Search

Background: Guidelines suggest indefinite anticoagulation after unprovoked venous thromboembolism (VTE) unless the bleeding risk is high, yet there is no consistent guidance on assessing bleeding risk., Objectives: This study aimed to evaluate the performance of 5 bleeding risk tools (RIETE, VTE-BLEED, CHAP, VTE-PREDICT, and ABC-Bleeding)., Methods: PLATO-VTE, a prospective cohort study, included patients aged ≥40 years with a first unprovoked VTE. Risk estimates were calculated at VTE diagnosis and after 3 months of treatment. Primary outcome was clinically relevant bleeding, as per International Society on Thrombosis and Haemostasis criteria, during 24-month follow-up. Discrimination was assessed by the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC). Patients were classified as having a "high risk" and "non-high risk" of bleeding according to predefined thresholds; bleeding risk in both groups was compared by hazard ratios (HRs)., Results: Of 514 patients, 38 (7.4%) had an on-treatment bleeding. AUROCs were 0.58 (95% CI, 0.48-0.68) for ABC-Bleeding, 0.56 (95% CI, 0.46-0.66) for RIETE, 0.53 (95% CI, 0.43-0.64) for CHAP, 0.50 (95% CI, 0.41-0.59) for VTE-BLEED, and 0.50 (95% CI, 0.40-0.60) for VTE-PREDICT. The proportion of high-risk patients ranged from 1.4% with RIETE to 36.9% with VTE-BLEED. The bleeding incidence in the high-risk groups ranged from 0% with RIETE to 13.0% with ABC-Bleeding, and in the non-high-risk groups, it varied from 7.7% with ABC-Bleeding to 9.6% with RIETE. HRs ranged from 0.93 (95% CI, 0.46-1.9) for VTE-BLEED to 1.67 (95% CI, 0.86-3.2) for ABC-Bleeding. Recalibration at 3-month follow-up did not alter the results., Conclusion: In this cohort, discrimination of currently available bleeding risk tools was poor. These data do not support their use in patients with unprovoked VTE., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interests N.A.M.G., A.-M.L.B., S.S.W., N.K., F.I.M., M.J.L.P., M.t.W, J.M.M.B.O., E.P., V.S.-L., and P.M.M.B. have no competing interests to disclose. M.C. has received research funding from BMS, Pfizer, and LEO Pharma. He has also received Honoria from Bayer, BMS, Pfizer, Servier, and LEO Pharma. A.D. has received research funding from BMS-Pfizer and Honoria from Bayer, BMS-Pfizer, Servier, and LEO Pharma. L.J.-P. has received research funding from LEO Pharma and MSD. He has also received honoraria from Bayer Hispania, Actelion, Pfizer, Rovi, LEO Pharma, Menarini, and MSD. M.D. has received research funding from LEO Pharma and honoraria and consultancy fees from Daiichi Sankyo, Bayer, BMS-Pfizer, Sanofi, and LEO Pharma outside the submitted work. W.A. has received research funding from Bayer and honoraria from Bayer, BMS-Pfizer, Aspen, Sanofi, Janssen, Werfen, LEO Pharma, and Portola. J.B.-W. has received research funding from Bayer, Daiichi Sankyo, Pfizer, and Portola/Alexion. He has also received honoraria from Bayer, Daiichi Sankyo, Pfizer, and Portola/Alexion. T.V. has served as a speaker and/or advisor for Boehringer Ingelheim, Daiichi Sankyo, BMS/Pfizer, Bayer, Sanofi, and LEO Pharma. F.A.K. reports research grants from Bayer, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Boehringer Ingelheim, MSD, Daiichi Sankyo, Actelion, the Dutch Thrombosis Association, and the Dutch Heart foundation. B.C. reports speakers’ fees from Daiichi Sankyo and Sanofi. V.E.A.G. reports lecture fees from Novo Nordisk, and funding of studies by Dutch Thrombosis Foundation, AstraZeneca, and Zambon. H.B. reports consulting fees from Daiichi Sankyo, Bayer Healthcare, BMS/Pfizer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Portola, Medscape, Eli Lilly, Sanofi Aventis, and Ionis. N.v.E. has received advisory board honoraria from Daiichi Sankyo, Bayer, and LEO Pharma, which were transferred to his institute. P.W.K. received research grants from Daiichi Sankyo and Roche Diagnostics., (Copyright © 2024. Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Background  Current guidelines recommend either low-molecular weight heparin (LMWH) or direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) as first-line treatment in cancer-associated venous thromboembolism (VTE). Aim  This study aimed to investigate treatment regimens for cancer-associated VTE over the past 5 years, explore predictors for initial treatment (LMWH vs. DOAC), and to assess the risks of recurrent VTE and bleeding. Methods  This was a Dutch, multicenter, retrospective cohort study including consecutive patients with cancer-associated VTE between 2017 and 2021. Treatment predictors were assessed with multivariable logistic regression models. Six-month cumulative incidences for recurrent VTE and major bleeding (MB) were estimated with death as competing risk. Results  In total, 1,215 patients were included. The majority (1,134/1,192; 95%) started VTE treatment with anticoagulation: 561 LMWH (47%), 510 DOACs (43%), 27 vitamin K antagonist (2.3%), and 36 other/unknown type (3.0%). The proportion of patients primarily treated with DOACs increased from 18% (95% confidence interval [CI] 12-25) in 2017 to 70% (95% CI 62-78) in 2021. Poor performance status (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 0.72, 95% CI 0.53-0.99) and distant metastases (aOR 0.61, 95% CI 0.45-0.82) were associated with primary treatment with LMWH. Total 6-month cumulative incidences were 6.0% (95% CI 4.8-7.5) for recurrent VTE and 7.0% (95% CI 5.7-8.6) for MB. During follow-up, 182 patients (15%) switched from LMWH to a DOAC, and 54 patients (4.4%) vice versa, for various reasons, including patient preference, recurrent thrombosis, and/or bleeding. Conclusion  DOAC use in cancer-associated VTE has increased rapidly over the past years. Changes in anticoagulation regimen were frequent over time, and were often related to recurrent thrombotic and bleeding complications, illustrating the complexity and challenges of managing cancer-associated VTE., Competing Interests: Conflict of Interest None declared., (The Author(s). This is an open access article published by Thieme under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, permitting unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction so long as the original work is properly cited. ( https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ ).)

Background: It is unclear how often cancer patients with acute pulmonary embolism (PE) are discharged from the emergency department (ED) or outpatient clinic and whether direct discharge is safe. We assessed treatment setting and early safety outcomes in cancer patients with acute symptomatic and incidental PE., Methods: Cancer patients diagnosed with PE at the ED or outpatient clinic between August 2017 and May 2021 were included in Four Cities VTE Cancer, a Dutch multicenter retrospective cohort study. The main outcome was direct discharge versus hospitalization. Safety outcomes were cumulative 14-day mortality and PE-related readmission incidences., Results: We included 602 patients (median age 71 years; 49.5 % female) of whom 285 (47.3 %) were discharged directly and 317 (52.7 %) were hospitalized. The cumulative 14-day mortality incidence was 0.7 % (95 % CI, 0.1-2.4 %) in patients discharged directly and 9.0 % (95 % CI, 6.2-12.5 %) in those hospitalized. The cumulative 14-day PE-related readmission incidence was 1.8 % (95 % CI, 0.7-3.9 %) and 1.4 % (95 % CI, 0.5-3.3 %) in directly discharged and hospitalized patients, respectively. Of the 220 patients with incidental PE, 180 (81.8 %) were discharged directly compared to 105 of 382 (27.5 %) patients with symptomatic PE (P < 0.001). Mortality and readmission incidences in symptomatic and incidental PE were consistent with the main analysis., Conclusions: About 28 % and 82 % of cancer patients with symptomatic or incidental PE, respectively, were discharged directly, with low 14-day mortality and PE-related readmission incidences. These data underline the need for PE risk stratification in oncological populations and suggest that clinicians successfully identify a proportion of patients in whom direct discharge is safe., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest The authors declare the following financial interests/personal relationships which may be considered as potential competing interests: N.A.M. Guman, F.H.J. Kaptein, A.T.A. Mairuhu, and S. Lohle have no conflicts of interest to declare. F.A. Klok has received research support from Bayer, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Boehringer-Ingelheim, MSD, VarmX, Daiichi-Sankyo, Actelion, The Netherlands Organisation for Health Research and Development, The Dutch Thrombosis Association, The Dutch Heart Foundation and the Horizon Europe Program, all unrelated to this work and paid to his institution. M.V. Huisman has received research grants from Dutch Healthcare Fund, Dutch Heart Foundation, Bayer Health Care, Pfizer, BMS, Boehringer-Ingelheim, Leo Pharma. P.W. Kamphuisen has received research grants from Daiichi Sankyo and Roche Diagnostics and the Tergooi academy, all transferred to his institute. N. van Es reports advisory board honoraria from Daiichi-Sankyo, Bayer, and LEO Pharma, which were transferred to his institute., (Copyright © 2023 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Background: Glioblastoma patients are at high risk of developing venous thromboembolism (VTE). Tumor-intrinsic features are considered to play a role, but the underlying pathophysiological mechanisms remain incompletely understood., Objectives: To identify tumor-expressed genes and signaling pathways that associate with glioblastoma-related VTE by using next generation RNA-sequencing (RNA-Seq)., Methods: The tumor gene expression profile of 23 glioblastoma patients with VTE and 23 glioblastoma patients without VTE was compared using an unpaired analysis. Ingenuity Pathway Analysis (IPA) core analysis was performed on the top 50 differentially expressed genes to explore associated functions and pathways. Based on full RNA-Seq data, molecular glioblastoma subtypes were determined by performing cluster analysis., Results: Of the 19,327 genes, 1246 (6.4 %) were differentially expressed between glioblastoma patients with and without VTE (unadjusted P < 0.05). The most highly overexpressed gene was GLI1, a classical target gene in the Sonic Hedgehog (Shh) signaling pathway (log2 fold change: 3.7; unadjusted P < 0.0001, adjusted P = 0.219). In line, Shh signaling was among the top canonical pathways and processes associated with VTE. The proportion of patients with the proneural/neural glioblastoma subtype was higher among those with VTE than controls., Conclusion: Shh signaling may be involved in the development of glioblastoma-related VTE., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest The authors declare the following financial interests/personal relationships which may be considered as potential competing interests: F.A.K. has received research support from Bayer, BMS, BSCI, MSD, Leo Pharma, Actelion, Farm-X, The Netherlands Organization for Health Research and Development, The Dutch Thrombosis Foundation, The Dutch Heart Foundation and the Horizon Europe Program, all paid to his institution and outside the submitted work. The other authors have no conflicts of interest to declare., (Copyright © 2023 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Background: Guidelines recommend thromboprophylaxis for patients with cancer at high risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE). Polygenic risk scores may improve VTE prediction but have not yet been evaluated in patients with cancer., Objectives: We assessed the performance of the 5-, 37-, 297-, extended 297- (additionally including factor V Leiden and prothrombin G20210A), and 100-single-nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) scores in predicting cancer-associated VTE in the UK Biobank, a population-based, prospective cohort study., Methods: The primary outcome was VTE during 12 months after cancer diagnosis. Cancer and VTE diagnosis were based on ICD-10 codes. Discrimination was evaluated by c-indices and subdistribution hazard ratios in the upper vs 3 lower quartiles of the scores in a competing risk model. As a comparison, the c-index was calculated for the Khorana cancer type risk classification., Results: Of 36 150 patients with cancer (median age, 66 years; 48.7% females), 1018 (2.8%) developed VTE. C-indices at 12 months ranged from 0.56 (95% CI, 0.54-0.58) for the 5-SNP to 0.60 (95% CI, 0.58-0.62) for the extended 297-SNP scores. The subdistribution hazard ratios ranged from 1.36 (95% CI, 1.19-1.56) for the 5-SNP to 1.90 (95% CI, 1.68-2.16) for the extended 297-SNP scores and were consistent after adjusting for cancer type. For the Khorana cancer type classification, the c-index was 0.60 (95% CI, 0.58-0.61), which increased to 0.65 (95% CI, 0.63-0.67, +0.05; 95% CI, 0.04-0.07) when combined with the extended 297-SNP score., Conclusion: These findings demonstrate that polygenic VTE risk scores can identify patients with cancer with a 1.9-fold higher VTE risk independent of cancer type. Combined clinical-genetic scores to improve cancer-associated VTE prediction should be evaluated further., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interests N.A.M.G., F.I.M., A.H.Z., and B.F. have no conflicts of interest to declare. H.R.B. reports personal fees from Daiichi-Sankyo, Bayer Healthcare, BMS/Pfizer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Portola, Medscape, Eli Lilly, Sanofi Aventis, and Ionis. P.W.K. has received research grants from Daiichi Sankyo, Roche Diagnostics, and the Tergooi Academy. N.v.E. reports advisory board honoraria from Daiichi-Sankyo, Bayer, and LEO Pharma, which were transferred to his institute., (Copyright © 2023 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is a frequent complication in patients with ovarian cancer after major surgery. Based on limited data, international guidelines recommend extended thromboprophylaxis for up to 28 days., Objectives: To assess the incidence of VTE and bleeding within 30 days following major surgery in patients with ovarian cancer and to evaluate the association between VTE and thromboprophylaxis duration., Methods: This was a single-center, retrospective, "before-after" cohort study in patients with ovarian cancer undergoing major surgery. Before July 2019, the local protocol mandated a standard course of thromboprophylaxis during hospital stay only. From July 2019 onward, patients received extended thromboprophylaxis for 28 days. The cumulative incidences of VTE and major bleeding within 30 days after surgery were estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method, with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Cox regression analysis was performed to evaluate the association between thromboprophylaxis duration and VTE incidence., Results: Between January 2018 and December 2020, 250 women were included, of which 118 (47.2%) received extended and 132 (52.8%) standard thromboprophylaxis. During follow-up, 12 patients developed VTE (cumulative incidence, 4.8%; 95% CI, 2.1-7.4) and 2 major bleeding (cumulative incidence 0.8%; 95% CI, 0.0-1.9). Compared with standard thromboprophylaxis, VTE incidence was numerically lower with extended duration of thromboprophylaxis (5/118 [4.2%] vs 7/132 [5.3%]) but not significantly different (hazard ratio, 0.80; 95% CI, 0.25-2.52). The risk of major bleeding was similar in both groups (1/118 [0.8%] vs 1/132 [0.8%]; hazard ratio, 1.12; 95% CI, 0.07-17.89)., Conclusions: The cumulative VTE incidence in patients with ovarian cancer following major surgery was considerable. Extended thromboprophylaxis was safe and associated with a numerically lower risk of VTE but not significantly different., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interests H.M.G.W., M.S., N.A.M.G., H.S.Z., F.I.M., and C.H.M. have no competing interests to disclose. N.v.E. received advisory board fees from Bayer, Daiichi Sankyo, and LEO Pharma, which were transferred to his institution, all outside the submitted work. S.A.M. received grants and personal fees from Bayer, BMS Pfizer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Daiichi Sankyo, and Portola during the study period; private fees from Abbvie and Sanofi were received outside the submitted work., (Copyright © 2022 International Society on Thrombosis and Haemostasis. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: In the recent years, numerous studies on the optimal treatment and prevention of cancer-associated venous thromboembolism (VTE) have been published, leading to updated (inter)national guidelines. These include direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) as the first-line treatment agent in general and the recommendation of primary thromboprophylaxis in selected ambulatory patients., Objectives: The objective of this study was to evaluate the clinical practice regarding treatment and prevention of VTE in patients with cancer in the Netherlands and practice variation among different specialties., Methods: An online survey was conducted between December 2021, and June 2022, among Dutch physicians (oncologists, hematologists, vascular medicine specialists, acute internal medicine specialists, and pulmonologists) treating patients with cancer, in which we explored the treatment of choice for cancer-associated VTE, the use of VTE risk stratification tools, and primary thromboprophylaxis., Results: A total of 222 physicians participated, of whom the majority (81%) used DOACs as a first-line agent for treating cancer-associated VTE. The treatment varied between the following specialties: hematologists and acute internal medicine specialists more often prescribed low-molecular-weight heparin than physicians of the other specialties (OR, 0.32; 95% CI, 0.13-0.80). The minimum duration of anticoagulant treatment was usually 3 to 6 months (87%), and treatment was extended when the malignancy was still active (98%). Regarding the prevention of cancer-associated VTE, no risk stratification tool was used. Three quarters of respondents never prescribed thromboprophylaxis to ambulatory patients, mostly because the thrombosis risk was not perceived high enough to justify prophylaxis., Conclusion: Dutch physicians largely adhere to the updated guidelines regarding the treatment of cancer-associated VTE but less to the recommendations for its prevention., (© 2023 The Authors.)

Background: The Khorana score is a validated tool to identify cancer patients at higher risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE)., Objective: We compared its predictive performance to that of the clinical PROTECHT and the polygenic 5-SNP scores in patients who participated in the Dutch CPCT-02 study., Patients/methods: Data on VTE and its risk factors were retrospectively collected for 2729 patients with advanced stage solid tumors planned for systemic cancer treatment. Patients were followed for 6 months. Overall discriminatory performance of the scores was evaluated by time-dependent c-indices. The scores were additionally evaluated dichotomously in competing risk models., Results: A total of 160 (5.9%) patients developed VTE during follow-up. Time-dependent c-indices at 6 months for the Khorana, PROTECHT, and 5-SNP scores were 0.57 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.55-0.60), 0.60 (95% CI: 0.57-0.62), and 0.54 (95% CI: 0.51-0.57), respectively. The dichotomous scores classified 9.6%, 16.8%, and 9.5% as high-risk, respectively. VTE risk was about 2-fold higher among high-risk patients than low-risk patients for the Khorana (subdistribution hazard ratio [SHR] 1.9, 95% CI: 1.3-3.0), PROTECHT (SHR 2.1, 95% CI: 1.5-3.0), and 5-SNP scores (SHR 1.7, 95% CI: 1.03-2.8). The sensitivity at 6 months was 16.6% (95% CI: 10.5-22.7), 28.9% (95% CI: 21.5-36.3), and 14.9% (95% CI: 8.5-21.2), respectively., Conclusions: Performance of the PROTECHT or 5-SNP score was not superior to that of the Khorana score. The majority of cancer patients who developed VTE during 6-month follow-up were not identified by these scores. Future directions for studies on cancer-associated VTE prediction may include combined clinical-genetic scores., (© 2021 The Authors. Journal of Thrombosis and Haemostasis published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of International Society on Thrombosis and Haemostasis.)

Cancer patients have a high risk of developing venous thromboembolism and arterial thrombosis, along with an increased risk of anticoagulant-related bleeding with primary and secondary prophylaxis of cancer-associated thrombosis. Decisions on initiation, dosing, and duration of anticoagulant therapy for prevention and treatment of cancer-associated thrombosis are challenging, as clinicians have to balance patients' individual risk of (recurrent) thrombosis against the risk of bleeding complications. For this purpose, several dedicated risk assessment models for venous thromboembolism in cancer patients have been suggested. However, most of these scores perform poorly and have received limited to no validation. For bleeding and arterial thrombosis, no risk scores have been developed specifically for cancer patients, and treatment decisions remain based on clinical gestalt and rough and unstructured estimation of the risks. The aims of this review are to summarize the characteristics and performance of risk assessment scores for (recurrent) venous thromboembolism and discuss available data on risk assessment for bleeding and arterial thrombosis in the cancer population. This summary can help clinicians in daily practice to make a balanced decision when considering the use of risk assessment models for cancer-associated venous thromboembolism. Future research attempts should aim at improving risk assessment for arterial thrombosis and anticoagulant-related bleeding in cancer patients., Competing Interests: D.N.M. reports personal fees from Daiichi Sankyo, personal fees from Bayer, personal fees from Bristol Myers Squibb, personal fees from Aspen, personal fees from Leo Pharma, personal fees from Sanofi, personal fees from Pfizer, outside the submitted work., (Thieme. All rights reserved.)