scholarly journals Pharmacological Thromboprophylaxis in Patients With Cancer

2021 ◽  
Vol 1 (11) ◽  
Author(s):  
Anusree Subramonian ◽  
Alison Adams

Six evidence-based guidelines were identified regarding the long-term (6 months or longer) use of pharmacological thromboprophylaxis for the management of cancer-associated thrombosis. The guidelines used rigorous methodology, systematically searched for evidence, and were clearly reported. Anticoagulation therapy for 6 months or longer is recommended by 5 guidelines for patients with active cancer and venous thromboembolism to prevent recurrences of venous thromboembolism. However, the recommendations are weak and made based on low-quality evidence or expert consensus. Two guidelines recommend a low-molecular-weight heparin or direct oral anticoagulant for long-term use (6 months or longer) in patients with cancer. This recommendation is based on low- to high-certainty evidence. Two guidelines strongly recommend direct oral anticoagulants in patients with cancers in locations other than gastrointestinal or genitourinary cancers. This recommendation is based on high-quality evidence. No guidelines were identified regarding arterial thrombosis or chronic disseminated intravascular coagulation associated with cancer.

2015 ◽  
Vol 22 (2) ◽  
pp. 144 ◽  
Author(s):  
J.C. Easaw ◽  
M.A. Shea-Budgell ◽  
C.M.J. Wu ◽  
P.M. Czaykowski ◽  
J. Kassis ◽  
...  

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.


2020 ◽  
Vol 27 (5) ◽  
Author(s):  
S. Ng ◽  
M. Carrier

Cancer is a hypercoagulable state with an associated increased risk of venous thromboembolism (vte) that is further amplified in individuals who undergo chemotherapy. Compared with patients having cancer alone or vte alone, patients who develop cancer-associated vte have a significantly poorer prognosis. The risks of recurrent vte despite appropriate anticoagulation therapy and of bleeding are also higher in patients with cancer than in those without. For those reasons, the prevention and appropriate management of cancer-associated thrombosis is of paramount importance. Although low-molecular-weight heparin has been the standard of care for the prevention and treat­ment of cancer-associated thrombosis, direct oral anticoagulants are increasingly being adopted as an effective and safe alternative.


2012 ◽  
Vol 03 (03) ◽  
pp. 121-125
Author(s):  
I. Pabinger ◽  
C. Ay

SummaryCancer is a major and independent risk factor of venous thromboembolism (VTE). In clinical practice, a high number of VTE events occurs in patients with cancer, and treatment of cancerassociated VTE differs in several aspects from treatment of VTE in the general population. However, treatment in cancer patients remains a major challenge, as the risk of recurrence of VTE as well as the risk of major bleeding during anticoagulation is substantially higher in patients with cancer than in those without cancer. In several clinical trials, different anticoagulants and regimens have been investigated for treatment of acute VTE and secondary prophylaxis in cancer patients to prevent recurrence. Based on the results of these trials, anticoagulant therapy with low-molecular-weight heparins (LMWH) has become the treatment of choice in cancer patients with acute VTE in the initial period and for extended and long-term anticoagulation for 3-6 months. New oral anticoagulants directly inhibiting thrombin or factor Xa, have been developed in the past decade and studied in large phase III clinical trials. Results from currently completed trials are promising and indicate their potential use for treatment of VTE. However, the role of the new oral thrombin and factor Xa inhibitors for VTE treatment in cancer patients still has to be clarified in further studies specifically focusing on cancer-associated VTE. This brief review will summarize the current strategies of initial and long-term VTE treatment in patients with cancer and discuss the potential use of the new oral anticoagulants.


Blood ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 136 (Supplement 1) ◽  
pp. 13-13
Author(s):  
Caroline Padbury ◽  
Margaret Harris ◽  
Michael LaCouture ◽  
Jelena Spyropoulos

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.


2018 ◽  
Vol 33 (3) ◽  
pp. 356-363
Author(s):  
Samantha M. Vogel ◽  
Leticia V. Smith ◽  
Evan J. Peterson

Objective: To review evidence behind anticoagulants in cancer-associated venous thromboembolism (VTE) with a focus on low-molecular-weight heparins (LMWH) and the role of direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs). Data Sources: PubMed was searched using terms “venous thromboembolism,” “cancer,” and “anticoagulation.” This search was restricted to clinical trials, meta-analyses, and subgroup analyses. Additional references were identified from reviewing literature citations. Study Selection: English-language prospective and retrospective studies assessing the efficacy and safety of LMWH and DOACs in patients with cancer. Data Analysis: Several trials were analyzed that compared anticoagulation therapies for prevention of recurrent VTE in patients with cancer. Many studies comparing LMWH and vitamin K antagonists (VKAs) found nonsignificant differences between therapies. A single study demonstrated that LMWHs are superior to VKAs. This evidence supporting LMWH for long-term VTE treatment in patients with cancer is based on comparison to VKA, but results are limited by methodological issues, and the benefit of LMWH may be driven by poor control. Subanalyses of DOAC trials suggest these are equally or more effective as VKA in cancer, but this conclusion is underpowered. Conclusion: DOACs have the potential to bypass many challenges with traditional therapy. After analyzing the evidence available, we conclude that after careful consideration of risks and benefits, use of DOACs for VTE treatment are a reasonable option in patients with cancer.


2019 ◽  
Vol 12 (1) ◽  
pp. bcr-2018-227663
Author(s):  
Shusuke Yagi ◽  
Seiichi Nishiyama ◽  
Toshio Abe ◽  
Masataka Sata

Antiphospholipid syndrome (APS) is a systemic autoimmune disease characterised by thromboembolic events including venous thromboembolism (VTE) in association with the presence of antiphospholipid antibodies. The standard treatment of VTE historically consists of anticoagulation therapy with warfarin, a vitamin K antagonist. Recently, direct oral anticoagulants, including rivaroxaban have become available for the treatment of VTE. However, the choice of anticoagulant, and the duration of anticoagulation in patients with APS has not been determined yet due to lack of evidence. Here, we report a case of recurrent venous thrombosis after discontinuation of rivaroxaban therapy and avoiding sedentary lifestyle in a patient with APS. We suggest that indefinite anticoagulation therapy might be needed even in low-risk APS cases.


TH Open ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 03 (01) ◽  
pp. e67-e76 ◽  
Author(s):  
Juan López-Núñez ◽  
Ricard Pérez-Andrés ◽  
Pierpaolo Di Micco ◽  
Sebastian Schellong ◽  
Covadonga Gómez-Cuervo ◽  
...  

Background The efficacy and safety of the direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) in fragile patients (age ≥ 75 years and/or creatinine clearance levels ≤ 50 mL/min and/or body weight ≤ 50kg) with venous thromboembolism (VTE) has not been evaluated. Methods We used the RIETE database to compare the rates of the composite of VTE recurrences or major bleeding during anticoagulation in fragile patients with VTE, according to the use of DOACs or standard anticoagulant therapy. Results From January 2013 to April 2018, 24,701 patients were recruited. Of these, 10,054 (41%) were fragile. Initially, 473 fragile patients (4.7%) received DOACs and 8,577 (85%) low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH). For long-term therapy, 1,298 patients (13%) received DOACs and 5,038 (50%) vitamin K antagonists (VKAs). Overall, 95 patients developed VTE recurrences and 262 had major bleeding. Patients initially receiving DOACs had a lower rate of the composite outcome (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.32; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.08–0.88) than those on LMWH. Patients receiving DOACs for long-term therapy had a nonsignificantly lower rate of the composite outcome (HR: 0.70; 95% CI: 0.46–1.03) than those on VKAs. On multivariable analysis, patients initially receiving DOACs had a nonsignificantly lower risk for the composite outcome (HR: 0.36; 95% CI: 0.11–1.15) than those on LMWH, while those receiving DOACs for long-term therapy had a significantly lower risk (HR: 0.61; 95% CI: 0.41–0.92) than those on VKAs. Conclusions Our data suggest that the use of DOACs may be more effective and safe than standard therapy in fragile patients with VTE, a subgroup of patients where the risk for bleeding is particularly high.


2020 ◽  
Vol 40 (01) ◽  
pp. 038-046 ◽  
Author(s):  
Florian Moik ◽  
Cihan Ay

AbstractIn this concise review, we discuss some common clinical challenges in the management of patients with cancer-associated venous thromboembolism (VTE), a frequent complication in patients with cancer that increases morbidity and mortality. While direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) have been established in clinical practice for anticoagulation in patients with VTE without cancer, their efficacy and safety in patients with cancer have not been assessed in randomized controlled trials until recently. The choice of the appropriate anticoagulant agent in the era of DOACs to treat patients with cancer-associated VTE is based on balancing the risk of recurrence against the risk of bleeding, and potential drug–drug interactions. However, the management of patients is challenged by special scenarios such as incidentally diagnosed pulmonary embolism and catheter-related thrombosis, and sometimes complicated by concomitant thrombocytopenia. We provide guidance for management of cancer-associated VTE in different clinical scenarios in a case-based manner and briefly review recent clinical studies and guidelines to explain our approach to management of the cases.


Blood ◽  
2010 ◽  
Vol 116 (21) ◽  
pp. 1097-1097
Author(s):  
David Spirk ◽  
Wolfgang Korte ◽  
Marc Husmann ◽  
Beat Frauchiger ◽  
Martin Banyai ◽  
...  

Abstract Abstract 1097 Background: In patients with cancer and acute venous thromboembolism (VTE), current consensus guidelines recommend anticoagulation therapy for an indefinite duration or until the cancer is resolved. Methods and results: Among 1’247 patients with acute VTE enrolled in the Swiss Venous Thromboembolism Registry (SWIVTER) from 18 hospitals, 315 (25%) had cancer of whom 179 (57%) had metastatic disease, 159 (50%) ongoing or recent chemotherapy, and 83 (26%) tumor surgery within 6 months. Patients with cancer were older (66±14 vs. 60±19 years, p<0.001), more often hospitalized at the time of VTE diagnosis (46% vs. 36%, p=0.001), immobile for >3 days (25% vs. 16%, p<0.001), and more often had thrombocytopenia (6% vs. 1%, p<0.001) than patients without cancer. The 30-day rate of VTE-related death or recurrent VTE was 9% in cancer patients vs. 4% in patients without cancer (p<0.001), and the rates of bleeding requiring medical attention were 5% in both groups (p=0.57). Cancer patients received indefinite-duration anticoagulation treatment more often than patients without cancer (47% vs. 19%, p<0.001), and LMWH mono-therapy during the initial 3 months was prescribed to 45% vs. 8%, p<0.001, respectively. Among patients with cancer, prior VTE (OR 4.0, 95%CI 2.0–8.0), metastatic disease (OR 3.0, 95%CI 1.7–5.2), outpatient status at the time of VTE diagnosis (OR 3.8, 95%CI 1.9–7.6), and inpatient treatment (OR 4.4, 95%CI 2.1–9.2) were independently associated with the prescription of indefinite-duration anticoagulation treatment. Conclusions: Less than half of the cancer patients with acute VTE received a prescription for indefinite-duration anticoagulation treatment. Recurrent VTE, metastatic cancer, outpatient VTE diagnosis, and VTE requiring hospitalization were associated with an increased use of this strategy. Disclosures: Spirk: sanofi-aventis (suisse) sa: Employment.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document