scholarly journals Cancer-Associated Thrombosis: An Overview

2014 ◽  
Vol 8 ◽  
pp. CMO.S18991 ◽  
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.

scholarly journals Current Recommendations for the Management of Cancer-Associated Venous Thromboembolism

2021 ◽  
Vol 7 (2) ◽  
pp. 27-38
Author(s):  
Katalin Makó
Keyword(s):  
Risk Factors ◽  
Venous Thromboembolism ◽  
Cancer Patients ◽  
Oral Anticoagulants ◽  
Direct Oral Anticoagulants ◽  
Bleeding Risk ◽  
Term Treatment ◽  
Long Term Treatment ◽  
High Bleeding Risk ◽  
Cancer Associated Thrombosis

Abstract Cancer-associated thrombosis (CAT) is a major cause of death in oncological patients. The mechanisms of thrombogenesis in cancer patients are not fully established, and it seems to be multifactorial in origin. Also, several risk factors for venous thromboembolism (VTE) are present in these patients such as tumor site, stage, histology of cancer, chemotherapy, surgery, and immobilization. Anticoagulant treatment in CAT is challenging because of high bleeding risk during treatment and recurrence of VTE. Current major guidelines recommend low molecular weight heparins (LMWHs) for early and long-term treatment of VTE in cancer patients. In the past years, direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) are recommended as potential treatment option for VTE and have recently been proposed as a new option for treating CAT. This manuscript will give a short overview of risk factors involved in the development of CAT and a summary on the recent recommendations and guidelines for treatment of VTE in patients with malignancies, discussing also some special clinical situations (e.g. renal impairment, catheter-related thrombosis, and thrombocytopenia).

scholarly journals 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)

Cancers ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 13 (12) ◽  
pp. 2905
Author(s):  
Martin Kirschner ◽  
Nicole do Ó Hartmann ◽  
Stefani Parmentier ◽  
Christina Hart ◽  
Larissa Henze ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Risk Factors ◽  
Cancer Patients ◽  
Vitamin K Antagonists ◽  
Oral Anticoagulants ◽  
Direct Oral Anticoagulants ◽  
Working Party ◽  
Major Surgery ◽  
Thrombotic Risk ◽  
Indwelling Catheters ◽  
Increased Risk

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.

scholarly journals Success of Online CME at Improving Knowledge and Confidence Around Guideline-Directed Management of Cancer-Associated Thrombosis

Blood ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 136 (Supplement 1) ◽  
pp. 13-13
Author(s):  
Caroline Padbury ◽  
Margaret Harris ◽  
Michael LaCouture ◽  
Jelena Spyropoulos
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Practice ◽  
Venous Thromboembolism ◽  
Cancer Patients ◽  
Treatment Guidelines ◽  
Conflicts Of Interest ◽  
Oral Anticoagulants ◽  
Roundtable Discussion ◽  
Patients With Cancer ◽  
Cancer Associated Thrombosis ◽  
Post Assessment

Title:Success of Online CME at Improving Knowledge and Confidence Around Guideline-Directed Management of Cancer-Associated Thrombosis Study Objectives:Recent guidance statements recommend the use of direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) as primary thromboprophylaxis in ambulatory patients with cancer who are starting chemotherapy and in patients with cancer and acute venous thromboembolism at low risk of bleeding and no drug-drug interactions.[Farge 2019; Key 2020] Yet, many clinicians lack knowledge and confidence with integrating DOACs into management strategies for patients with cancer in accordance to guideline recommendations.[Cushman 2015; Khorana 2016] We sought to determine if online continuing medical education (CME) could improve the knowledge and confidence of hematologists/oncologists regarding guideline-directed use of DOACs in the management of cancer-associated thrombosis. Methods:This CME intervention comprised of a 30-minute online video-based roundtable discussion among experts in the field of cancer-associated thrombosis management. Responses to 3 multiple-choice, knowledge questions and 1 self-efficacy, 5-point Likert scale confidence question were analyzed using a repeated pairs pre-/post-assessment study design. A chi-square test (P <.05 is considered significant) assessed pre- to post-activity change . The activity launched December 23, 2019, and data were collected through February 24, 2020. Results:In total, 71 Hematologists/Oncologists were included in this study. Overall, there were knowledge and confidence improvements seen among all groups from pre- to post-assessment: 27% of hematologists/oncologists (P<.01) improved at identifying guideline-directed therapy regarding recommended thromboprophylaxis in patients with cancer per guideline recommendations.27% of hematologists/oncologists (P<.01) improved at selecting guideline-appropriate treatment options for cancer-associated thrombosis.44% of hematologists/oncologists had an increase in confidence in managing thrombosis in patients with cancer. Continued educational gaps: 25% of hematologists/oncologists failed to select guideline recommended DOAC therapy for thromboprophylaxis in cancer patients.45% of hematologists/oncologists failed to select guideline recommended DOAC therapy for treatment of thrombosis in cancer patients.66% of hematologists/oncologists still remain at only a rating of 1 to 3 on a scale of 1 to 5 in their confidence managing thrombosis in patients with cancer. Conclusion:This study demonstrates the success of online, CME-accredited, video-based roundtable discussion with experts in the field on significantly improving knowledge and confidence of hematologists/oncologists related to the guideline-recommended use of DOACs in the management of cancer-associated thrombosis. Continued gaps were also identified for future educational targets. Sources of support: Developed through an independent educational grant from Janssen in partnership with the University of Chicago. References: Cushman M, Creager MA. Improving awareness and outcomes related to venous thromboembolism. JAMA. 2015;314(18):1913-4. Farge D, Frere C, Connors JM, et al. 2019 International clinical practice guidelines for the treatment and prophylaxis of venous thromboembolism in patients with cancer. The Lancet Oncology. 2019;20(10):e566-581. Key NS, Khorana AA, Kuderer NM, et al. Venous thromboembolism prophylaxis and treatment in patients with cancer: ASCO Clinical Practice Guideline Update. J Clin Oncol. 2020 Feb 10;38(5):496-520. Khorana AA, Yannicelli D, McCrae KR, et al. Evaluation of US prescription patterns: are treatment guidelines for cancer-associated venous thromboembolism being followed? Thromb Res. 2016 Sep;145:51-3. Disclosures No relevant conflicts of interest to declare.

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

2019 ◽  
Vol 39 (01) ◽  
pp. 067-075 ◽  
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.

scholarly journals Epidemiological Trends in Asthma

1996 ◽  
Vol 3 (4) ◽  
pp. 261-268 ◽  
Author(s):  
Malcolm R Sears
Keyword(s):  
Risk Factors ◽  
Hospital Admissions ◽  
Significant Risk ◽  
Morbidity And Mortality ◽  
Beta Agonist ◽  
Physician Education ◽  
Physician Visits ◽  
Asthma Morbidity ◽  
Beta Agonists ◽  
Epidemiological Trends

Many markers of asthma morbidity have shown substantial increases over the past two decades, including family physician visits, use of anti-asthma medications, emergency room visits and hospital admissions. The reported prevalence of diagnosed asthma and of wheezing has increased, especially in children, with accompanying evidence of increased atopy and increased airway responsiveness. Allergen exposure and parental smoking are significant risk factors for childhood wheezing, whereas the influence of outdoor air pollution is uncertain. Increasing use of beta-agonist treatment, which appears to increase the severity of asthma by increasing early and late responses to allergen, may contribute to increased morbidity and mortality, especially if potent beta-agonists are used. Risk factors for asthma mortality include age, smoking, allergy and airway lability, as well as over-reliance on beta-agonists and poor compliance with other aspects of treatment. Following withdrawal of the potent beta-agonist fenoterol in New Zealand, both hospital admissions and mortality from asthma fell abruptly. Continued patient and physician education, with emphasis on avoidance of risk factors and use of appropriate treatment, should reduce morbidity and mortality from asthma in Canada.

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

2017 ◽  
Vol 117 (02) ◽  
pp. 219-230 ◽  
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.

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

Phlebologie ◽  
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.

scholarly journals Direct oral anticoagulants: now also for prevention and treatment of cancer-associated venous thromboembolism?

Hematology ◽  
2017 ◽  
Vol 2017 (1) ◽  
pp. 136-143 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ingrid Pabinger ◽  
Julia Riedl
Keyword(s):  
Venous Thromboembolism ◽  
Primary Prevention ◽  
Cancer Patients ◽  
Vitamin K Antagonists ◽  
Oral Anticoagulants ◽  
Direct Oral Anticoagulants ◽  
Similar Efficacy ◽  
Prevention And Treatment ◽  
History Of ◽  
Meta Analyses

Abstract Data on specific studies in cancer patients using direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) for the prevention and treatment of venous thromboembolism (VTE) are still scarce. For preventing VTE with DOACs, current experience is still very limited, so definite conclusions cannot yet be drawn. However, DOACs have so far been compared with vitamin K antagonists (VKAs) in patients with acute VTE in 5 studies, and several hundreds of patients included in these studies had either active cancer, a history of cancer, or a new occurrence of cancer during the course of disease. Meta-analyses have revealed an at least similar efficacy and safety profile of DOACs compared with VKAs. A number of studies of cancer patients investigating primary prevention and treatment are underway, and some will be finalized soon. Nevertheless, we might need further trials, specifically on the prevention of VTE in patients who are at particularly high risk. This article also includes a personal opinion on the use of DOACs in cancer patients. In conclusion, the currently available data show that DOACs might be safe and efficacious in the treatment of VTE, however, this has yet to be proven in specifically designed trials in patients with cancer. With regard to prevention, thus far, even less data exist, and the outcomes of the ongoing studies have to be evaluated before DOACs may be used for primary prevention.

Anticoagulation in Deep Venous Thrombosis: Current Trends in the Era of Non- Vitamin K Antagonists Oral Anticoagulants

2020 ◽  
Vol 26 (23) ◽  
pp. 2692-2702 ◽  
Author(s):  
Panteleimon E. Papakonstantinou ◽  
Costas Tsioufis ◽  
Dimitris Konstantinidis ◽  
Panagiotis Iliakis ◽  
Ioannis Leontsinis ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cancer Patients ◽  
Vitamin K ◽  
Safety Profile ◽  
Vitamin K Antagonists ◽  
Oral Anticoagulants ◽  
Anticoagulation Therapy ◽  
Bleeding Risk ◽  
Efficacy And Safety ◽  
Anticoagulation Management ◽  
Oral Agents

: Anticoagulation therapy is the cornerstone of treatment in acute vein thrombosis (DVT) and it aims to reduce symptoms, thrombus extension, DVT recurrences, and mortality. The treatment for DVT depends on its anatomical extent, among other factors. Anticoagulation therapy for proximal DVT is clearly recommended (at least for 3 months), while AT for isolated distal DVT should be considered, especially in the presence of high thromboembolic risk factors. The optimal anticoagulant and duration of therapy are determined by the clinical assessment, taking into account the thromboembolic and bleeding risk in each patient in a case-by-case decision making. Non-Vitamin K antagonists oral anticoagulants (NOACs) were a revolution in the anticoagulation management of DVT. Nowadays, NOACs are considered as first-line therapy in the anticoagulation therapy for DVT and are recommended as the preferred anticoagulant agents by most scientific societies. NOACs offer a simple route of administration (oral agents), a rapid onset-offset of their action along with a good efficacy and safety profile in comparison with Vitamin K Antagonists (VKAs). However, there are issues about their efficacy and safety profile in specific populations with high thromboembolic and bleeding risks, such as renal failure patients, active-cancer patients, and pregnant women, in which VKAs and heparins were the standard care of treatment. Since the available data are promising for the use of NOACs in end-stage chronic kidney disease and cancer patients, several ongoing randomized trials are currently trying to solve that issues and give evidence about the safety and efficacy of NOACs in these populations.

Influence of Hypertension and Diabetes on Postoperative Outcomes In Cancer Patients Undergoing Moderate/High Risk Surgical Procedures

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lafayete William Ferreira Ramos ◽  
Beatriz Nery Nascimento ◽  
Gabriel Rossi Silva ◽  
Marcos Vinícius Ferreira Ramos ◽  
Barbara Cristina Ferreira Ramos ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Risk Factors ◽  
Postoperative Complications ◽  
Cancer Patients ◽  
Multiple Logistic Regression Analysis ◽  
Diabetic Group ◽  
Postoperative Outcomes ◽  
Morbidity And Mortality ◽  
Systemic Hypertension ◽  
Surgical Time ◽  
Increased Risk

Abstract Background: Systemic hypertension (HTN) and diabetes mellitus (DM) are believed to be risk factors for adverse postoperative outcomes in patients undergoing surgical interventions, but evidence is lacking. This retrospective study evaluated the effects of HTN and DM, alone or in combination, on postoperative outcomes of elective noncardiac surgery in cancer patients. Methods: Patients (n = 844) with malignancies, who underwent elective surgery at a tertiary hospital, were categorised into healthy (group A, n = 339), hypertensive (group B, n = 357), diabetic (group C, n = 21), and hypertensive and diabetic (group D, n = 127) groups. Preoperatively, all patients had systolic blood pressure ≤ 160 mmHg and plasma glucose level ≤ 140 mg/dl. Postoperative in-hospital morbidity and mortality were compared among groups. Results: Postoperative complications occurred in 22 (6.5%), 21 (5.9%), 2 (9.5%), and 11 (8.7%) patients in groups A, B, C, and D, respectively (p = 0.712). HTN (p = 0.538), DM (p = 0.990), and HTN+DM (p = 0.135) did not impact the occurrence of adverse events. Patients with higher surgical risk (ASA III or IV) and those with longer surgical time had higher morbidity and mortality (p = 0.001, p < 0.001, respectively). In multiple logistic regression analysis, ASA status and surgical time were independent risk factors for postoperative complications (both p < 0.001). Conclusion: Cancer patients with preoperative comorbidities, such as HTN and DM, alone or in combination, regardless of other characteristics, do not have an increased risk of adverse postoperative outcomes.Trial registration: Retrospectively registered.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document