broadening the Categories of Patients Eligible for Extended Venous Thromboembolism Treatment

Thrombosis and Haemostasis ◽

10.1055/s-0039-3400302 ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 120 (01) ◽

pp. 014-026 ◽

Cited By ~ 3

Author(s):

Marc Schindewolf ◽

Jeffrey Ian Weitz

Keyword(s):

Risk Factors ◽

Risk Factor ◽

Venous Thromboembolism ◽

Profile Analysis ◽

Vitamin K Antagonists ◽

Oral Anticoagulants ◽

Direct Oral Anticoagulants ◽

Anticoagulation Therapy ◽

Specific Risk ◽

Increased Risk

AbstractTraditionally, venous thromboembolism (VTE) resulting from major transient risk factors (e.g., surgery or trauma) or a major persistent risk factor such as cancer, has been defined as being provoked, whereas unprovoked VTE encompasses events without an identifiable cause. These categorizations influence anticoagulant treatment duration; unlike VTE provoked by major transient risk factors, extended anticoagulation beyond 3 months is advised for patients with cancer or unprovoked VTE due to risk persistence after treatment cessation. However, some patients with VTE provoked by minor transient or minor persistent risk factors may also be candidates for extended anticoagulation therapy due to the continuing risk of recurrence. In patients who require extended therapy, vitamin K antagonists (VKAs) are effective but are associated with an increased risk of bleeding and various treatment burdens (e.g., anticoagulation monitoring and dose adjustment). Evaluations of extended VTE treatment with the less-burdensome direct oral anticoagulants such as apixaban, dabigatran, edoxaban, and rivaroxaban show that they are at least as safe and effective as VKAs in a broad range of patients. In addition, apixaban and rivaroxaban offer more than one dosing option, allowing tailoring of treatment to the patient's specific risk factor profile. Analysis of more granular definitions for risk factor groupings has also yielded vital information on the most appropriate strategies for the treatment of patients with specific risk factors, highlighting that extended anticoagulation treatment may benefit those with minor transient and persistent environmental and nonenvironmental risk factors who commonly receive shorter-duration therapy.

Download Full-text

The Current Status of Direct Oral Anticoagulants in Cancer-Related Venous Thromboembolism Treatment

Rational Pharmacotherapy in Cardiology ◽

10.20996/1819-6446-2020-04-10 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 16 (2) ◽

pp. 286-295

Author(s):

К. V. Lobastov ◽

I. V. Schastlivtsev

Keyword(s):

Venous Thromboembolism ◽

Cancer Patients ◽

Vitamin K Antagonists ◽

Oral Anticoagulants ◽

Direct Oral Anticoagulants ◽

Similar Efficacy ◽

Current Status ◽

Patients With Cancer ◽

Increased Risk ◽

Discontinuation Of Treatment

This article is a review of epidemiology, pathogenesis and treatment of venous thromboembolism (VTE) in cancer patients. In accordance with actual guidelines, the duration of anticoagulant therapy of cancer-related venous thrombosis should be at least 6 months. The use of vitamin K antagonists (VKA) is associated with an increased risk of VTE recurrence and bleeding, so low molecular weight heparin (LMWH), in particular dalteparin, has been the "gold standard" until recently. Compared to VKA, prolonged use of LMWH can reduce the incidence of VTE recurrence without affecting the risk of bleeding or death. The main disadvantage of LMWH is low compliance, leading to premature discontinuation of treatment or switching to alternative anticoagulants. Direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) have changed the situation. Compared to VKA, they demonstrated higher efficacy with a similar (or improved for individual DOACs) safety in patients with cancer-related VTE. Recently, the results of studies comparing the use of DOACs with dalteparin in cancer patients have been published: SELECT-D (rivaroxaban), HOKUSAI-VTE Cancer (edoxaban), ADAM VTE (apixaban), CARAVAGGIO (apixaban). Rivaroxaban showed higher efficacy than dalteparin with a similar risk of major bleeding, but an increased risk of clinically relevant non-major (CRNM) bleeding. Edoxaban had the same efficacy as dalteparin but increased risk of major but not CRNM bleeding. Apixaban showed similar efficacy and safety as dalteparin in the CARAVAGGIO study, but did not provide higher safety in the ADAM VTE study. It was noted that gastrointestinal and urogenital bleeding dominated in the structure of hemorrhagic complications of DOACs. The results of published trials are reflected in the current guidelines of the specialized societies. DOACs (particularly, rivaroxaban and edoxaban) are recommended for the VTE treatment in cancer patients.

Download Full-text

Direct oral anticoagulants for the treatment of cancer-associated venous thromboembolism

Hämostaseologie ◽

10.5482/hamo-16-09-0036 ◽

2017 ◽

Vol 37 (04) ◽

pp. 241-255 ◽

Cited By ~ 4

Author(s):

Minna Voigtlaender ◽

Florian Langer

Keyword(s):

Venous Thromboembolism ◽

Cancer Patients ◽

Vitamin K Antagonists ◽

Oral Anticoagulants ◽

Direct Oral Anticoagulants ◽

Treatment Phase ◽

Standard Of Care ◽

Longterm Treatment ◽

Increased Risk ◽

Direct Head

SummaryCancer patients with venous thromboembolism (VTE) are at increased risk for both bleeding and VTE recurrence. Anticoagulation with low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) is the standard of care during the initial and longterm treatment phase (i.e. during the first 3 – 6 months of therapy) based on its overall beneficial safety and efficacy profile compared to vitamin K antagonists (VKAs). The direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) rivaroxaban, apixaban, edoxaban, and dabigatran are approved for the treatment of acute VTE, and the combined six phase-3 trials have included > 1500 patients with active cancer, as defined by variable selection criteria. Subgroup analyses of these patients, either pooled or separately reported, suggest that DOACs could be a safe and efficacious alternative to VKA therapy for the treatment of cancer-associated VTE. However, the populations of cancer patients included in the DOAC and LMWH trials are not comparable with regard to mortality and VTE risk, and no specific data from direct head-to-head comparisons of DOACs with LMWHs are currently available. The use of DOACs for the management of VTE in cancer is thus not recommended by clinical practice guidelines.

Download Full-text

Update on Direct Oral AntiCoagulants (DOACs)

Phlebologie ◽

10.1055/s-0038-1657856 ◽

2018 ◽

Vol 47 (03) ◽

pp. 137-145

Author(s):

C. Rosenthal ◽

C. von Heymann ◽

J. Koscielny

Keyword(s):

Elective Surgery ◽

Oral Anticoagulants ◽

Direct Oral Anticoagulants ◽

Patient Characteristics ◽

Clinical Decision ◽

Major Surgery ◽

Preoperative Treatment ◽

Risk Of Bleeding ◽

Increased Risk ◽

Meta Analyses

SummaryRecent findings require an update of previous recommendations for the perioperative use of Direct Oral AntiCoagulants (DOACs). A break in preoperative treatment of 24-96 hours is recommended based on the pharmacokinetic profiles of DOACs and depends on individual patient characteristics, their renal and possibly liver function, and their surgery-related risk of bleeding. In cases of renal or hepatic insufficiency, whether to extend the preoperative interruption of IIa- and Xa-inhibitors is a clinical decision that must be reached on an individual patient basis. In cases of epidural or spinal anaesthesia, more conservative pausing-intervals are recommended due to the risk of persistent neurologic deficits (e.g., paraplegia) following the development of spinal subdural and epidural haematomas. Elective surgery should be postponed according to these recommendations. Preoperative “bridging” with LMWH (more precisely referred to as “switching”) should be omitted due to a significantly increased risk of bleeding. In addition, the incidence of perioperative thromboembolic risks, such as DVT, PE, and stroke, are no different whether interruption or „switching” is undertaken. Postoperatively, the DOACs can be reinstituted within the first 24 hours. In cases of major surgery or if there is a higher risk of bleeding, resumption of DOACS should only begin after 24-72 hours. In patients with an elevated thromboembolic risk, transient postoperative LMWH administration can be recommended during this period.Interaction of DOACs with other drugs usually occurs during the absorption, transport and elimination of these drugs. Therefore, substance-specific restrictions and recommendations should be observed during these times. In everyday clinical practice, webbased, independent information portals on drug-interactions are very helpful in providing safe and rapid information about potential interactions when DOACs are used in combination with other drugs, especially during perioperative management.Non-adherence to medications is a worldwide problem that has dangerous and costly consequences. Present data suggest that persistence is the primary factor that supports adherence. Despite the adherence data presented in the DOACS approval studies (e.g., persistence in the treatment of acute venous thromboembolism has been reported to be between 94-99%), the first registries and meta-analyses provide sobering results regarding the incidence of persistence and the success rate of interventions designed to improve adherence with DOACs in cases of long-term usage.Nachdruck aus und zu zitieren als: Hämostaseologie 2017; 37: 267–275 https://doi.org/10.5482/HAMO-16-10-1657856

Download Full-text

Cancer-Associated Thrombosis: An Overview

Clinical Medicine Insights Oncology ◽

10.4137/cmo.s18991 ◽

2014 ◽

Vol 8 ◽

pp. CMO.S18991 ◽

Cited By ~ 72

Author(s):

Ghaleb Elyamany ◽

Ali Mattar Alzahrani ◽

Eman Bukhary

Keyword(s):

Risk Factors ◽

Cancer Patients ◽

Hospital Admissions ◽

Vitamin K Antagonists ◽

Oral Anticoagulants ◽

Arterial Occlusion ◽

Predictive Biomarkers ◽

Morbidity And Mortality ◽

Antiangiogenic Agents ◽

Cancer Associated Thrombosis

Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is a common complication in patients with malignant disease. Emerging data have enhanced our understanding of cancer-associated thrombosis, a major cause of morbidity and mortality in patients with cancer. In addition to VTE, arterial occlusion with stroke and anginal symptoms is relatively common among cancer patients, and is possibly related to genetic predisposition. Several risk factors for developing venous thrombosis usually coexist in cancer patients including surgery, hospital admissions and immobilization, the presence of an indwelling central catheter, chemotherapy, use of erythropoiesis-stimulating agents (ESAs) and new molecular-targeted therapies such as antiangiogenic agents. Effective prophylaxis and treatment of VTE reduced morbidity and mortality, and improved quality of life. Low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) is preferred as an effective and safe means for prophylaxis and treatment of VTE. It has largely replaced unfractionated heparin (UFH) and vitamin K antagonists (VKAs). Recently, the development of novel oral anticoagulants (NOACs) that directly inhibit factor Xa or thrombin is a milestone achievement in the prevention and treatment of VTE. This review will focus on the epidemiology and pathophysiology of cancer-associated thrombosis, risk factors, and new predictive biomarkers for VTE as well as discuss novel prevention and management regimens of VTE in cancer according to published guidelines.

Download Full-text

Cancer-associated venous thromboembolism: Burden, mechanisms, and management

Thrombosis and Haemostasis ◽

10.1160/th16-08-0615 ◽

2017 ◽

Vol 117 (02) ◽

pp. 219-230 ◽

Cited By ~ 110

Author(s):

Cihan Ay ◽

Ingrid Pabinger ◽

Alexander T. Cohen

Keyword(s):

Venous Thromboembolism ◽

Cancer Patients ◽

Vitamin K Antagonists ◽

Oral Anticoagulants ◽

Performance Status ◽

Direct Oral Anticoagulants ◽

Treatment Options ◽

Cancer Site ◽

Related Factors ◽

Venous Diseases

SummaryVenous thromboembolism (VTE) is a significant health problem in the general population but especially in cancer patients. In this review, we discuss the epidemiology and burden of the disease, the pathophysiology of cancer-associated VTE, and the clinical treatment options for both primary prevention and acute treatment. Overall, the development of VTE in cancer patients is related to increases in morbidity, mortality, and medical costs. However, the incidence of cancer-associated VTE varies due to patient-related factors (e.g. thrombophilia, comorbidities, performance status, history of venous diseases), tumour-related factors (e.g. cancer site, stage, grade), and treatment-related factors (e.g. surgery, chemotherapy, anti-angiogenesis treatment, hormonal and supportive treatment). Furthermore, blood count parameters (e.g. platelets and leukocytes) and biomarkers (e.g. soluble P-selectin and D-dimer) are predictive markers for the risk of VTE in cancer patients and have been used to enhance risk stratification. Evidence suggests that cancer itself is associated with a state of hypercoagulability, driven in part by the release of procoagulant factors, such as tissue factor, from malignant tissue as well as by inflammation-driven activation of endothelial cells, platelets, and leukocytes. In general, low-molecular-weight heparin (LWMH) monotherapy is the standard of care for the management of cancer-associated VTE, as vitamin K antagonists are less effective in cancer patients. Direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) offer a potentially promising treatment option for cancer patients with VTE, but recommendations concerning the routine use of DOACs should await head-to-head studies with LMWH.

Download Full-text

Canadian consensus recommendations on the management of venous thromboembolism in patients with cancer. Part 2: treatment

Current Oncology ◽

10.3747/co.22.2587 ◽

2015 ◽

Vol 22 (2) ◽

pp. 144 ◽

Cited By ~ 33

Author(s):

J.C. Easaw ◽

M.A. Shea-Budgell ◽

C.M.J. Wu ◽

P.M. Czaykowski ◽

J. Kassis ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Venous Thromboembolism ◽

Renal Insufficiency ◽

Cancer Patients ◽

Oral Anticoagulants ◽

Direct Oral Anticoagulants ◽

Anticoagulation Therapy ◽

Factor Xa ◽

Patients With Cancer ◽

Clinical Scenarios ◽

Increased Risk

Patients with cancer are at increased risk of venous thromboembolism (vte). Anticoagulation therapy is used to treat vte; however, patients with cancer have unique clinical circumstances that can often make decisions surrounding the administration of therapeutic anticoagulation complicated. No national Canadian guidelines on the management of established cancer-associated thrombosis have been published. We therefore aimed to develop a consensus-based, evidence-informed guideline on the topic.PubMed was searched for clinical trials and meta-analyses published between 2002 and 2013. Reference lists of key articles were hand-searched for additional publications. Content experts from across Canada were assembled to review the evidence and make recommendations.Low molecular weight heparin is the treatment of choice for cancer patients with established vte. Direct oral anticoagulants are not recommended for the treatment of vte at this time. Specific clinical scenarios, including the presence of an indwelling venous catheter, renal insufficiency, and thrombocytopenia, warrant modifications in the therapeutic administration of anticoagulation therapy. Patients with recurrent vte should receive extended (>3 months) anticoagulant therapy. Incidental vte should generally be treated in the same manner as symptomatic vte. There is no evidence to support the monitoring of anti–factor Xa levels in clinically stable cancer patients receiving prophylactic anticoagulation; however, levels of anti–factor Xa could be checked at baseline and periodically thereafter in patients with renal insufficiency. Follow-up and education about the signs and symptoms of vte are important components of ongoing patient care.

Download Full-text

Evaluation of Direct Oral Anticoagulants for the Treatment of Venous Thromboembolism in the Oncology Population

Blood ◽

10.1182/blood.v128.22.5026.5026 ◽

2016 ◽

Vol 128 (22) ◽

pp. 5026-5026

Author(s):

Jessica Hedvat ◽

Christina Howlett ◽

James K. McCloskey ◽

Ruchi Jain

Keyword(s):

Venous Thromboembolism ◽

High Risk ◽

Cancer Patients ◽

Bleeding Episode ◽

Oral Anticoagulants ◽

Direct Oral Anticoagulants ◽

Package Insert ◽

Increased Risk ◽

Clinically Significant ◽

Risk For Bleeding

Abstract INTRODUCTION: Anticoagulant management of cancer-associated thrombosis is challenging since this patient population is concurrently at an increased risk for bleeding. The use of direct oral anticoagulants [(DOACs) dabigatran, rivaroxaban, apixaban] is not recommended for the treatment of venous thromboembolism (VTE) in cancer patients since there is limited data in this patient population. Despite limited evidence for use, DOACs are commonly prescribed due to ease of administration and lack of required laboratory monitoring. The objective of this study was to evaluate the practice and safety patterns of the DOACs when used for VTE treatment in the oncology population at Hackensack University Medical Center (HackensackUMC). METHODS: This study was a retrospective chart review of adult cancer patients treated at HackensackUMC who received dabigatran, rivaroxaban, or apixaban for the treatment of VTE. The protocol was reviewed and approved by the Institutional Review Board. Patients were identified through a computer generated report of the DOACs which included patients on all inpatient adult oncology floors at HackensackUMC from January 2013 to October 2015. Patients were included in this study if they were 18 years of age or older, admitted to an oncology floor, receiving a DOAC for VTE treatment for at least 48 hours, and had active cancer. Patients were excluded from this study if they were receiving hemodialysis or receiving a DOAC exclusively for the indication of atrial fibrillation. The primary outcomes of this study included the percentage of patients who were receiving a DOAC dosage consistent with that of the package insert and the percentage of patients who experienced clinically significant bleeding. The secondary outcomes of this study included the percentage of patients who had their DOAC held for thrombocytopenia and high risk procedures. Descriptive statistics were used to analyze study outcomes. RESULTS: Of the 126 patients screened, 39 patients were included. Thirty-five patients were on rivaroxaban and 4 patients were on apixaban (Table 1). Ten of 39 patients (26%) were not receiving a DOAC dosage consistent with that of the package insert. Of these 10 patients identified, the majority were receiving a lower DOAC dose than is recommended in the package insert. Our assumption is that these patients received a lower than recommended dose due to concerns for increased risk of bleeding. No patients experienced clinically significant bleeding. Four of 39 patients (10%) experienced a minor bleeding episode, all of which were gastrointestinal and/or genitourinary bleeds (Table 2). Four of 14 thrombocytopenic patients (29%) did not have their DOAC dose held for thrombocytopenia (none of which experienced a bleeding episode). All patients had their DOACs appropriately held for all procedures. CONCLUSION: Increased education and awareness on manufacturer recommended dosing of DOACs is warranted for oncology prescribers. Despite the increased risk for bleeding in cancer patients, no clinically significant bleeding events were identified in our patient cohort. To our knowledge, this is the first study to evaluate the use of DOACs for VTE treatment in patients with cancer at a high risk for bleeding. This data suggests that the use of DOACs may be safe to use for VTE treatment in the oncology population. This study may provide foundation for larger, randomized, controlled trials to determine whether DOACs should be used for VTE treatment in cancer patients. Disclosures Howlett: Eisai: Honoraria; Amgen: Honoraria; Pfizer: Honoraria; Sandoz: Honoraria; Teva: Speakers Bureau. McCloskey:Ariad: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Amgen: Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Speakers Bureau.

Download Full-text