Search

Background: Superficial venous thrombosis (SVT) is perceived to have a benign prognosis. Objective: To assess the prevalence of venous thromboembolism in patients with SVT and to determine the 3-month incidence of thromboembolic complications. Design: National cross-sectional and prospective epidemiologic cohort study. (ClinicalTrials.gov registration number: NCT00818688) Setting: French office- and hospital-based vascular medicine specialists. Patients: 844 consecutive patients with symptomatic SVT of the lower limbs that was at least 5 cm on compression ultrasonography. Measurements: Incidence of venous thromboembolism and extension or recurrence of SVT in patients with isolated SVT at presentation. Results: Among 844 patients with SVT at inclusion (median age, 65 years; 547 women), 210 (24.9%) also had deep venous thrombosis (DVT) or symptomatic pulmonary embolism. Among 600 patients without DVT or pulmonary embolism at inclusion who were eligible for 3-month follow-up, 58 (10.2%) developed thromboembolic complications at 3 months (pulmonary embolism, 3 [0.5%]; DVT, 15 [2.8%]; extension of SVT, 18 [3.3%]; and recurrence of SVT, 10 [1.9%]), despite 540 patients (90.5%) having received anticoagulants. Risk factors for complications at 3 months were male sex, history of DVT or pulmonary embolism, previous cancer, and absence of varicose veins. Limitation: The findings are from a specialist referral setting, and the study was terminated before the target patient population was reached because of slow recruitment. Conclusion: A substantial number of patients with SVT exhibit venous thromboembolism at presentation, and some that do not can develop this complication in the subsequent 3 months. Primary Funding Source: GlaxoSmithKline, sanofi-aventis, and the Ministère Francais de la Santé et des Sports (Programme Hospitalier de Recherche Clinique). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Axial spondyloarthritis (axSpA) is a chronic inflammatory disease characterised by inflammatory low back pain. Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) are recommended as a first treatment in axSpA. In case of inadequate response to NSAIDs, biological disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (bDMARDs) should be introduced according to the recommendations of the European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR) and the American College of Rheumatology. Until 2015, only bDMARD was recommended for axSpA in case of failure to anti-tumour necrosis factor (TNF). The 2022 Assessment of SpondyloArthritis International Society (ASAS)-EULAR recommendation proposed to start an alternative bDMARD but without advocating a switch in mode of action as proposed in rheumatoid arthritis. Since 2015, the inhibition of interleukin (IL)-17 has demonstrated efficacy in axSpA. Then, we designed a randomised multicentre clinical trial to identify the more effective treatment after a first anti-TNF failure in axSpA, comparing an anti-IL-17 to a second anti-TNF., Methods and Analysis: The ROC-SpA (Rotation Or Change of biotherapy after first anti-TNF treatment failure in axSpA patients) study is a prospective, randomised, multicentre, superiority open-label phase IV trial comparing an anti-IL-17 strategy (secukinumab or ixekizumab) to a second TNF blocker in a 1:1 ratio. Patients with an active axSpA (Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Index >4 or ankylosing spondylitis disease activity score (ASDAS) >3.5) with inadequate 3 months response to a first anti-TNF and with a stable dose of conventional synthetic DMARDs, oral corticosteroids and/or NSAIDs for at least 1 month are included in 31 hospital centres in France and Monaco. The primary outcome is the ASAS40 response at week 24. The secondary outcomes are ASAS40 at weeks 12 and 52, other clinical scores (ASAS20, partial remission rate, ASDAS major improvement rate) at weeks 12, 24 and 52 with the drugs and anti-drugs concentrations at baseline, weeks 12, 24 and 52. The primary analysis is performed at the end of the study according to the intent-to-treat principle., Ethics and Dissemination: Ethics approval was obtained from the committee for the protection of persons (Comité de protection des personnes Ouest IV #12/18_1, 6 February 2018) and registered in ClinicalTrials.gov and in EudraCT. Results of this study, whether positive or negative, will be presented at national and international congresses, to national axSpA patient associations and published in a peer-reviewed journal. It could also impact the international recommendation to manage patients with axSpA., Trial Registration Number: NCT03445845 and EudraCT2017-004700-22., Competing Interests: Competing interests: ED, CM, TB-A, FR, MA, LDA and EP declare no competing interests. AF has received grants or contracts (Eli Lilly, Pfizer, AbbVie, Gilead and BMS), consulting fees (AstraZeneca, AbbVie, Pfizer and Gilead) and honorary payments (BMIS, AbbVie, Eli Lilly, Pfizer and MSD) and participated in advisory boards (Astra-Zeneca, Gilead, Novartis, AbbVie, Eli Lilly, Pfizer, J&J, Mylan and UCB). HM has received grants and contract (Celltrion Healthcare, Lilly, Medac, Nordic Pharma), consulting fees (AbbVie, Accord, Celltrion Healthcare, Johnson and Johnson, UCB) and honorary payments (AbbVie, BMS, Lilly, Pfizer) and participated in advisory boards (Celltrion Healthcare, Eli Lilly, Pfizer, UCB)., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2024. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

BACKGROUND: Admission to the hospital is a major risk factor for the development of venous thromboembolism (VTE). Whether thromboprophylaxis with low-molecular-weight heparin prevents symptomatic VTE in medically ill, hospitalized older adults remains debated. METHODS: In a prospective, randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind, multicenter trial, older adults (>70 years of age) hospitalized for acute medical conditions were randomly assigned to receive 40 mg a day of low-molecular-weight heparin (enoxaparin) or placebo for 6 to 14 days. The primary efficacy outcome was the cumulative incidence of symptomatic VTE (distal or proximal deep vein thrombosis, fatal or nonfatal pulmonary embolism) at 30 days. The primary safety outcome was major bleeding. Secondary outcomes included efficacy and safety outcomes at 90 days. RESULTS: The trial was prematurely discontinued in September 2020, 5 years after enrollment began, because of drug supply issues. By the time of trial discontinuation, 2559 patients had been randomly assigned at 47 centers. Median age was 82 years and 60% of patients were female. In the intention-to-treat population, the primary efficacy outcome occurred in 22 out of 1278 (cumulative incidence, 1.8%) patients in the enoxaparin group and in 27 out of 1263 (cumulative incidence, 2.2%) patients in the placebo group (cumulative incidence difference, −0.4 percentage points; 95% confidence interval, −1.5 to 0.7), with no significant difference in time to VTE (P=0.46). The incidence of major bleeding was 0.9% in the enoxaparin group and 1.0% in the placebo group. At 90 days there were 14 symptomatic pulmonary emboli in the enoxaparin group and 25 in the placebo group; all 39 pulmonary embolism events resulted in hospital readmission and/or death, with 5 deaths from pulmonary embolism in the enoxaparin group and 11 deaths in the placebo group. CONCLUSIONS: This trial of thromboprophylaxis in medically ill, hospitalized older adults did not demonstrate that enoxaparin reduced the risk of symptomatic VTE after 1 month. Because the trial was prematurely discontinued, larger trials are needed to definitively address this question. (Funded by the French Ministry of Health Programme Hospitalier de Recherche Clinique, grant number PHRC-N-13-0283; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02379806.)

Background: Venous thromboembolism is a major complication of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). We hypothesized that a weight-adjusted intermediate dose of anticoagulation may decrease the risk of venous thromboembolism COVID-19 patients., Methods: In this multicenter, randomised, open-label, phase 4, superiority trial with blinded adjudication of outcomes, we randomly assigned adult patients hospitalised in 20 French centers and presenting with acute respiratory SARS-CoV-2. Eligible patients were randomly assigned (1:1 ratio) to receive an intermediate weight-adjusted prophylactic dose or a fixed-dose of subcutaneous low-molecular-weight heparin during the hospital stay. The primary outcome corresponded to symptomatic deep-vein thrombosis (fatal) pulmonary embolism during hospitalization (COVI-DOSE ClinicalTrials.gov number: NCT04373707)., Findings: Between May 2020, and April 2021, 1000 patients underwent randomisation in medical wards (noncritically ill) (80.1%) and intensive care units (critically ill) (19.9%); 502 patients were assigned to receive a weight-adjusted intermediate dose, and 498 received fixed-dose thromboprophylaxis. Symptomatic venous thromboembolism occurred in 6 of 502 patients (1.2%) in the weight-adjusted dose group and in 10 of 498 patients (2.1%) in the fixed-dose group (subdistribution hazard ratio, 0.59; 95% CI, 0.22-1.63; P = 0.31). There was a twofold increased risk of major or clinically relevant nonmajor bleeding: 5.9% in the weight-adjusted dose group and 3.1% in the fixed-dose group (P = 0.034)., Interpretation: In the COVI-DOSE trial, the observed rate of thromboembolic events was lower than expected in patients hospitalized for COVID-19 infection, and the study was unable to show a significant difference in the risk of venous thromboembolism between the two low-molecular-weight-heparin regimens., Funding: French Ministry of Health, CAPNET, Grand-Est Region, Grand-Nancy Métropole., Competing Interests: Dr. Zuily reports grants from French Ministry of Health, grants from The Grand Est Regional Council, grants from The Grand Nancy Métropole, grants from The Comité ad hoc de pilotage national des essais thérapeutiques et autres recherches sur le COVID-19 (CAPNET, label Priorité Nationale de Recherche–National Research Priority), during the conduct of the study; personal fees from Leo Pharma, personal fees from Bristol Myers Squibb, personal fees from Pfizer, personal fees from Novartis, personal fees from GlaxoSmithKline, personal fees from Amgen, personal fees from Viatris, personal fees from Sanofi, grants from Boehringer Ingelheim, grants from Bayer, outside the submitted work; Dr. Lefevre reports grants from Gilead, grants from ViiV, outside the submitted work; Dr. Sanchez reports grants and personal fees from Bristol Myers Squibb, grants and personal fees from Pfizer, grants and personal fees from Bayer, grants and personal fees from MSD, grants and personal fees from Boehringer Ingelheim, personal fees from Inari, personal fees from Boston Scientific, personal fees from Sanofi, personal fees from Leo Pharma, personal fees from Chiesi, grants from Oxyvie, outside the submitted work; Dr. Empis De Vendin has nothing to disclose; Dr. De Ciancio has nothing to disclose; Dr. Arlet reports grants from Addmedical, grants and other from Novartis, outside the submitted work; Dr. Khider has nothing to disclose; Dr. Terriat has nothing to disclose; Dr. Greigert has nothing to disclose; Dr. Robert has nothing to disclose; Dr. Louis has nothing to disclose; Dr. Trinh-Duc has nothing to disclose; Dr. Rispal has nothing to disclose; Dr. Accassat reports other from Leo Pharma, other from Janssen, other from MSD, outside the submitted work; Dr. Thiery has nothing to disclose; Dr. Montani reports grants and personal fees from Acceleron, grants and personal fees from Janssen, grants and personal fees from Merck, personal fees from Bayer, outside the submitted work; Dr. Azarian has nothing to disclose; Dr. Meneveau reports grants, personal fees and other from Bayer, grants, personal fees and other from Bristol Myers Squibb, grants, personal fees and other from Pfizer, grants from Medtronic, grants and personal fees from Boston Scientific, grants, personal fees and other from Abbott, personal fees from Inari, personal fees from Terumo, outside the submitted work; Dr. Soudet reports grants and personal fees from Leo Pharma, grants and personal fees from Bristol Myers Squibb, grants and personal fees from Pfizer, outside the submitted work; Dr. Le Mao has nothing to disclose; Dr. Maurier has nothing to disclose; Dr. Le Moing has nothing to disclose; Dr. Quéré reports other from Leo Pharma, outside the submitted work; Dr. Yelnik has nothing to disclose; Dr. Lefebvre reports personal fees and other from Pfizer, other from Eumedica, outside the submitted work; Dr. Martinot reports other from Menarini, other from Overcome, outside the submitted work; Dr. Delrue has nothing to disclose; Dr. Benhamou has nothing to disclose; Dr. Parent reports grants from Oxyvie, personal fees from MSD, outside the submitted work; Dr. Roy reports personal fees and other from Bayer, personal fees and other from Boehringer Ingelheim, personal fees and other from Bristol Myers Squibb, personal fees and other from Pfizer, personal fees and other from Aspen, personal fees and other from Sanofi, outside the submitted work; Ms. Presles has nothing to disclose; Dr. Goehringer has nothing to disclose; Dr. Mismetti reports personal fees from Bayer Healthcare, personal fees from Bristol Myers Squibb, personal fees from Boehringer Ingelheim, personal fees from Sanofi, personal fees from Leo Pharma, personal fees from Aspen, personal fees from Pfizer, outside the submitted work; Dr. Bertoletti reports grants from Bayer, grants and personal fees from MSD, personal fees and other from Leo Pharma, personal fees and other from Bristol Myers Squibb, personal fees and other from Pfizer, outside the submitted work; Dr. Rossignol reports personal fees from AstraZeneca, personal fees from Bayer, personal fees from Boehringer-Ingelheim, personal fees from Cincor, personal fees from KBP, personal fees from Novartis, personal fees from NovoNordisk, personal fees from Roche, personal fees from Vifor/Relypsa, personal fees from Fresenius, personal fees and other from CardioRenal, personal fees from Idorsia, personal fees from Sequana, personal fees from Vifor, non-financial support from G3P, outside the submitted work; Dr. Couturaud reports grants and personal fees (board memberships, symposia or travel) from Bayer, grants and personal fees (board memberships, symposia or travel) from Bristol-Myers Squibb/Pfizer, personal fees (board memberships, symposia or travel) from Merck Sharp and Dohme, personal fees (board memberships, symposia or travel) from Astra Zeneca, personal fees (board memberships or symposia) from Sanofi, personal fees (board memberships or symposia) from Janssen, personal fees (board memberships, symposia or travel) from Leo Pharma, outside the submitted work; Dr. Wahl has nothing to disclose; Dr. Thilly has nothing to disclose; Dr. Laporte reports personal fees from Lilly/Boehringer Ingelheim, personal fees from Bristol Myers Squibb/Pfizer, personal fees from Merck, personal fees from Leo-Pharma, outside the submitted work., (© 2023 The Authors.)

Background: Chronic thromboembolic pulmonary hypertension (CTEPH) is a life-threatening complication of a pulmonary embolism (PE) whose incidence and predictors are not precisely determined., Objective: To determine the frequency and predictors for CTEPH after a first unprovoked PE., Patients/methods: In a randomized trial comparing an additional 18-month warfarin versus placebo in patients after a first unprovoked PE initially treated with vitamin K antagonist for 6 months, we applied recommended CTEPH screening strategies through an 8-year follow-up to determine cumulative incidence of CTEPH. CTEPH predictors were estimated using Cox models. Pulmonary vascular obstruction (PVO) and systolic pulmonary arterial pressure (sPAP) at PE diagnosis and 6 months were studied by receiver operating curves analysis. All CTEPH cases and whether they were incident or prevalent were adjudicated., Results: During a median follow-up of 8.7 years, nine CTEPH cases were diagnosed among 371 patients, with a cumulative incidence of 2.8% (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.95-4.64), and of 1.31% (95% CI 0.01-2.60) after exclusion of five cases adjudicated as prevalent. At PE diagnosis, PVO > 45% and sPAP > 56 mmHg were associated with CTEPH with a hazard ratio (HR) of 33.00 (95% CI 1.64-667.00, p = .02) and 12.50 (95% CI 2.10-74.80, p < .01), respectively. Age > 65 years, lupus anticoagulant antibodies and non-O blood groups were also predictive of CTEPH. PVO > 14% and sPAP > 34 mmHg at 6 months were associated with CTEPH (HR 63.90 [95% CI 3.11-1310.00, p < .01]and HR 17.2 [95% CI 2.75-108, p < .01])., Conclusion: After a first unprovoked PE, CTEPH cumulative incidence was 2.8% during an 8-year follow-up. PVO and sPAP at PE diagnosis and at 6 months were the main predictors for CTEPH diagnosis., (© 2022 International Society on Thrombosis and Haemostasis.)

Background: Diagnosis of heparin-induced thrombocytopenia (HIT) requires pretest probability assessment and dedicated laboratory assays., Objective: To develop a pretest score for HIT., Design: Observational; analysis of prospectively collected data of hospitalized patients suspected with HIT (ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00748839)., Setting: Thirty-one tertiary hospitals in France, Switzerland, and Belgium., Patients: Patients tested for HIT antibodies (2280 evaluable), randomly allocated to derivation and validation cohorts., Measurements: Independent adjudicators diagnosed HIT based on the prospectively collected data and serotonin release assay results., Results: Heparin-induced thrombocytopenia was diagnosed in 234 (14.7%) and 99 (14.5%) patients in the two cohorts. Eight features were associated with HIT (in brackets, points assigned for score calculation of the score): unfractionated heparin (1); therapeutic-dose heparin (1); cardiopulmonary bypass (cardiac surgery) (2); major trauma (3); 5- to 21-day interval from anticoagulation initiation to suspicion of HIT (4); ≥40% decrease in platelet count over ≤6 days (3); thrombotic event, arterial (3) or venous (3). The C-statistic was 0.79 (95% CI, 0.76-0.82). In the validation cohort, the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve was 0.77 (95% CI, 0.74-0.80). Three groups of scores were defined; HIT prevalence reached almost 30% in the high-probability group., Limitation: The performance of the score may depend on settings and practices., Conclusion: The objective, easy-to-collect, clinical features of HIT we evidenced were incorporated into a pretest score, which may guide clinical decisions regarding diagnostic testing and anticoagulation., (© 2021 International Society on Thrombosis and Haemostasis.)

Introduction: Fibromyalgia (FM) is characterized by multiple symptoms including pain, fatigue, and sleep disorders, altering patient's quality of life. In the absence of effective pharmacological therapy, the last European guidelines recommend a multidisciplinary management based on exercise and education. Thus, our main objective was to measure the effectiveness of a healthcare organization offering a specific program of adapted physical activity combined with a therapeutic education program for FM patients. Methods and Analysis: The From Intent To Move (FIMOUV) study will recruit 330 FM patients randomized into two groups: test and control. The test group will benefit from a 1-month mixed exercise training program supervised at the hospital, followed by 2 months in a community-based relay in a health-sport structure. In addition, each of the two groups will benefit from therapeutic patient education sessions. The main endpoint is the measurement of the level of physical activity by accelerometry at 1 year. The secondary endpoints concern adherence to the practice of physical activity, impact on lifestyle, state of health, and physical capacity, as well as an estimate of the budgetary impact of this management strategy. Discussion: This interventional research will allow us to assess the evolution of behaviors in physical activity after an FM syndrome management based solely on patient education or based on a supervised and adapted practice of physical activity associated with this same therapeutic education program. It seems to be the first study evaluating the impact of its intervention on objective data for measuring physical activity and sedentary behavior via accelerometry among FM patients. Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04107948., Competing Interests: The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest., (Copyright © 2021 Colas, Goutte, Creac'h, Fontana, Vericel, Manzanares, Peuriere, Akrour, Martin, Presles, Barth, Guyot, Garros, Trombert, Massoubre, Roche, Féasson, Marotte, Cathebras and Hupin.)

Introduction: Two meta-analyses showed lower bone mineral density (BMD) in patients with haemophilia (haemophilia type and severity were often not specified) compared with healthy controls. This finding could be related to reduced mobility and sedentary lifestyle, and/or hepatitis C or HIV infection. The aim of this study is to determine osteoporosis prevalence in patients with haemophilia classified in function of the disease type (A or B) and severity, and to evaluate the potential role of regular prophylactic factor replacement (early vs delayed initiation) in preserving or restoring BMD., Methods and Analysis: The haemoPHILia and ostEoporOSis Study is a prospective, controlled, multicentre study that will include patients in France (13 haemophilia treatment centres), Belgium (1 centre) and Romania (1 centre). In total, 240 patients with haemophilia and 240 matched healthy controls will be recruited (1:1). The primary objective is to determine osteoporosis prevalence in patients with severe haemophilia A and B (HA and HB) without prophylaxis, compared with healthy controls. Secondary outcomes include: prevalence of osteoporosis and osteopenia in patients with mild, moderate and severe HA or HB with prophylaxis (grouped in function of their age at prophylaxis initiation), compared with healthy subjects; BMD in patients with HA and HB of comparable severity; correlation between BMD and basal factor VIII/IX levels and thrombin potential; and quantification of plasmatic markers of bone remodelling (formation and resorption) in patients with haemophilia., Ethics and Dissemination: The protocol was approved by the French Ethics Committee and by the French National Agency for Medicines and Health Products Safety (number: 2019-A03358-49). The results of this study will be actively disseminated through scientific publications and conference presentations., Trial Registration Number: NCT04384341., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2021. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Background: We aimed to validate the Men Continue and HERDOO2 (HERDOO2), D-dimer, age, sex, hormonal therapy (DASH), and updated Vienna recurrent venous thromboembolism prediction models in a population composed entirely of first unprovoked pulmonary embolism, and to analyze the impact of the addition of the pulmonary vascular obstruction index (PVOI) on score accuracy., Methods: Analyses were based on the double-blind, randomized PADIS-PE trial, which included 371 unprovoked pulmonary embolism patients initially treated for 6 months, successively randomized to receive an additional 18 months of warfarin or placebo, and subsequently followed-up for 2 years., Results: The HERDOO2, DASH, and updated Vienna scores displayed C-statistics of 0.61 (95% CI 0.54-0.68), 0.60 (95% CI 0.53-0.66), and 0.58 (95% CI 0.51-0.66), respectively. Only the HERDOO2 score identified low recurrence risk patients (<3%/year) after anticoagulation was stopped. When added to either of the prediction models, PVOI measured at pulmonary embolism diagnosis, after 6 months of anticoagulation, or both, improved scores' C-statistics between +0.06 and +0.11 points and consistently led to identifying at least 50% of patients who experienced recurrence but in whom the scores would have indicated against extended anticoagulation., Conclusions: In patients with a first unprovoked pulmonary embolism, the HERDOO2 score is able to identify patients with a low recurrence risk after treatment discontinuation. Addition of PVOI improves accuracy of all scores., Clinical Trials Registration: URL: http://www.controlled-trials.com. Unique identifier: NCT00740883., (Copyright © 2020 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background:  We aimed to identify risk factors for residual pulmonary vascular obstruction after a first unprovoked pulmonary embolism (PE)., Methods:  Analyses were based on data from the double-blind randomized "PADIS-PE" trial that included 371 patients with a first unprovoked PE initially treated during 6 uninterrupted months; all patients underwent baseline ventilation-perfusion lung scanning at inclusion (i.e., after 6 months of anticoagulation). Each patient's pulmonary vascular obstruction indexes (PVOIs) at PE diagnosis and at inclusion were centrally assessed., Results:  Among the 371 included patients, residual PVOI was available in 356 patients, and 150 (42.1%) patients had PVOI ≥ 5%. At multivariable analysis, age > 65 years (odds ratio [OR], 2.81, 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.58-5.00), PVOI ≥ 25% at PE diagnosis (OR, 3.53, 95% CI, 1.94-6.41), elevated factor VIII (OR, 3.89, 95% CI, 1.41-10.8), and chronic respiratory disease (OR, 2.18, 95% CI, 1.11-4.26) were independent predictors for residual PVOI ≥ 5%. Patients with ≥ 1 of these factors represented 94.5% (123 patients) of all patients with residual PVOI ≥ 5%., Conclusion:  Six months after a first unprovoked PE, age > 65 years, PVOI ≥ 25% at PE diagnosis, elevated factor VIII, or chronic respiratory disease were found to be independent predictors for residual pulmonary vascular obstruction., Clinical Trials Registration:  URL: http://www.controlled-trials.com. Unique identifier: NCT00740883., Competing Interests: F.C. reports having received research grant support from Pfizer and fees for board memberships or symposia from Bayer, Bristol-Myers Squibb/Pfizer, and Astra Zeneca, and having received travel support from Bayer, Bristol-Myers Squibb/Pfizer, Daiichi Sankyo, Boehringer Ingelheim, Leo Pharma, Intermune, and Actelion. L.R. declares she has no conflict of interest related to this research. P.R. declares he has no conflict of interest related to this research. R.L.-M. declares he has no conflict of interest related to this research. E.P. declares she has no conflict of interest related to this research. C.T. declares she has no conflict of interest related to this research. O.S. reports having received research grant support from Bayer, Daiichi Sankyo, and Portola Pharmaceuticals, and fees or nonfinancial support for consultancy activities from Actelion, GlaxoSmithKline, Boehringer Ingelheim, and Chiesi. G.P. declares he has no conflict of interest related to this research. L.B. declares he has no conflict of interest related to this research. C.A.L. declares she has no conflict of interest related to this research. P.J. reports having received personal fees or nonfinancial support from Sanofi, GlaxoSmithKline, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, and Leo Pharma. A.M. declares she has no conflict of interest related to this research. F.L. declares he has no conflict of interest related to this research. P.-Y.L.R. declares he has no conflict of interest related to this research. P.-Y.S. declares he has no conflict of interest related to this research. M.N. declares he has no conflict of interest related to this research. B.P. declares he has no conflict of interest related to this research. P.G. reports having received personal fees and nonfinancial support from Bayer and Leo Pharma. K.L. reports having received personal fees from Bayer-Health Care, Bristol-Myers Squibb, and Boehringer Ingelheim. S.M. declares she has no conflict of interest related to this research. P.M. reports having received research grants from Bayer, fees for board memberships from Bayer, Bristol-Myers Squibb/Pfizer, and Daiichi Sankyo, for lectures from Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol-Myers Squibb/Pfizer, Daiichi Sankyo, and Sanofi, and for development of educational presentations from Bayer and Bristol-Myers Squibb/Pfizer. S.L. reports having received research grant support from Bayer and Sanofi, and fees for board memberships or consultancy from Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Leo Pharma, and Sanofi. G.M. reports having received research grant support from Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Leo Pharma, and Sanofi, having been an uncompensated board member and a consultant for Bayer, Boehringer-Ingelheim, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Leo Pharma, and Pfizer, and having received travel support from Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Daiichi Sankyo, Leo Pharma, and Sanofi. C.L. reports having received research grant support from Pfizer and fees for board memberships or symposia from Bayer and Astra Zeneca and having received travel support from Bayer, Daiichi Sankyo, Leo Pharma, Intermune, and Actelion. No other potential conflict of interest relevant to this article was reported., (Georg Thieme Verlag KG Stuttgart · New York.)

The optimal duration of anticoagulation after a first episode of unprovoked deep-vein thrombosis is uncertain. We aimed to assess the benefits and risks of an additional 18 months of treatment with warfarin versus placebo, after an initial 6 months of anticoagulation for a first unprovoked proximal deep-vein thrombosis. We conducted a multicenter, randomized, double-blind, controlled trial comparing an additional 18 months of warfarin with placebo in patients with a unprovoked proximal deep-vein thrombosis initially treated for 6 months (treatment period: 18 months; follow up after treatment period: 24 months). The primary outcome was the composite of recurrent venous thromboembolism or major bleeding at 18 months. Secondary outcomes were the composite at 42 months, as well as each component of the composite, and death unrelated to pulmonary embolism or major bleeding, at 18 and 42 months. All outcomes were centrally adjudicated. A total of 104 patients, enrolled between July 2007 and October 2013 were analyzed on an intention-to-treat basis; no patient was lost to follow-up. During the 18-month treatment period, the primary outcome occurred in none of the 50 patients in the warfarin group and in 16 out of 54 patients (cumulative risk, 29.6%) in the placebo group (hazard ratio, 0.03; 95% confidence interval: 0.01 to 0.09; P <0.001). During the entire 42-month study period, the composite outcome occurred in 14 patients (cumulative risk, 36.8%) in the warfarin group and 17 patients (cumulative risk, 31.5%) in the placebo group (hazard ratio, 0.72; 95% confidence interval: 0.35-1.46). In conclusion, after a first unprovoked proximal deep-vein thrombosis initially treated for 6 months, an additional 18 months of warfarin therapy reduced the composite of recurrent venous thrombosis and major bleeding compared to placebo. However, this benefit was not maintained after stopping anticoagulation. Clinical registration: this trial was registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov as #NCT00740493 ., (Copyright© 2019 Ferrata Storti Foundation.)

Introduction: VTE-BLEED is a validated score for identification of patients at increased risk of major bleeding during extended anticoagulation for venous thromboembolism (VTE). It is unknown whether VTE-BLEED high-risk patients also have an increased risk for recurrent VTE, which would limit the potential usefulness of the score., Methods: This was a post hoc analysis of the randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled PADIS-PE trial that randomized patients with a first unprovoked pulmonary embolism (PE) initially treated during 6 months to receive an additional 18-month of warfarin vs. placebo. The primary outcome of this analysis was recurrent VTE during 2-year follow-up after anticoagulant discontinuation, that is, after the initial 6-month treatment in the placebo arm and after 24 months of anticoagulation in the active treatment arm. This rate, adjusted for study treatment allocation, was compared between patients in the high- vs. low-risk VTE-BLEED group., Results: In complete case analysis (n = 308; 82.4% of total population), 89 (28.9%) patients were classified as high risk; 44 VTE events occurred after anticoagulant discontinuation during 668 patient-years. The cumulative incidence of recurrent VTE was 16.4% (95% confidence interval [CI], 10.0%-26.1%; 14 events) and 14.6% (95% CI, 10.4%-20.3%; 30 events) in the high-risk and low-risk VTE-BLEED groups, respectively, for an adjusted hazard ratio of 1.16 (95% CI, 0.62-2.19)., Conclusion: In this study, patients with unprovoked PE classified at high risk of major bleeding by VTE-BLEED did not have a higher incidence of recurrent VTE after cessation of anticoagulant therapy, supporting the potential yield of the score for making management decisions on the optimal duration of anticoagulant therapy.

Objective: Postoperative lymphopenia has been proposed as a risk factor for postoperative infections but has never been identified as such in a multivariate analysis. Postoperative pneumonia (POP) is one of the most common complications after lung cancer surgery and is associated with a worse outcome. We aimed to evaluate the association between postoperative lymphopenia and POP after lung cancer surgery., Methods: Patients admitted for lung cancer surgery (lobectomy, bilobectomy, or pneumonectomy) aged ≥ 18 years and with no history of an immunosuppressive state were eligible for inclusion. Lymphocyte counts were determined in blood drawn on the day before surgery and at postoperative days 1, 3 and 7. POP diagnosis was based on clinical, biological and radiological data. A logistic regression model adjusted on currently described risk factors for POP was used to explain the onset of this condition., Results: Two hundred patients were included, of whom 43 (21.5%) developed POP. Preoperative lymphocyte count was 1.8±0.6x10(9) cells/L and 2.0±0.7x10(9) cells/L in patients with and without POP, respectively (P = .091). In both groups, the lymphocyte count nadir occurred at postoperative day 1. In multivariate analysis, lymphopenia at postoperative day 1 was significantly associated with increased risk of POP (odds ratio: 2.63, 95% CI [1.03-5.40]). POP rate at postoperative day 7 was higher in patients presenting low lymphocyte counts (≤1.19x10(9) cells/L) at postoperative day 1 (P = .003)., Conclusions: Our study showed that lymphopenia following lung cancer surgery was maximal at postoperative day 1 and was associated with POP., Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exists.