Background Acutely ill hospitalized medical patients are at risk for VTE. We assessed the incidence of VTE in the observational International Medical Prevention Registry on Venous Thromboembolism ...(IMPROVE) study and derived VTE risk assessment scores at admission and associative VTE scores during hospitalization. Methods Data from 15,156 medical patients were analyzed to determine the cumulative incidence of clinically observed VTE over 3 months after admission. Multiple regression analysis identified factors associated with VTE risk. Results Of the 184 patients who developed symptomatic VTE, 76 had pulmonary embolism, and 67 had lower-extremity DVT. Cumulative VTE incidence was 1.0%; 45% of events occurred after discharge. Factors independently associated with VTE were previous VTE, known thrombophilia, cancer, age > 60 years, lower-limb paralysis, immobilization ≥ 7 days, and admission to an ICU or coronary care unit (first four were available at admission). Points were assigned to each factor identified to give a total risk score for each patient. At admission, 67% of patients had a score ≥ 1. During hospitalization, 31% had a score ≥ 2; for a score of 2 or 3, observed VTE risk was 1.5% vs 5.7% for a score ≥ 4. Observed and predicted rates were similar for both models (C statistic, 0.65 and 0.69, respectively). During hospitalization, a score ≥ 2 was associated with higher overall and VTE-related mortality. Conclusions Weighted VTE risk scores derived from four clinical risk factors at hospital admission can predict VTE risk in acutely ill hospitalized medical patients. Scores derived from seven clinical factors during hospitalization may help us to further understand symptomatic VTE risk. These scores require external validation.
To provide recommendations about prophylaxis and treatment of venous thromboembolism (VTE) in patients with cancer. Prophylaxis in the outpatient, inpatient, and perioperative settings was ...considered, as were treatment and use of anticoagulation as a cancer-directed therapy.
A systematic review of the literature published from December 2007 to December 2012 was completed in MEDLINE and the Cochrane Collaboration Library. An Update Committee reviewed evidence to determine which recommendations required revision.
Forty-two publications met eligibility criteria, including 16 systematic reviews and 24 randomized controlled trials.
Most hospitalized patients with cancer require thromboprophylaxis throughout hospitalization. Thromboprophylaxis is not routinely recommended for outpatients with cancer. It may be considered for selected high-risk patients. Patients with multiple myeloma receiving antiangiogenesis agents with chemotherapy and/or dexamethasone should receive prophylaxis with either low-molecular weight heparin (LMWH) or low-dose aspirin. Patients undergoing major cancer surgery should receive prophylaxis, starting before surgery and continuing for at least 7 to 10 days. Extending prophylaxis up to 4 weeks should be considered in those with high-risk features. LMWH is recommended for the initial 5 to 10 days of treatment for deep vein thrombosis and pulmonary embolism as well as for long-term (6 months) secondary prophylaxis. Use of novel oral anticoagulants is not currently recommended for patients with malignancy and VTE. Anticoagulation should not be used for cancer treatment in the absence of other indications. Patients with cancer should be periodically assessed for VTE risk. Oncology professionals should provide patient education about the signs and symptoms of VTE.
In the Hokusai VTE Cancer study, edoxaban was non-inferior to dalteparin for the composite outcome of recurrent venous thromboembolism (VTE) and major bleeding in 1,050 patients with ...cancer-associated VTE. The absolute rate of recurrent VTE was 3.4% lower with edoxaban, whereas the absolute rate of major bleeding was 2.9% higher. The present analysis focuses on the sites, clinical presentation, course and outcome of bleeding events, and the associated tumour types. Major bleeds and their severity (categories 1-4) were blindly adjudicated by a committee using a priori defined criteria, and data were analysed in the safety population. Major bleeding occurred in 32 of 522 patients given edoxaban (median treatment duration, 211 days) and in 16 of 524 patients treated with dalteparin (median treatment duration, 184 days); no patients had more than one major bleed. There were no fatal bleeds with edoxaban, and two with dalteparin. Severe bleeding at presentation (category 3 or 4) occurred in 10 (1.9%) and 11 (2.1%) patients in the edoxaban and dalteparin groups, respectively. The excess of major bleeding with edoxaban was confined to patients with gastrointestinal cancer. However, severe major bleeding at presentation (category 3 or 4) in this sub-group occurred in 5 of 165 (3.0%) and in 3 of 140 (2.1%) patients given edoxaban or dalteparin, respectively.In conclusion, this analysis suggests that while oral edoxaban is an appropriate alternative to subcutaneous dalteparin for treatment of cancer-associated VTE, the use of edoxaban in patients with gastrointestinal cancer requires careful benefit-risk weighting.
Summary Background The risk of venous thromboembolism is high after total hip arthroplasty and could persist after hospital discharge. Our aim was to compare the use of rivaroxaban for extended ...thromboprophylaxis with short-term thromboprophylaxis with enoxaparin. Methods 2509 patients scheduled to undergo elective total hip arthroplasty were randomly assigned, stratified according to centre, with a computer-generated randomisation code, to receive oral rivaroxaban 10 mg once daily for 31–39 days (with placebo injection for 10–14 days; n=1252), or enoxaparin 40 mg once daily subcutaneously for 10–14 days (with placebo tablet for 31–39 days; n=1257). The primary efficacy outcome was the composite of deep-vein thrombosis (symptomatic or asymptomatic detected by mandatory, bilateral venography), non-fatal pulmonary embolism, and all-cause mortality up to day 30–42. Analyses were done in the modified intention-to-treat population, which consisted of all patients who had received at least one dose of study medication, had undergone planned surgery, and had adequate assessment of thromboembolism. This study is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov , number NCT00332020. Findings The modified intention-to-treat population for the analysis of the primary efficacy outcome consisted of 864 patients in the rivaroxaban group and 869 in the enoxaparin group. The primary outcome occurred in 17 (2·0%) patients in the rivaroxaban group, compared with 81 (9·3%) in the enoxaparin group (absolute risk reduction 7·3%, 95% CI 5·2–9·4; p<0·0001). The incidence of any on-treatment bleeding was much the same in both groups (81 6·6% events in 1228 patients in the rivaroxaban safety population vs 68 5·5% of 1229 patients in the enoxaparin safety population; p=0·25). Interpretation Extended thromboprophylaxis with rivaroxaban was significantly more effective than short-term enoxaparin plus placebo for the prevention of venous thromboembolism, including symptomatic events, in patients undergoing total hip arthroplasty. Funding Bayer HealthCare AG, Johnson & Johnson Pharmaceutical Research and Development LLC.
Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is often asymptomatic, mis-diagnosed, and unrecognized at death, and there is a lack of routine postmortem examinations. These factors are thought to result in marked ...underestimates ofVTE incidence. The objective of our study was to estimate the total burden of VTE within the European Union (EU) per annum. An epidemiological model was constructed to estimate the number of community- and hospital-acquired incidents and recurrent cases (attack rate) of nonfatal VTE and VTE-related deaths, as well as incident and prevalent cases of post-thrombotic syndrome (PTS) and chronic thromboembolic pulmonary hypertension (PH) occurring in the EU per annum. Individual models were developed for six EU countries. The models were populated with data from published literature and, where necessary, expert opinions. The findings were tested using probabilistic sensitivity analyses. The estimated total number of symptomaticVTE events (range based on probabilistic sensitivity analysis) per annum within the six EU countries was 465,715 (404,664-538,189) cases of deep-vein thrombosis, 295,982 (242,450-360,363) cases of pulmonary embolism (PE), and 370,012 (300,193-483,108) VTE-related deaths. Of these deaths, an estimated 27,473 (7%) were diagnosed as being antemortem; 126,145 (34%) were sudden fatal PE, and 217,394 (59%) followed undiagnosed PE. Almost three-quarters of all VTE-related deaths were from hospital-acquired VTE. VTE is a major health problem in the EU, with over one million VTE events or deaths per annum in the six countries examined. Given the availability of effective VTE prophylaxis, many of these events and deaths could have been prevented. These results have important implications for the allocation of healthcare resources.
To provide current recommendations about the prophylaxis and treatment of venous thromboembolism (VTE) in patients with cancer.
PubMed and the Cochrane Library were searched for randomized controlled ...trials, systematic reviews, meta-analyses, and clinical practice guidelines from November 2012 through July 2014. An update committee reviewed the identified abstracts.
Of the 53 publications identified and reviewed, none prompted a change in the 2013 recommendations.
Most hospitalized patients with active cancer require thromboprophylaxis throughout hospitalization. Routine thromboprophylaxis is not recommended for patients with cancer in the outpatient setting. It may be considered for selected high-risk patients. Patients with multiple myeloma receiving antiangiogenesis agents with chemotherapy and/or dexamethasone should receive prophylaxis with either low-molecular weight heparin (LMWH) or low-dose aspirin. Patients undergoing major surgery should receive prophylaxis starting before surgery and continuing for at least 7 to 10 days. Extending prophylaxis up to 4 weeks should be considered in those undergoing major abdominal or pelvic surgery with high-risk features. LMWH is recommended for the initial 5 to 10 days of treatment for deep vein thrombosis and pulmonary embolism as well as for long-term secondary prophylaxis (at least 6 months). Use of novel oral anticoagulants is not currently recommended for patients with malignancy and VTE because of limited data in patients with cancer. Anticoagulation should not be used to extend survival of patients with cancer in the absence of other indications. Patients with cancer should be periodically assessed for VTE risk. Oncology professionals should educate patients about the signs and symptoms of VTE.
Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is a potentially life-threatening condition that can be associated with significant morbidity. Thrombosis and cancer are linked by numerous pathophysiological mechanisms; ...the frequency of VTE and the recurrence rate are increased in the cancer population in comparison with other patient groups. VTE is the second most common cause of death in patients with cancer, but can also be the initial presenting complaint in patients with an occult malignancy. Risk factors for cancer-related VTE include tumour type, surgery, chemotherapy and the use of central venous catheters; predictors of VTE for individuals are only now beginning to emerge. Patients with cancer who develop symptomatic VTE during chemotherapy are at a greater risk of early mortality than those without VTE. The apparent impact of VTE on early mortality in patients with cancer raises the question of whether anticoagulation might improve long-term survival in this population, by direct tumour biology-modifying mechanisms. There are widely published guidelines that highlight the benefits of effective VTE strategies in patients with cancer. In partnership with the patient and their carers, the clinical team can improve patient outcomes with optimal risk assessment and concordance with national and international guidelines in the prophylaxis and treatment of VTE.
The efficacy and safety of prolonging prophylaxis for venous thromboembolism in medically ill patients beyond hospital discharge remain uncertain. We hypothesized that extended prophylaxis with ...apixaban would be safe and more effective than short-term prophylaxis with enoxaparin.
In this double-blind, double-dummy, placebo-controlled trial, we randomly assigned acutely ill patients who had congestive heart failure or respiratory failure or other medical disorders and at least one additional risk factor for venous thromboembolism and who were hospitalized with an expected stay of at least 3 days to receive apixaban, administered orally at a dose of 2.5 mg twice daily for 30 days, or enoxaparin, administered subcutaneously at a dose of 40 mg once daily for 6 to 14 days. The primary efficacy outcome was the 30-day composite of death related to venous thromboembolism, pulmonary embolism, symptomatic deep-vein thrombosis, or asymptomatic proximal-leg deep-vein thrombosis, as detected with the use of systematic bilateral compression ultrasonography on day 30. The primary safety outcome was bleeding. All efficacy and safety outcomes were independently adjudicated.
A total of 6528 subjects underwent randomization, 4495 of whom could be evaluated for the primary efficacy outcome--2211 in the apixaban group and 2284 in the enoxaparin group. Among the patients who could be evaluated, 2.71% in the apixaban group (60 patients) and 3.06% in the enoxaparin group (70 patients) met the criteria for the primary efficacy outcome (relative risk with apixaban, 0.87; 95% confidence interval CI, 0.62 to 1.23; P=0.44). By day 30, major bleeding had occurred in 0.47% of the patients in the apixaban group (15 of 3184 patients) and in 0.19% of the patients in the enoxaparin group (6 of 3217 patients) (relative risk, 2.58; 95% CI, 1.02 to 7.24; P=0.04).
In medically ill patients, an extended course of thromboprophylaxis with apixaban was not superior to a shorter course with enoxaparin. Apixaban was associated with significantly more major bleeding events than was enoxaparin. (Funded by Bristol-Myers Squibb and Pfizer; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00457002.).
To conduct an update of the ASCO venous thromboembolism (VTE) guideline.
After publication of potentially practice-changing clinical trials, identified through ASCO's signals approach to updating, an ...updated systematic review was performed for two guideline questions: perioperative thromboprophylaxis and treatment of VTE. PubMed and the Cochrane Library were searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) published between November 1, 2018, and June 6, 2022.
Five RCTs provided information that contributed to changes to the 2019 recommendations. Two RCTs addressed direct factor Xa inhibitors (either rivaroxaban or apixaban) for extended thromboprophylaxis after surgery. Each of these postoperative trials had important limitations but suggested that these two oral anticoagulants are safe and effective in the settings studied. An additional three RCTs addressed apixaban in the setting of VTE treatment. Apixaban was effective in reducing the risk of recurrent VTE, with a low risk of major bleeding.
Apixaban and rivaroxaban were added as options for extended pharmacologic thromboprophylaxis after cancer surgery, with a weak strength of recommendation. Apixaban was also added as an option for the treatment of VTE, with high quality of evidence and a strong recommendation.Additional information is available at www.asco.org/supportive-care-guidelines.
The efficacy and safety of dabigatran for treatment of venous thromboembolism (VTE) were demonstrated in two trials. It is unclear if the results pertain to patients with cancer and VTE. Data from ...two randomised trials comparing dabigatran and warfarin for acute VTE were pooled. Primary efficacy outcome was symptomatic recurrent VTE and related death from randomisation to the end of the treatment period. Safety outcomes were major, major and clinically relevant non-major, and any bleeding during the oral-only treatment period. Patients with active cancer (=within 5 years) at baseline or diagnosed during the study were analysed. Compared with 4,772 patients without cancer, recurrent VTE occurred more frequently in 335 patients with cancer at any time (hazard ratio HR 3.3; 95 % confidence interval CI, 2.1-5.3) and more often in 114 with cancer diagnosed during the study compared to 221 with cancer at baseline (HR 2.6; 95 % CI, 1.1-6.2). There was no significant difference in efficacy between dabigatran and warfarin for cancer at baseline (HR 0.75; 95 % CI, 0.20-2.8) or diagnosed during the study (HR 0.63; 95 % CI, 0.20-2.0). Major bleeding (HR 4.1; 95 % CI, 2.2-7.5) and any bleeding (HR 1.5; 95 % CI, 1.2-2.0) were more frequent in patients with cancer than without, but with similar incidence in cancer with dabigatran or warfarin. In conclusion, in cancer patients, dabigatran provided similar clinical benefit as warfarin. VTE recurrence or bleeding were similar in patients on dabigatran or warfarin. The efficacy of dabigatran has not been assessed in comparison with low-molecular-weight heparin.
PDF
