Epidemiology, risk and outcomes of venous thromboembolism in cancer

2012 ◽  
Vol 32 (02) ◽  
pp. 115-125 ◽  
Author(s):  
L. Russo ◽  
A. Falanga
Keyword(s):  
Risk Factors ◽  
Venous Thromboembolism ◽  
Brain Cancer ◽  
Prediction Models ◽  
Disease Stage ◽  
Individual Factors ◽  
Scientific Societies ◽  
Risk Prediction Models ◽  
Patients With Cancer ◽  
Increased Risk

SummaryCancer is associated with a fourfold increased risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE). The risk of VTE varies according to the type of malignancy (i. e. pancreatic cancer, brain cancer, lymphoma) and its disease stage and individual factors (i. e. sex, race, age, previous VTE history, immobilization, obesity). Preventing cancer-associated VTE is important because it represents a significant cause of morbidity and mortality. In order to identify cancer patient at particularly high risk, who need thromboprophylaxis, risk prediction models have become available and are under validation. These models include clinical risk factors, but also begin to incorporate biological markers. The major American and European scientific societies have issued their recommendations to guide the management of VTE in patients with cancer.In this review the principal aspects of epidemiology, risk factors and outcome of cancer-associated VTE are summarized.

scholarly journals Assessing the risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE) in ambulatory patients with cancer: Rationale and implementation of a pharmacist-led VTE risk assessment program in an ambulatory cancer centre

2021 ◽  
pp. 107815522110047
Author(s):  
Ryan Pelletier
Keyword(s):  
Risk Assessment ◽  
Venous Thromboembolism ◽  
Risk Prediction ◽  
Risk Score ◽  
Prediction Models ◽  
Risk Prediction Models ◽  
Patients With Cancer ◽  
Assessment Program ◽  
Ambulatory Oncology ◽  
Ambulatory Patients

Objectives The objectives of this paper were to identify and compare clinical prediction models used to assess the risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE) in ambulatory patients with cancer, as well as review the rationale and implementation of a pharmacist-led VTE screening program using the Khorana Risk Score model in an ambulatory oncology centre in Sault Ste. Marie, Ontario, Canada. Data Sources PubMed was used to identify clinical practice guidelines and review articles discussing risk prediction models used to assess VTE risk in ambulatory patients with cancer. Data Summary Three commonly used VTE risk prediction models in ambulatory patients with cancer: the Khorana Risk Score, Vienna Cancer and Thrombosis Study (CATS) and Protecht Score, were identified via literature review. After considering guideline recommendations, site-specific factors (i.e. laboratory costs, time pharmacists spent calculating VTE risk) and evidence from the CASSINI and AVERT trials, a novel pharmacist-led VTE risk assessment program using the Khorana Risk Score was developed during a fourth-year PharmD clinical rotation at the Algoma District Cancer Program (ADCP) [ambulatory cancer care centre]. ADCP patients with a Khorana Risk Score of [Formula: see text] were referred to the hematologist for a full VTE workup. Considering limitations, inclusion and exclusion criteria of the CASSINI and AVERT trials, the hematologist and pharmacy team decided on appropriate initiation of thromboprophylaxis with a direct oral anticoagulant (DOAC). Conclusions The Khorana Risk Score was the chosen model used for the pharmacist-led VTE risk assessment program due to its user-friendly scoring algorithm, evidence from validation studies and clinical trials, as well as ease of integration into pharmacy workflow. More research is needed to determine if pharmacist-led VTE risk assessment programs will impact patient outcomes, such as morbidity and mortality, secondary to cancer-associated thrombosis.

Predictors Of Vena Cava Filter Use For Venous Thromboembolism In Cancer Patients

Blood ◽  
2013 ◽  
Vol 122 (21) ◽  
pp. 935-935
Author(s):  
Gwendolyn Ho ◽  
Ann Brunson ◽  
Richard H. White ◽  
Ted Wun
Keyword(s):  
Risk Factors ◽  
Venous Thromboembolism ◽  
Cancer Patients ◽  
Brain Cancer ◽  
Vena Cava ◽  
Severity Of Illness ◽  
Bleeding Risk ◽  
Factors Associated ◽  
Patients With Cancer ◽  
Cancer Types

Abstract Background The use of vena cava filters (VCF) in the treatment of venous thromboembolism (VTE) is controversial. Few studies have evaluated the use of VCFs in cancer patients with acute thrombosis. Aims To determine frequency of VCF placement and factors associated with VCF use in patients with cancer hospitalized for acute VTE, and to compare these findings to patients without cancer hospitalized for acute VTE. Methods Using a retrospective observational study design, we analyzed hospital discharge records in California from 2005-2009 of cases presenting with acute VTE. Patients with cancer were identified by specific ICD-9-CM codes for the index VTE admission or a cancer diagnosis within 6 months prior to the index VTE. Bivariate and multivariable logistic regression analyses were used to determine predictive factors for placement of a VCF in cancer patients. Candidate risk factors included basic demographic parameters, cancer type, severity-of-illness (SOI) on admission, undergoing surgery, bleeding, and hospital characteristics. Results A VCF was placed in 19.6% of 14,000 cancer cases admitted with a principal diagnosis of acute VTE, versus 10.8% of 70,472 non-cancer cases admitted during the same time period. Among cancer cases, there was little variation in percentage that received a VCF based on age, and no significant variation across race or insurance type, except that self pay cancer patients had a lower rate of VCF placement. Variation across hospitals in the percentage of cancer cases that received a VCF was striking, ranging from 0% to 52% among hospitals that admitted a minimum of 15 acute VTE cases. There was a strong correlation (r=0.72, R2=0.52) in the frequency of VCF placement in cancer and non-cancer cases within individual hospitals. Among cancer types, the frequency of VCF placement was highest in cases with brain cancer (43%), with the observed frequency of VCF use among other cancer types ranging from 8%-23%. Patients with brain cancers, which has a high perceived bleeding risk were over 4 fold more likely to have a VCF placed compared to those cancers with low bleeding risk. Having acute leukemia did not predict for VCF placement. Only 8.2% of cancer patients had a strict contraindication to anticoagulation (acute bleeding or recent/imminent surgery), which are the only guideline-based indications for VCF placement. Active bleeding and undergoing surgery were each strongly associated with VCF use: 47% of cases that bled and 58% of cases who underwent surgery had a VCF placed. Results of the multivariable logistic model are shown in the table. In addition to bleeding and undergoing surgery, factors associated with VCF insertion included: larger hospital, urban location, private hospital and greater SOI at the time of admission. Conclusions The frequency of VCF use in cancer patients admitted for acute VTE is much higher than in non-cancer patients. Major risk factors for VCF use include bleeding, undergoing recent surgery, having brain cancer, urban location, and greater severity of illness. The frequency of VCF placement among cancer patients varied widely across hospitals. Given the extraordinary variation in the frequency of use of VCFs between hospitals, more research is needed to better define outcomes of VCF placement in cancer patients. Disclosures: Ho: American Society of Hematology: ASH HONORS trainee research award Other.

Delirium incidence, risk factors, and treatment in older adults receiving chemotherapy: A scoping review.

2019 ◽  
Vol 37 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. e23025-e23025
Author(s):  
Shabbir M.H. Alibhai ◽  
Patrick Jung ◽  
Zuhair Alam ◽  
Lily Yeung ◽  
Uzair Malik ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Risk Factors ◽  
Older Adults ◽  
Clinical Trials ◽  
Risk Prediction ◽  
Scoping Review ◽  
Full Text ◽  
Prediction Models ◽  
High Quality ◽  
Risk Prediction Models ◽  
Increased Risk

e23025 Background: Older adults with cancer are at increased risk of delirium given their advanced age, multiple comorbidities and medications, prevalence of cognitive impairment, and possibly cancer treatment. Awareness of such risks and interventions to prevent or treat delirium is important to clinicians and to provide high quality care. However, there is scant published information on the risks of delirium with chemotherapy or evidence-based approaches to prevent or treat it. We performed a scoping review to summarize the available evidence. Methods: We conducted a scoping review using the framework of Arksey and O’Malley. We systematically searched peer-reviewed journal articles in English, French, and German from Medline, Embase, PsychINFO, CINAHL Plus, and Cochrane Central from inception until January 2017 to identify studies that examined delirium in patients receiving chemotherapy. We also attempted to identify any studies that reported on multivariable delirium risk prediction models and any clinical trials that examined prevention or treatment of delirium. Article titles and abstracts as well as full text articles were reviewed using Covidence software by two or more reviewers independently. Similarly, data extraction was performed by two independent reviewers. Results: A total of 21,678 titles and abstracts were screened, and 1,166 full-text articles were reviewed. Nineteen articles with varying study designs (retrospective administrative databases to clinical trials) reported on delirium using an acceptable diagnostic standard. Sample sizes varied from 15 to over 21,000. No one tumour site or treatment protocol constituted the majority of studies. The incidence of delirium ranged from 0 to 51% (mean 13.5%). The time course of delirium relative to the cycle of chemotherapy was inconsistently reported. No studies reported on risk prediction models for delirium, and no intervention studies to prevent or treat delirium were identified. An additional 109 studies reported on outcomes that could be part of the delirium syndrome but did not meet even our broad inclusion criteria (e.g. cognitive disturbance). Conclusions: Delirium may occur in over 1 in 8 older adults receiving chemotherapy, although there were substantial limitations in reported studies. This scoping review highlights the dearth of knowledge in the area, particularly for risk factors, prevention, and treatment, and emphasizes the need for high-quality studies examining these important outcomes in the oncology setting.

scholarly journals Recent advances in the treatment and prevention of venous thromboembolism in cancer patients: role of the direct oral anticoagulants and their unique challenges

F1000Research ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 8 ◽  
pp. 974 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dominique Farge ◽  
Corinne Frere
Keyword(s):  
Venous Thromboembolism ◽  
Cancer Patients ◽  
Oral Anticoagulants ◽  
Direct Oral Anticoagulants ◽  
Patient Characteristics ◽  
Primary Prophylaxis ◽  
Disease Stage ◽  
Vte Prophylaxis ◽  
Patients With Cancer ◽  
Increased Risk

Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is a common complication in patients with cancer and is associated with poor prognosis. Low-molecular-weight heparins (LMWHs) are the standard of care for the treatment of cancer-associated thrombosis. Primary VTE prophylaxis with LMWH is recommended after cancer surgery and in hospitalized patients with reduced mobility. However, owing to wide variations in VTE and bleeding risk, based on disease stage, anti-cancer treatments, and individual patient characteristics, routine primary prophylaxis is not recommended in ambulatory cancer patients undergoing chemotherapy. Efforts are under way to validate risk assessment models that will help identify those patients in whom the benefits of primary prophylaxis will outweigh the risks. In recent months, long-awaited dedicated clinical trials assessing the direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) in patients with cancer have reported promising results. In comparison with the LMWHs, the DOACs were reported to be non-inferior to prevent VTE recurrence. However, there was an increased risk of bleeding, particularly in gastrointestinal cancers. Safe and optimal treatment with the DOACs in the patient with cancer will require vigilant patient selection based on patient characteristics, co-morbidities, and the potential for drug–drug interactions.

scholarly journals COVID-19 and cancer registries: learning from the first peak of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alvin J. X. Lee ◽  
Karin Purshouse
Keyword(s):  
Risk Factors ◽  
Performance Status ◽  
Poor Performance ◽  
Cancer Registries ◽  
Adverse Outcomes ◽  
Smoking History ◽  
Poor Performance Status ◽  
International Studies ◽  
Patients With Cancer ◽  
Increased Risk

AbstractThe SARS-Cov-2 pandemic in 2020 has caused oncology teams around the world to adapt their practice in the aim of protecting patients. Early evidence from China indicated that patients with cancer, and particularly those who had recently received chemotherapy or surgery, were at increased risk of adverse outcomes following SARS-Cov-2 infection. Many registries of cancer patients infected with SARS-Cov-2 emerged during the first wave. We collate the evidence from these national and international studies and focus on the risk factors for patients with solid cancers and the contribution of systemic anti-cancer treatments (SACT—chemotherapy, immunotherapy, targeted and hormone therapy) to outcomes following SARS-Cov-2 infection. Patients with cancer infected with SARS-Cov-2 have a higher probability of death compared with patients without cancer. Common risk factors for mortality following COVID-19 include age, male sex, smoking history, number of comorbidities and poor performance status. Oncological features that may predict for worse outcomes include tumour stage, disease trajectory and lung cancer. Most studies did not identify an association between SACT and adverse outcomes. Recent data suggest that the timing of receipt of SACT may be associated with risk of mortality. Ongoing recruitment to these registries will enable us to provide evidence-based care.

scholarly journals Rare Germline Pathogenic Variants Identified by Multigene Panel Testing and the Risk of Aggressive Prostate Cancer

Cancers ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 13 (7) ◽  
pp. 1495
Author(s):  
Tú Nguyen-Dumont ◽  
James G. Dowty ◽  
Robert J. MacInnis ◽  
Jason A. Steen ◽  
Moeen Riaz ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Prostate Cancer ◽  
Risk Prediction ◽  
Prediction Models ◽  
Risk Prediction Models ◽  
Aggressive Prostate Cancer ◽  
Panel Testing ◽  
Pathogenic Variants ◽  
Increased Risk ◽  
Predisposition Genes ◽  
Rare Genetic Variants

While gene panel sequencing is becoming widely used for cancer risk prediction, its clinical utility with respect to predicting aggressive prostate cancer (PrCa) is limited by our current understanding of the genetic risk factors associated with predisposition to this potentially lethal disease phenotype. This study included 837 men diagnosed with aggressive PrCa and 7261 controls (unaffected men and men who did not meet criteria for aggressive PrCa). Rare germline pathogenic variants (including likely pathogenic variants) were identified by targeted sequencing of 26 known or putative cancer predisposition genes. We found that 85 (10%) men with aggressive PrCa and 265 (4%) controls carried a pathogenic variant (p < 0.0001). Aggressive PrCa odds ratios (ORs) were estimated using unconditional logistic regression. Increased risk of aggressive PrCa (OR (95% confidence interval)) was identified for pathogenic variants in BRCA2 (5.8 (2.7–12.4)), BRCA1 (5.5 (1.8–16.6)), and ATM (3.8 (1.6–9.1)). Our study provides further evidence that rare germline pathogenic variants in these genes are associated with increased risk of this aggressive, clinically relevant subset of PrCa. These rare genetic variants could be incorporated into risk prediction models to improve their precision to identify men at highest risk of aggressive prostate cancer and be used to identify men with newly diagnosed prostate cancer who require urgent treatment.

scholarly journals Risk Factors and Prediction Models for Venous Thromboembolism in Ambulatory Patients with Lung Cancer

Healthcare ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 9 (6) ◽  
pp. 778
Author(s):  
Ann-Rong Yan ◽  
Indira Samarawickrema ◽  
Mark Naunton ◽  
Gregory M. Peterson ◽  
Desmond Yip ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Risk Factors ◽  
Lung Cancer ◽  
Venous Thromboembolism ◽  
High Risk ◽  
Prediction Models ◽  
Poor Performance ◽  
Risk Models ◽  
Related Risk ◽  
Wide Range ◽  
Ambulatory Patients

Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is a significant cause of mortality in patients with lung cancer. Despite the availability of a wide range of anticoagulants to help prevent thrombosis, thromboprophylaxis in ambulatory patients is a challenge due to its associated risk of haemorrhage. As a result, anticoagulation is only recommended in patients with a relatively high risk of VTE. Efforts have been made to develop predictive models for VTE risk assessment in cancer patients, but the availability of a reliable predictive model for ambulate patients with lung cancer is unclear. We have analysed the latest information on this topic, with a focus on the lung cancer-related risk factors for VTE, and risk prediction models developed and validated in this group of patients. The existing risk models, such as the Khorana score, the PROTECHT score and the CONKO score, have shown poor performance in external validations, failing to identify many high-risk individuals. Some of the newly developed and updated models may be promising, but their further validation is needed.

scholarly journals Development and validation of two SCORE-based cardiovascular risk prediction models for Eastern Europe: a multicohort study

2020 ◽  
Vol 41 (35) ◽  
pp. 3325-3333 ◽  
Author(s):  
Taavi Tillmann ◽  
Kristi Läll ◽  
Oliver Dukes ◽  
Giovanni Veronesi ◽  
Hynek Pikhart ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Risk Factors ◽  
Prediction Models ◽  
Validation Cohort ◽  
European Countries ◽  
Eastern European ◽  
Risk Prediction Models ◽  
Derivation Cohort ◽  
Score Model ◽  
Eastern European Countries

Abstract Aims Cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk prediction models are used in Western European countries, but less so in Eastern European countries where rates of CVD can be two to four times higher. We recalibrated the SCORE prediction model for three Eastern European countries and evaluated the impact of adding seven behavioural and psychosocial risk factors to the model. Methods and results We developed and validated models using data from the prospective HAPIEE cohort study with 14 598 participants from Russia, Poland, and the Czech Republic (derivation cohort, median follow-up 7.2 years, 338 fatal CVD cases) and Estonian Biobank data with 4632 participants (validation cohort, median follow-up 8.3 years, 91 fatal CVD cases). The first model (recalibrated SCORE) used the same risk factors as in the SCORE model. The second model (HAPIEE SCORE) added education, employment, marital status, depression, body mass index, physical inactivity, and antihypertensive use. Discrimination of the original SCORE model (C-statistic 0.78 in the derivation and 0.83 in the validation cohorts) was improved in recalibrated SCORE (0.82 and 0.85) and HAPIEE SCORE (0.84 and 0.87) models. After dichotomizing risk at the clinically meaningful threshold of 5%, and when comparing the final HAPIEE SCORE model against the original SCORE model, the net reclassification improvement was 0.07 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.02–0.11] in the derivation cohort and 0.14 (95% CI 0.04–0.25) in the validation cohort. Conclusion Our recalibrated SCORE may be more appropriate than the conventional SCORE for some Eastern European populations. The addition of seven quick, non-invasive, and cheap predictors further improved prediction accuracy.

Diagnosis and Initial Treatment of Venous Thromboembolism in Patients With Cancer

2009 ◽  
Vol 27 (29) ◽  
pp. 4889-4894 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael B. Streiff
Keyword(s):  
Venous Thromboembolism ◽  
Initial Treatment ◽  
Vena Cava ◽  
Initial Therapy ◽  
Primary Objective ◽  
Thrombotic Disease ◽  
Venous Stenting ◽  
Patients With Cancer ◽  
Vena Cava Filters ◽  
Increased Risk

Purpose Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is a common complication of cancer and its therapy. The purpose of this article is to review the diagnosis and initial treatment of VTE in the patient with cancer. Methods I conducted a survey of the English-language literature on topics relevant to the diagnosis and initial treatment of VTE in patients with cancer. Results Patients with cancer are at increased risk for VTE because of the presence of multiple risk factors for thrombotic disease. The most common signs and symptoms of VTE as well as the utility of clinical prediction rules and D-dimer testing in the diagnosis of VTE in the patient with cancer are reviewed. Duplex ultrasound and computer tomography angiography are the primary objective diagnostic modalities for VTE. Low molecular weight heparin is the preferred initial therapy for VTE. Until further data emerge, thrombolysis and vena cava filters should be reserved for patients in whom anticoagulation is insufficient or contraindicated. Outpatient management is feasible for carefully selected patients with cancer with deep vein thrombosis (DVT) and low-risk pulmonary embolism. Anticoagulation is the preferred initial therapy for cancer patients with central venous catheter–associated DVT, calf DVT, and unsuspected VTE. Conclusion Optimal initial management of VTE in patients with cancer entails maintaining a high index of suspicion for thrombotic disease, confirming diagnostic suspicions with objective testing and evidence-based use of anticoagulation, and adjunctive therapeutic modalities (thrombolysis, vena cava interruption, venous stenting). Further investigation of initial diagnostic and treatment strategies for VTE focusing on patients with cancer are warranted.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document