Publications by authors named "Marc Carrier"

214 Publications

Treatment of portal vein thrombosis: an updated narrative review.

Minerva Med 2021 Apr 9. Epub 2021 Apr 9.

Department of Medicine and Surgery, University of Insubria, Varese, Italy.

Portal vein thrombosis (PVT) is the most frequent among the splanchnic vein thrombosis, accounting for 90% of cases. More than half of PVT are provoked by liver cirrhosis, solid cancer or myeloproliferative neoplasms. The remaining cases are non-malignant non-cirrhotic PVT and include either unprovoked events or thrombosis secondary to other less common risk factors (e.g. abdominal surgery, intrabdominal inflammations/infections, or hormonal stimuli). Anticoagulant therapy in patients with acute symptomatic PVT should be started early after diagnosis, if no active bleeding, to obtain greater vessel recanalization and reduce the occurrence of portal-hypertension related complications. Gastroesophageal varices do not represent a contraindication to anticoagulant treatment, as long as adequate measures have been undertaken for the prophylaxis of gastroesophageal bleeding. Different treatment options (unfractionated or low molecular weight heparin, vitamin K antagonists and direct oral anticoagulants [DOACs]) can be considered. In this narrative review we will discuss the treatment of PVT in the three most common scenarios (cirrhosis-associated, cancer-associated and non-malignant non-cirrhotic PVT). We will also discuss the role of the DOACs and summarise recent guidelines on this topic.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.23736/S0026-4806.21.07526-1DOI Listing
April 2021

Similarities and perspectives on the two C's-Cancer and COVID-19.

J Thromb Haemost 2021 Mar 16. Epub 2021 Mar 16.

Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, Ohio, USA.

COVID-19 continues to dominate the health-care burden in the twenty-first century. While health-care professionals around the world try their best to minimize the mortality from this pandemic, we also continue to battle the high mortality from different types of cancer. For the hemostasis and thrombosis specialist, these two conditions present some unusual similarities including the high rate of thrombosis and marked elevation of D-dimers. In this forum article, we discuss these similarities and provide some considerations for future research and therapeutic trials.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/jth.15294DOI Listing
March 2021

Long-term risk of recurrent venous thromboembolism after a first contraceptive-related event: Data from REVERSE cohort study.

J Thromb Haemost 2021 Mar 16. Epub 2021 Mar 16.

Thrombosis Program, Division of Hematology, Department of Medicine, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada.

Introduction: The risk of recurrent venous thromboembolism (VTE) after combined oral contraceptive (COC) use is variably reported. We assessed the long-term risk of recurrent VTE in women on COC at the time of a first VTE, in comparison to women without COC use. Our secondary aim assessed the impact of COC use on the recurrent VTE risk in high risk and low risk HERDOO2 subgroups.

Methods: The REVERSE cohort study derived the HERDOO2 clinical decision rule to predict recurrent VTE in patients who discontinued anticoagulation after 5-7 months for a first unprovoked VTE. Incidence rates of recurrent VTE among women with and without COC exposure were calculated as the number of recurrent VTE over the number of person-years of follow-up, and Cox proportional hazards model was used to compare risks between groups.

Results: The risk of recurrent VTE among COC users was 1.1% (95% CI 0.3-2.9) per patient-year as compared with 3.2% per patient-year (95% CI 2.4-4.3) among non-users (HR, 0.37, 95% CI, 0.1-1.0). Women who were COC users and high risk by HERDOO2 score had a recurrence rate of 3.5% (95% CI 0.4-12.5) as compared to 6.1% (95% CI 4.3-8.5) among women who were non-COC users and at high risk by HERDOO2 score (HR 0.6, 95% CI, 0.1-2.5).

Conclusions: Women who were COC users at the time of an otherwise unprovoked VTE event had a lower VTE recurrence rate during long-term follow-up, compared to non-users. The use of HERDOO2 rule may help identify higher risk women with COC use.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/jth.15303DOI Listing
March 2021

Coagulopathy of hospitalised COVID-19: A Pragmatic Randomised Controlled Trial of Therapeutic Anticoagulation versus Standard Care as a Rapid Response to the COVID-19 Pandemic (RAPID COVID COAG - RAPID Trial): A structured summary of a study protocol for a randomised controlled trial.

Trials 2021 Mar 10;22(1):202. Epub 2021 Mar 10.

St. Michael's Hospital, Applied Health Research Centre, Li Ka Shing Knowledge Institute, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada.

Objectives: To determine the effect of therapeutic anticoagulation, with low molecular weight heparin (LMWH) or unfractionated heparin (UFH, high dose nomogram), compared to standard care in hospitalized patients admitted for COVID-19 with an elevated D-dimer on the composite outcome of intensive care unit (ICU) admission, non-invasive positive pressure ventilation, invasive mechanical ventilation or death up to 28 days.

Trial Design: Open-label, parallel, 1:1, phase 3, 2-arm randomized controlled trial PARTICIPANTS: The study population includes hospitalized adults admitted for COVID-19 prior to the development of critical illness. Excluded individuals are those where the bleeding risk or risk of transfusion would generally be considered unacceptable, those already therapeutically anticoagulated and those who have already have any component of the primary composite outcome. Participants are recruited from hospital sites in Brazil, Canada, Ireland, Saudi Arabia, United Arab Emirates, and the United States of America. The inclusion criteria are: 1) Laboratory confirmed COVID-19 (diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 via reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction as per the World Health Organization protocol or by nucleic acid based isothermal amplification) prior to hospital admission OR within first 5 days (i.e. 120 hours) after hospital admission; 2) Admitted to hospital for COVID-19; 3) One D-dimer value above the upper limit of normal (ULN) (within 5 days (i.e. 120 hours) of hospital admission) AND EITHER: a. D-Dimer ≥2 times ULN OR b. D-Dimer above ULN and Oxygen saturation ≤ 93% on room air; 4) > 18 years of age; 5) Informed consent from the patient (or legally authorized substitute decision maker). The exclusion criteria are: 1) pregnancy; 2) hemoglobin <80 g/L in the last 72 hours; 3) platelet count <50 x 10/L in the last 72 hours; 4) known fibrinogen <1.5 g/L (if testing deemed clinically indicated by the treating physician prior to the initiation of anticoagulation); 5) known INR >1.8 (if testing deemed clinically indicated by the treating physician prior to the initiation of anticoagulation); 6) patient already prescribed intermediate dosing of LMWH that cannot be changed (determination of what constitutes an intermediate dose is to be at the discretion of the treating clinician taking the local institutional thromboprophylaxis protocol for high risk patients into consideration); 7) patient already prescribed therapeutic anticoagulation at the time of screening [low or high dose nomogram UFH, LMWH, warfarin, direct oral anticoagulant (any dose of dabigatran, apixaban, rivaroxaban, edoxaban)]; 8) patient prescribed dual antiplatelet therapy, when one of the agents cannot be stopped safely; 9) known bleeding within the last 30 days requiring emergency room presentation or hospitalization; 10) known history of a bleeding disorder of an inherited or active acquired bleeding disorder; 11) known history of heparin-induced thrombocytopenia; 12) known allergy to UFH or LMWH; 13) admitted to the intensive care unit at the time of screening; 14) treated with non-invasive positive pressure ventilation or invasive mechanical ventilation at the time of screening; 15) Imminent death according to the judgement of the most responsible physician; 16) enrollment in another clinical trial of antithrombotic therapy involving hospitalized patients.

Intervention And Comparator: Intervention: Therapeutic dose of LMWH (dalteparin, enoxaparin, tinzaparin) or high dose nomogram of UFH. The choice of LMWH versus UFH will be at the clinician's discretion and dependent on local institutional supply. Comparator: Standard care [thromboprophylactic doses of LMWH (dalteparin, enoxaparin, tinzaparin, fondaparinux)] or UFH. Administration of LMWH, UFH or fondaparinux at thromboprophylactic doses for acutely ill hospitalized medical patients, in the absence of contraindication, is generally considered standard care.

Main Outcomes: The primary composite outcome of ICU admission, non-invasive positive pressure ventilation, invasive mechanical ventilation or death at 28 days. Secondary outcomes include (evaluated up to day 28): 1. All-cause death 2. Composite of ICU admission or all-cause death 3. Composite of mechanical ventilation or all-cause death 4. Major bleeding as defined by the ISTH Scientific and Standardization Committee (ISTH-SSC) recommendation; 5. Red blood cell transfusion (>1 unit); 6. Transfusion of platelets, frozen plasma, prothrombin complex concentrate, cryoprecipitate and/or fibrinogen concentrate; 7. Renal replacement therapy; 8. Hospital-free days alive; 9. ICU-free days alive; 10. Ventilator-free days alive; 11. Organ support-free days alive; 12. Venous thromboembolism (defined as symptomatic or incidental, suspected or confirmed via diagnostic imaging and/or electrocardiogram where appropriate); 13. Arterial thromboembolism (defined as suspected or confirmed via diagnostic imaging and/or electrocardiogram where appropriate); 14. Heparin induced thrombocytopenia; 15. Trajectories of COVID-19 disease-related coagulation and inflammatory biomarkers.

Randomisation: Randomisation will be stratified by site and age (>65 versus ≤65 years) using a 1:1 computer-generated random allocation sequence with variable block sizes. Randomization will occur within the first 5 days (i.e. 120 hours) of participant hospital admission. However, it is recommended that randomization occurs as early as possible after hospital admission. Central randomization using an interactive web response system will ensure allocation concealment.

Blinding (masking): No blinding involved. This is an open-label trial.

Numbers To Be Randomised (sample Size): 462 patients (231 per group) are needed to detect a 15% risk difference, from 50% in the control group to 35% in the experimental group, with power of 90% at a two-sided alpha of 0.05.

Trial Status: Protocol Version Number 1.4. Recruitment began on May 11, 2020. Recruitment is expected to be completed March 2022. Recruitment is ongoing.

Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04362085 Date of Trial Registration: April 24, 2020 FULL PROTOCOL: The full protocol is attached as an additional file, accessible from the Trials website (Additional file 1). In the interest of expediting dissemination of this material, the familiar formatting has been eliminated; this Letter serves as a summary of the key elements of the full protocol.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13063-021-05076-0DOI Listing
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7943934PMC
March 2021

MitPlan: A planning approach to mitigating concurrently applied clinical practice guidelines.

Artif Intell Med 2021 02 16;112:102002. Epub 2020 Dec 16.

The Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, Ottawa Canada.

As the population ages, patients' complexity and the scope of their care is increasing. Over 60% of the population is 65 years of age or older and suffers from multi-morbidity, which is associated with two times as many patient-physician encounters. Yet clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) are developed to treat a single disease. To reconcile these two competing issues, previously we developed a framework for mitigation, i.e., identifying and addressing adverse interactions in multi-morbid patients managed according to multiple CPGs. That framework relies on first-order logic (FOL) to represent CPGs and secondary medical knowledge and FOL theorem proving to establish valid patient management plans. In the work presented here, we leverage our earlier research and simplify the mitigation process by representing it as a planning problem using the Planning Domain Definition Language (PDDL). This new framework, called MitPlan, identifies and addresses adverse interactions using durative planning actions that embody clinical actions (including medication administration and patient testing), supports a physician-defined length of planning horizons, and optimizes plans based on patient preferences and action costs. It supports a variety of criteria when developing management plans, including the total cost of prescribed treatment and the cost of the revisions to be introduced. The solution to MitPlan's planning problem is a sequence of timed actions that are easy to interpret when creating a management plan. We demonstrate MitPlan's capabilities using illustrative and clinical case studies.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.artmed.2020.102002DOI Listing
February 2021

American Society of Hematology 2021 guidelines for management of venous thromboembolism: prevention and treatment in patients with cancer.

Blood Adv 2021 Feb;5(4):927-974

Cochrane Iberoamérica, Biomedical Research Institute Sant Pau-CIBERESP, Barcelona, Spain.

Background: Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is a common complication among patients with cancer. Patients with cancer and VTE are at a markedly increased risk for morbidity and mortality.

Objective: These evidence-based guidelines of the American Society of Hematology (ASH) are intended to support patients, clinicians, and other health care professionals in their decisions about the prevention and treatment of VTE in patients with cancer.

Methods: ASH formed a multidisciplinary guideline panel balanced to minimize potential bias from conflicts of interest. The guideline development process was supported by updated or new systematic evidence reviews. The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) approach was used to assess evidence and make recommendations.

Results: Recommendations address mechanical and pharmacological prophylaxis in hospitalized medical patients with cancer, those undergoing a surgical procedure, and ambulatory patients receiving cancer chemotherapy. The recommendations also address the use of anticoagulation for the initial, short-term, and long-term treatment of VTE in patients with cancer.

Conclusions: Strong recommendations include not using thromboprophylaxis in ambulatory patients receiving cancer chemotherapy at low risk of VTE and to use low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) for initial treatment of VTE in patients with cancer. Conditional recommendations include using thromboprophylaxis in hospitalized medical patients with cancer, LMWH or fondaparinux for surgical patients with cancer, LMWH or direct oral anticoagulants (DOAC) in ambulatory patients with cancer receiving systemic therapy at high risk of VTE and LMWH or DOAC for initial treatment of VTE, DOAC for the short-term treatment of VTE, and LMWH or DOAC for the long-term treatment of VTE in patients with cancer.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1182/bloodadvances.2020003442DOI Listing
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7903232PMC
February 2021

Clinical and sociodemographic factors associated with anticoagulant use for cancer associated venous thromboembolism.

J Thromb Thrombolysis 2021 Feb 5. Epub 2021 Feb 5.

Department of Medicine, Division of Hematology/Oncology, University of Michigan, C366 Med Inn Building, 1500 E. Medical Center Drive, Ann Arbor, MI, 48109, USA.

Cancer associated thrombosis (CAT) is a leading cause of death among patients with cancer. It is not clear if non-clinical factors are associated with anticoagulation receipt. We conducted a retrospective cohort study of Optum's de-identified Clinformatics® Database of adults with cancer diagnosed between 2009 and 2016 who developed CAT, treated with an outpatient anticoagulant (warfarin, low molecular weight heparin (LMWH), or a direct oral anticoagulant (DOAC)). Of 12,622 patients, three months after an episode of CAT, 1,485 (12%) were on LMWH, 1,546 (12%) on DOACs, and 9,591 (76%) were on warfarin. When controlling for other factors, anticoagulant use was significantly associated with socioeconomic factors, region, co-morbidities, type of thrombosis, and cancer subtype. Patients with a bachelor's degree or greater level of education were less likely to receive warfarin (OR: 0.77; 95% CI: [0.59, 0.99]; p < 0.046) or DOACs (OR: 0.67; 95% CI: [0.55, 0.82]; p < 0.001) compared to LMWH. Patients with higher income levels were more likely to receive LMWH or DOACs compared to warfarin, while patients across all income levels were equally likely to receive LMWH or DOACs. Non-clinical factors including income, education, and region, are associated with anticoagulation receipt three months after an episode of CAT. Sociodemographic factors may result in some patients receiving suboptimal care and contribute to non-guideline concordant care for CAT.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11239-021-02392-9DOI Listing
February 2021

Challenging anticoagulation cases: A case of pulmonary embolism shortly after spontaneous brain bleeding.

Thromb Res 2021 Apr 26;200:41-47. Epub 2021 Jan 26.

Department of Medicine, Ottawa Hospital Research Institute at the University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Canada.

Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is a common complication after intracranial hemorrhage (ICH); the incidence has been reported to vary between 18% to 50% for deep vein thrombosis and between 0.5% to 5% for pulmonary embolism (PE). According to current clinical practice guidelines, patients with acute VTE should receive anticoagulant treatment for at least 3 months in the absence of contraindications. Anticoagulant treatment reduces mortality, prevents early recurrences and improves long-term outcome in patients with acute VTE. However, recent ICH is an absolute contraindication for anticoagulant treatment due to the potential increased risk of hematoma expansion or recurrent ICH. Hematoma expansion occurs in approximately a third of patients within 24 h following the diagnosis of a spontaneous ICH. The risk for recurrent ICH depends on patients' features as well as on the feature of index ICH. Limited evidence is available on the risks of therapeutic anticoagulation started shortly after ICH. Expert consensus around the introduction of therapeutic anticoagulation suggests delaying therapeutic anticoagulation for at least 2 weeks after spontaneous ICH, until the risk re-bleeding becomes acceptable. Vena cava filters should be inserted to reduce the risk for (non) fatal PE until therapeutic anticoagulation can be started; antithrombotic prophylaxis should be started as soon as possible to avoid recurrent VTE after vena cava filter insertion. For patients presenting PE with hemodynamic compromise, percutaneous embolectomy should be considered. Most patients will be able to receive anticoagulant treatment within 4 weeks following spontaneous ICH; direct oral anticoagulants are probably the treatment of choice for those ICH patients tolerating anticoagulant treatment.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.thromres.2021.01.016DOI Listing
April 2021

Effect of oral anticoagulant use on surgical delay and mortality in hip fracture.

Bone Joint J 2021 Feb;103-B(2):222-233

Department of Surgery, Section of Orthopaedic Surgery, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada.

Aims: Current guidelines recommend surgery within 48 hours among patients presenting with hip fractures; however, optimal surgical timing for patients on oral anticoagulants (OACs) remains unclear. Individual studies are limited by small sample sizes and heterogeneous outcomes. The aim of this study was to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis to summarize the effect of pre-injury OACs on time-to-surgery (TTS) and all-cause mortality among older adults with hip fracture treated surgically.

Methods: We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) from inception to 14 October 2019 to identify studies directly comparing outcomes among hip fracture patients receiving direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) or vitamin K antagonists (VKAs) prior to hospital admission to hip fracture patients not on OACs. Random effects meta-analyses were used to pool all outcomes (TTS, in-hospital mortality, and 30-day mortality).

Results: A total of 34 studies (involving 39,446 patients) were included in our systematic review. TTS was 13.7 hours longer (95% confidence interval (CI) 9.8 to 17.5; p < 0.001) among hip fracture patients on OACs compared to those not on OACs. This translated to a three-fold higher odds of having surgery beyond the recommended 48 hours from admission (odds ratio (OR) 3.0 (95% CI 2.1 to 4.3); p = 0.001). In-hospital mortality was higher (OR 1.4 (95% CI 1.0 to 1.8); p < 0.03) among anticoagulated patients. Among studies comparing anticoagulants, there was no statistically significant difference in time-to-surgery between patients taking a DOAC compared to a VKA.

Conclusion: Patients presenting with a hip fracture who were taking OACs prior to injury experience a delay in time-to-surgery and higher mortality than non-anticoagulated patients. Patients on DOACs may be at risk of further delays. Evaluating expedited surgical protocols in hip fracture patients on OACs is an urgent priority, with the potential to decrease morbidity and mortality in this group of high-risk patients. Cite this article: 2021;103-B(2):222-233.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1302/0301-620X.103B2.BJJ-2020-0583.R2DOI Listing
February 2021

Clinical Surveillance vs. Anticoagulation For low-risk patiEnts with isolated SubSegmental Pulmonary Embolism: protocol for a multicentre randomised placebo-controlled non-inferiority trial (SAFE-SSPE).

BMJ Open 2020 11 19;10(11):e040151. Epub 2020 Nov 19.

Department of General Internal Medicine, Inselspital, Bern University Hospital, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland.

Introduction: The clinical significance of subsegmental pulmonary embolism (SSPE) is currently unclear. Although growing evidence from observational studies suggests that withholding anticoagulant treatment may be a safe option in selected patients with isolated SSPE, most patients with this condition receive anticoagulant treatment, which is associated with a 90-day risk of recurrent venous thromboembolism (VTE) of 0.8% and major bleeding of up to 5%. Given the ongoing controversy concerning the risk-benefit ratio of anticoagulation for isolated SSPE and the lack of evidence from randomised-controlled studies, the aim of this clinical trial is to evaluate the efficacy and safety of clinical surveillance without anticoagulation in low-risk patients with isolated SSPE.

Methods And Analysis: SAFE-SSPE (Surveillance vs. Anticoagulation For low-risk patiEnts with isolated SubSegmental Pulmonary Embolism, a multicentre randomised placebo-controlled non-inferiority trial) is an international, multicentre, placebo-controlled, double-blind, parallel-group non-inferiority trial conducted in Switzerland, the Netherlands and Canada. Low-risk patients with isolated SSPE are randomised to receive clinical surveillance with either placebo (no anticoagulation) or anticoagulant treatment with rivaroxaban. All patients undergo bilateral whole-leg compression ultrasonography to exclude concomitant deep vein thrombosis before enrolment. Patients are followed for 90 days. The primary outcome is symptomatic recurrent VTE (efficacy). The secondary outcomes include clinically significant bleeding and all-cause mortality (safety). The ancillary outcomes are health-related quality of life, functional status and medical resource utilisation.

Ethics And Dissemination: The local ethics committees in Switzerland have approved this protocol. Submission to the Ethical Committees in the Netherlands and Canada is underway. The results of this trial will be published in a peer-reviewed journal.

Trial Registration Number: NCT04263038.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2020-040151DOI Listing
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7678381PMC
November 2020

Management of hemostatic complications in acute leukemia: Guidance from the SSC of the ISTH.

J Thromb Haemost 2020 12;18(12):3174-3183

Division of Hemostasis and Thrombosis, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center and Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA.

Patients with acute leukemia frequently develop thrombocytopenia and hemostatic complications caused by coagulopathy. Coagulopathy complicates the management of these patients and can lead to significant morbidity and mortality. This guidance document aims to review and provide guidance on the management of hemostatic complications in adult patients with acute leukemia, addressing four main issues, including platelet transfusion, disseminated intravascular coagulation, L-asparaginase-related hypofibrinogenemia, and the use of antifibrinolytic agents.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/jth.15074DOI Listing
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7909744PMC
December 2020

Ventilation/perfusion SPECT for the diagnosis of pulmonary embolism: A systematic review.

J Thromb Haemost 2020 11 31;18(11):2910-2920. Epub 2020 Aug 31.

Service de médecine nucléaire, CHRU de Brest, EA3878 (GETBO), Université de Brest, Brest, France.

Background: Ventilation/perfusion (V/Q) single-photon emission computed tomography (SPECT) has largely replaced conventional planar V/Q scan in nuclear medicine departments for pulmonary embolism (PE) diagnosis. However, the diagnostic performance of the test and its role in the diagnostic management of acute PE are still a matter of debate.

Objective: The primary aim was to establish the diagnostic accuracy (sensitivity, specificity) of V/Q SPECT for PE diagnosis. The secondary aim was to review the clinical outcomes of patients investigated for PE suspicion with a standardized algorithm based on V/Q SPECT.

Methods: We conducted a systematic review of diagnostic accuracy and management outcome studies involving patients evaluated with V/Q SPECT for suspected acute PE. We searched from inception to June 23, 2020, MEDLINE, Embase, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials for diagnostic accuracy studies, randomized controlled trials, and observational cohort studies. The methodological quality and risk of bias of eligible studies were assessed using the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies-2 (QUADAS-2) and the Risk of Bias in Nonrandomized Studies of Interventions tools.

Results: We identified 13 accuracy studies and one prospective outcome study. Eleven diagnostic accuracy studies were deemed at high risk of bias in at least two of the four domains of QUADAS-2 evaluation and a further two studies raised concerns regarding the applicability of results, precluding the meta-analysis for accuracy indices. The only prospective cohort study demonstrated critical risk of bias.

Conclusions: Although V/Q SPECT has been widely implemented in daily clinical practice, the exact diagnostic performance of V/Q SPECT for PE is still unknown. This systematic review clearly identifies knowledge gaps and sets the agenda for future research.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/jth.15038DOI Listing
November 2020

Development and implementation of common data elements for venous thromboembolism research: on behalf of SSC Subcommittee on official Communication from the SSC of the ISTH.

J Thromb Haemost 2021 01;19(1):297-303

Breakthrough Healthcare, Baltimore, MD, USA.

Clinical research in venous thromboembolism (VTE) is hindered by variability in the collection and reporting of data and outcomes. A consistent data language facilitates efficiencies, leads to higher quality data, and permits between-study comparisons and evidence synthesis. The International Society on Thrombosis and Haemostasis (ISTH) launched an international task force of more than 50 researchers to develop common data elements for clinical research in venous thromboembolism. The project was organized in seven working groups, each focusing on a topic area: General Core Data Elements; Anticoagulation and Other Therapies; Chronic VTE and Functional Outcomes; Diagnosis of VTE; Malignancy; Perioperative; and Predictors of VTE. The groups met via teleconference to collaboratively identify key data elements and develop definitions and data standards that were structured in a project-specific taxonomy. A Steering Committee met by teleconference and in-person to determine the overall scope of the project and resolve questions arising from the working groups. ISTH held an open public comment period to enable broader stakeholder involvement and feedback. The common data elements were then refined by the working groups to create a set of 512 unique data elements that are publicly available at http://isth.breakthrough.healthcare. The ISTH VTE Common Data Elements are intended to be a living project with ongoing curation, future expansion, and adaptation to meet the needs of the thrombosis and hemostasis research community.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/jth.15138DOI Listing
January 2021

Rivaroxaban Compared to Placebo for the Treatment of Leg Superficial Vein Thrombosis: A Randomized Trial.

Semin Thromb Hemost 2020 Nov 23;46(8):977-985. Epub 2020 Dec 23.

Department of Oncology, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada.

The role of rivaroxaban in the treatment of leg superficial venous thrombosis (SVT) is uncertain. This article aims to determine if rivaroxaban is an effective and safe treatment for leg SVT. Patients with symptomatic leg SVT of at least 5 cm length were randomized to 45 days of rivaroxaban 10 mg daily or to placebo, and followed for a total of 90 days. Treatment failure (required a nonstudy anticoagulant; had proximal deep vein thrombosis or pulmonary embolism; or had surgery for SVT) at 90 days was the primary efficacy outcome. Secondary efficacy outcomes included leg pain severity, and venous disease-specific and general health-related quality of life over 90 days. Major bleeding at 90 days was the primary safety outcome. Poor enrollment led to the trial being stopped after 85 of the planned 600 patients were randomized to rivaroxaban ( = 43) or placebo ( = 42). One rivaroxaban and five placebo patients had a treatment failure by 90 days (absolute risk reduction = 9.0%, 95% confidence interval: -22 to 5.9%). Leg pain improvement did not differ at 7 ( = 0.16) or 45 days ( = 0.89), but was greater with rivaroxaban at 90 days ( = 0.011). There was no difference in venous disease-specific ( = 0.99) or general health-related ( = 0.37) quality of life over 45 days. There were no major bleeds or deaths in either group. There were no identifiable differences in efficacy or safety between rivaroxaban and placebo in patients with symptomatic SVT but comparisons were undermined by a much smaller than planned sample size (NCT1499953).
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1055/s-0040-1718891DOI Listing
November 2020

Establishing diagnostic criteria and treatment of subsegmental pulmonary embolism: A Delphi analysis of experts.

Res Pract Thromb Haemost 2020 Nov 1;4(8):1251-1261. Epub 2020 Oct 1.

Department of Thrombosis and Hemostasis Leiden University Medical Center Leiden The Netherlands.

Background: Improved imaging techniques have increased the incidence of subsegmental pulmonary embolism (ssPE). Indirect evidence is suggesting that ssPE may represent a more benign presentation of venous thromboembolism not necessarily requiring anticoagulant treatment. However, correctly diagnosing ssPE is challenging with reported low interobserver agreement, partly due to the lack of widely accepted diagnostic criteria.

Objectives: We sought to derive uniform diagnostic criteria for ssPE, guided by expert consensus.

Methods: Based on an extensive literature review and expert opinion of a Delphi steering committee, two surveys including statements regarding diagnostic criteria and management options for ssPE were established. These surveys were conducted electronically among two panels, respectively: expert thoracic radiologists and clinical venous thromboembolism specialists. The Delphi method was used to achieve consensus after multiple survey rounds. Consensus was defined as a level of agreement >70%.

Results: Twenty-nine of 40 invited radiologists (73%) and 40 of 51 clinicians (78%) participated. Following two survey rounds by the expert radiologists, consensus was achieved on 15 of 16 statements, including on the established diagnostic criteria for ssPE (96% agreement): a contrast defect in a subsegmental artery, that is, the first arterial branch division of any segmental artery independent of artery diameter, visible in at least two subsequent axial slices, using a computed tomography scanner with a desired maximum collimator width of ≤1 mm. These criteria were approved by 83% of the clinical venous thromboembolism (VTE) specialists. The clinical expert panel favored anticoagulant treatment in case of prior VTE, antiphospholipid syndrome, pregnancy, cancer, and proximal deep vein thrombosis.

Conclusion: The results of this analysis provide standard radiological criteria for ssPE that may be applicable in both clinical trials and practice.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/rth2.12422DOI Listing
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7695556PMC
November 2020

Thromboprophylaxis practice patterns and beliefs among physicians treating patients with abdominopelvic cancers at a Canadian centre.

Can J Surg 2020 11 30;63(6):E562-E568. Epub 2020 Nov 30.

From the Division of Urology, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Ont. (McAlpine, Breau, Knee, Cagiannos, Morash, Lavallée); the Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Ont. (Breau, Carrier, Knee, Cagiannos, Morash, Lavallée); the Department of Medicine, University of Ottawa and The Ottawa Hospital, Ottawa, Ont. (Carrier); and the Departments of Health Research Methods, Evidence, and Impact and of Surgery, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ont. (Violette).

Background: There is inadequate high-quality evidence on thromboprophylaxis for patients undergoing surgery for abdominopelvic cancer. We surveyed physicians who treat patients with abdominopelvic cancer to determine current thromboprophylaxis practice patterns and to determine where research is needed.

Methods: We created an online survey with questions on thromboprophylaxis topics, including type of thromboprophylaxis used, timing of initial thromboprophylaxis dose, use of thromboprophylaxis during chemotherapy, use of extended-duration thromboprophylaxis and areas for future research. The survey questions were reviewed by external content experts to ensure they were appropriate and relevant. Surgeons, thrombosis experts and medical oncologists who manage patients with abdominopelvic cancers at 1 large Canadian academic centre were invited to complete the survey between January and April 2019.

Results: Of the 57 physicians invited, 42 (74%) completed the survey, including 27 surgeons (response rate 79%), 9 thrombosis experts (response rate 75%) and 6 medical oncologists (response rate 55%). Most surgeons (22 [82%]) reported using mechanical thromboprophylaxis, whereas only 1 thrombosis expert (11%) recommended mechanical thromboprophylaxis. There was substantial variability in the timing of the initial dose of thromboprophylaxis, with 9/10 urologists (90%) and all 7 general surgeons giving the first dose intraoperatively, and three-quarters of thoracic surgeons (3/4 [75%]), gynecologists (3/4 [75%]) and thrombosis experts (7/9 [78%]) starting thromboprophylaxis after surgery. All medical oncologists believed chemotherapy increases the risk of venous thromboembolism, but 4 (67%) reported that they do not routinely prescribe thromboprophylaxis owing to bleeding concerns. Most respondents (35/38 [92%]) felt there was a need for more research on thromboprophylaxis and indicated willingness to participate in future clinical trials.

Conclusion: Variability exists in contemporary thromboprophylaxis practice patterns among physicians treating patients with abdominopelvic cancer. Future research is needed to standardize care and improve outcomes for patients.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1503/cjs.015219DOI Listing
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7747845PMC
November 2020

Prevention of venous thromboembolism in ambulatory patients with cancer.

ESMO Open 2020 11;5(6):e000948

Department of Medicine, University of Ottawa, Ottawa Hospital Research Institute at the University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada.

Patients with cancer are at high risk of venous thromboembolic events, and this risk can be further increased in patients with certain cancer types and by cancer treatments. Guidelines on the prevention of cancer-associated thrombosis (CAT) recommend thromboprophylaxis for hospitalised patients; however, this is not routinely recommended for ambulatory patients receiving chemotherapy and is limited to specified high-risk patients. Identification of the ambulatory patients at risk of CAT who would most benefit from anticoagulant therapy is therefore critical to reduce the incidence of this complication. For patients receiving thromboprophylaxis for CAT, treatment options include low molecular weight heparin, acetylsalicylic acid, warfarin or direct oral anticoagulants (apixaban or rivaroxaban), dependent on the cancer type and cancer treatment regimen. This review discusses emerging clinical trial data and their potential clinical impact.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/esmoopen-2020-000948DOI Listing
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7684816PMC
November 2020

Discordant reporting of VTE in pancreatic cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis of thromboprophylaxis versus chemotherapeutic trials.

J Thromb Haemost 2021 Feb 3;19(2):489-501. Epub 2020 Dec 3.

Division of Hemostasis and Thrombosis, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA.

Background: Despite the frequency of venous thromboembolism (VTE) in pancreatic cancer, it is inconsistently reported as an adverse event in clinical trials. We hypothesized that reported rates of VTE in pancreatic cancer clinical trials are influenced by the objectives of the trial, with higher rates reported in thromboprophylaxis compared with chemotherapeutic trials. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized, controlled trials (RCT) in pancreatic cancer to quantify differences in reported rates of VTE in thromboprophylaxis and chemotherapeutic trials.

Methods: We systematically searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Clinicaltrials.gov. Eligible thromboprophylaxis RCTs were required to report rates of thrombosis in non-anticoagulant pancreatic cancer cohorts. Eligible chemotherapy studies were RCTs evaluating chemotherapy regimens in advanced pancreatic cancer and reported thrombosis as adverse events. Pooled event rates of VTE and arterial thrombosis were calculated using a random-effects model.

Results: The pooled VTE rate in 13 chemotherapy studies (5694 patients) was 5.9% (95% confidence interval [CI], 3.9-9.0%) compared with 16.5% (95% CI, 11.7%-23.3%; P < .001) in 9 thromboprophylaxis studies (631 patients). The pooled symptomatic VTE rate from chemotherapy studies was 5.4% (95% CI, 3.5%-8.3%), which was significantly lower than the pooled rate from thromboprophylaxis studies of 10.5% (95% CI, 7.3%-14.9%; P = .02).

Conclusion: The VTE incidence reported in chemotherapy RCTs in pancreatic cancer is significantly lower than reported in thromboprophylaxis studies. This finding highlights the underrecognition of VTE in chemotherapeutic trials and emphasizes the need to standardize approaches towards monitoring and reporting of VTE in clinical trials.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/jth.15175DOI Listing
February 2021

Safety and efficacy of apixaban thromboprophylaxis in cancer patients with metastatic disease: A post-hoc analysis of the AVERT trial.

Thromb Res 2021 Jan 1;197:13-15. Epub 2020 Nov 1.

Department of Medicine University of Ottawa, the Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, Ottawa, Canada. Electronic address:

Background: The risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE) is increased in patients with active cancer and the risk is highest in those with metastatic disease. The risks and benefits of thromboprophylaxis among cancer patients with metastatic disease initiating chemotherapy treatment are unknown. To address this important knowledge gap, we evaluated the efficacy and safety of apixaban thromboprophylaxis in patients with and without metastatic disease.

Methods: Post-hoc analysis of the AVERT trial, which was a randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind trial comparing apixaban therapy to placebo for VTE prophylaxis among cancer patients who were intermediate-to-high risk for VTE and who were initiating chemotherapy. The hazards ratios (HRs) for VTE and major bleeding episodes in patients with and without metastatic disease were calculated using a Cox regression model controlling for age, gender, and center.

Results: A total of 574 patients underwent randomization and 365 patients could be stratified according to the presence (n = 138) or absence (n = 227) of metastatic disease. In patients with metastatic disease, those receiving apixaban had a significantly lower risk of VTE (HR 0.55; 95% CI 0.32 to 0.97) without a significant increase in major bleeding complications (HR 1.36 95% CI 0.27 to 6.93) compared to those on placebo. In patients without metastatic disease, the use of apixaban was also associated with a significantly lower risk of VTE (HR 0.34 95% CI 0.19 to 0.60) without a significant increase in major bleeding complications (HR 1.14 95% CI 0.08 to 15.91).

Conclusions: In patients with and without metastatic disease, apixaban thromboprophylaxis was associated with a significantly lower rate of VTE compared to placebo.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.thromres.2020.10.026DOI Listing
January 2021

Anticoagulation in splanchnic and cerebral vein thrombosis: An international vignette-based survey.

Res Pract Thromb Haemost 2020 Oct 11;4(7):1192-1202. Epub 2020 Sep 11.

Department of Medicine and Surgery University of Insubria Varese Italy.

Background: Anticoagulant treatment of splanchnic (SVT) and cerebral vein thrombosis (CVT) can be challenging due to the rarity of these conditions, the concomitantly high thrombotic and bleeding risks, and the available low-quality evidence.

Objectives: To explore the current therapeutic approaches to SVT and CVT, and the rationale behind the anticoagulant treatment choice.

Methods: A cross-sectional survey was conducted (October 2018-April 2019) among members of three thrombosis and hemostasis societies. The survey consisted of four vignette cases: (i) SVT secondary to transient risk factor; (ii) cirrhotic SVT with esophageal varices; (iii) CVT secondary to transient risk factor; and (iv) unprovoked CVT with intracranial hemorrhage.

Results: A total of 397 physicians responded to the survey. There was wide variability in anticoagulant treatment options, starting time, and duration. Vitamin K antagonists were the commonest choice across the four vignette cases (44.2%-63.0%). The direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) were the second commonest choice in low-bleeding-risk scenarios (27.7% in case 1, 22.9% in case 3), while parenteral anticoagulation alone was the second commonest choice in high-bleeding-risk scenarios (39.9% in case 2, 39.8% in case 4). The most frequent reasons for selecting DOACs were oral route of administration (50.6%), lack of need for laboratory monitoring (48.1%), and favorable safety profile of these drugs (43.4%).

Conclusions: The results of our study showed that, despite being off-label, the DOACs were considered for the treatment of unusual-site venous thromboembolism. The wide variability among different physicians reflected the clinical difficulties and raised the need for more collaborative trials on these disorders.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/rth2.12424DOI Listing
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7590282PMC
October 2020

Anticoagulant medication adherence for cancer-associated thrombosis: A comparison of LMWH to DOACs.

J Thromb Haemost 2021 01 21;19(1):212-220. Epub 2020 Nov 21.

Department of Medicine, Division of Hematology/Oncology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA.

Essentials It is not clear if patients are less adherent to low molecular weight heparin (LMWH) compared to direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) for cancer-associated thrombosis (CAT). We evaluated medication adherence among two propensity-matched groups of patients with CAT by comparing the proportion of days covered (PDC). Median treatment persistence on DOACs was more than 80 days longer than LMWH. Medication adherence was high (~95%) and was similar with LMWH compared to DOACs. ABSTRACT: Background Low molecular weight heparin (LMWH) and direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) are used to treat cancer-associated thrombosis (CAT). It is not clear if patients are less adherent to LMWH compared to DOACs. Objectives To compare medication persistence and adherence between LMWH and DOACs. Patients/Methods We analyzed Optum's de-identified Clinformatics® Data Mart Database of privately insured adults with cancer diagnosed between January 2009 and October 2015 who were undergoing chemotherapy, immunotherapy, targeted or hormonal therapies; developed CAT; and were treated with an outpatient anticoagulant. The proportion of days covered (PDC) was calculated from the date of anticoagulant prescription until the anticoagulant was switched, stopped, or the study end. Medication adherence was defined as PDC ≥ 80%, ≥95%, and by comparing the mean PDC. Results Two propensity-matched groups of 1128 patients were identified. Patient persistence was higher with DOACs compared to LMWH (median 116 days versus 34 days). With adherence defined as PDC ≥ 80%, we found no significant difference (95.6% versus 94.6% adherence with DOACs versus LMWH, P = .33). The mean difference of PDC between the two groups was also similar. With medication adherence defined as PDC ≥ 95%, adherence was evident in 73% of DOAC users and 81% of patients on LMWH (P < .001). Prescription copayments were higher on average for LMWH compared to DOACs (mean $153.61 versus 40.67; standard deviation $306.74 versus $33.11). Conclusion Patients remain on DOACs longer than LMWH, but medication adherence is similar with LMWH.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/jth.15153DOI Listing
January 2021

Thromboprophylaxis for patients with newly diagnosed vs. recurrent cancers: a post-hoc analysis of the avert trial.

J Thromb Thrombolysis 2020 Oct 20. Epub 2020 Oct 20.

Department of Medicine, University of Ottawa, the Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, 501 Smyth Road, Box 201 a, Ottawa, ON, K1H 8L6, Canada.

Venous thromboembolic disease (VTE) is a common complication among patients with cancer. Data reporting risk of VTE among patients receiving chemotherapy for recurrent cancer compared to those with newly diagnosed tumors is scarce. Furthermore, it is unclear if thromboprophylaxis is beneficial and safe in these specific patient populations. Post-hoc analysis of the AVERT trial which was a randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind trial comparing apixaban therapy to placebo for VTE prophylaxis among cancer patients who were intermediate-to-high risk for VTE and who were initiating chemotherapy. The HRs for recurrent VTE and major bleeding episodes in patients with newly diagnosed and recurrent cancers were calculated using a Cox regression model controlling for age, gender, and center. Of the 563 included patients 469 and 93 patients had newly diagnosed and recurrent cancers, respectively. Patients with recurrent cancer have a higher risk of VTE (Hazard ratio (HR): 1.53 (95% CI 1.0 to 2.33; p = 0.047) and major bleeding episodes (HR 2.89 (95% CI 1.52 to 5.49; p = 0.001) compared to those with newly diagnosed cancer. In patients with newly diagnosed cancers, the use of apixaban was associated with a significantly lower risk of VTE (HR 0.45; 95% CI 0.27-0.76; p = 0.002) and a higher rate of major bleeding (HR 2.10; 95% CI 1.09-4.08; p = 0.028). In patients with recurrent cancer, apixaban was associated with a significant lower rate of VTE (HR 0.26; 95% CI 0.13-0.53; p < 0.001) without an associated significantly increased risk of major bleeding (HR 1.82; 95% CI 0.36-9.15; p = 0.466). Patients with recurrent cancer seem to be at higher risk of recurrent VTE and major bleeding complications compared to those with newly diagnosed tumors. Apixaban appears to be safe and effective in these patient populations.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11239-020-02317-yDOI Listing
October 2020

Biomarker-enhanced VTE risk stratification in ambulatory patients with cancer.

Thromb Res 2020 12 8;196:437-443. Epub 2020 Oct 8.

Department of Medicine, University of Ottawa, and the Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, Ottawa, Canada. Electronic address:

Introduction: Risk assessment models are used to stratify cancer patients according to their underlying risk of VTE. The CATS score has been shown to enhance VTE risk stratification as compared to the modified Khorana score by incorporating d-dimer and soluble p-selectin measurements. Our aim was to evaluate the performance of the CATS score with respect to VTE risk stratification.

Materials And Methods: Analysis of a subset of the AVERT trial population for whom biomarker data was available. All patients included in the AVERT trial were at increased risk of VTE based on a modified Khorana score of ≥2. Patients were stratified according to the modified Khorana score and CATS score. Kaplan-Meier analysis was used to calculate the 6-month cumulative probabilities of VTE.

Results: A total of 466 patients were included in the analysis, 229 and 237 patients in the placebo and apixaban arms, respectively. The 6-month cumulative probability of VTE among patients with a modified Khorana score ≥ 3 was 13% [95% CI 7 to 23], whereas it was 20% [95% CI 11 to 35] for patients with a CATS score ≥ 4. The absolute risk reduction achieved with apixaban VTE prophylaxis among patients with modified Khorana ≥2, modified Khorana ≥3 and CATS ≥4 was -5.9% [-10.9 to -0.8], -5.8% [-16.0 to 4.5] and -10.1% [-22.9 to 2.6], respectively. Apixaban VTE prophylaxis among patients with increasing modified Khorana or CATS scores was not associated with an increased risk of bleeding events.

Conclusions: The use of a CATS score of ≥4 to identify ambulatory cancer patients at very high risk of VTE could enhance the benefit/risk ratio achieved with apixaban VTE prophylaxis.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.thromres.2020.09.035DOI Listing
December 2020

Cross-Sectional Evaluation of Humoral Responses against SARS-CoV-2 Spike.

Cell Rep Med 2020 Oct 30;1(7):100126. Epub 2020 Sep 30.

Centre de Recherche du CHUM, Montreal, QC H2X 0A9, Canada.

SARS-CoV-2 is responsible for the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, infecting millions of people and causing hundreds of thousands of deaths. The Spike glycoproteins of SARS-CoV-2 mediate viral entry and are the main targets for neutralizing antibodies. Understanding the antibody response directed against SARS-CoV-2 is crucial for the development of vaccine, therapeutic, and public health interventions. Here, we perform a cross-sectional study on 106 SARS-CoV-2-infected individuals to evaluate humoral responses against SARS-CoV-2 Spike. Most infected individuals elicit anti-Spike antibodies within 2 weeks of the onset of symptoms. The levels of receptor binding domain (RBD)-specific immunoglobulin G (IgG) persist over time, and the levels of anti-RBD IgM decrease after symptom resolution. Although most individuals develop neutralizing antibodies within 2 weeks of infection, the level of neutralizing activity is significantly decreased over time. Our results highlight the importance of studying the persistence of neutralizing activity upon natural SARS-CoV-2 infection.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.xcrm.2020.100126DOI Listing
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7524645PMC
October 2020

D-Dimer Enhances Risk-Targeted Thromboprophylaxis in Ambulatory Patients with Cancer.

Oncologist 2020 12 12;25(12):1075-1083. Epub 2020 Oct 12.

Department of Medicine, Ottawa Hospital Research Institute at the University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Canada.

Background: Thromboprophylaxis for ambulatory patients with cancer is effective, although uncertainties remain on who should be targeted. Using D-dimer values from individuals enrolled to the AVERT trial, we sought to identify and validate a more efficient venous thromboembolism (VTE) risk threshold for thromboprophylaxis.

Materials And Methods: The AVERT trial compared thromboprophylaxis with apixaban with placebo among patients with cancer with a Khorana Risk Score ≥2. The D-dimer measured at randomization was used to calculate an individualized 6-month VTE risk using the validated CATScore. A modified intention-to-treat analysis was used to assess efficacy (VTE) and safety (major and overall bleeding) in the (a) complete cohort and (b) ≥8% and < 8% 6-month VTE risk thresholds.

Results: Five hundred seventy-four patients were randomized in the AVERT trial; 466 (81%) with baseline D-dimer were included in the study. Two hundred thirty-seven subjects received apixaban; 229 received placebo. In the complete cohort, there were 13 (5.5%) VTE events in the apixaban arm compared with 26 (11.4%) events in the placebo arm (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] 0.49 [0.25-0.95], p < .05). Number needed to treat (NNT) to prevent one VTE = 17. Eighty-two (35%) and 72 (31%) patients in the apixaban and placebo arms, respectively, had a 6-month VTE risk ≥8%. In this subgroup, 7 (8.4%) VTE events occurred with apixaban and 19 (26.3%) events with placebo (aHR 0.33 [0.14-0.81], p < .05), NNT = 6. Individuals with a VTE risk <8% derived no benefit from apixaban thromboprophylaxis (aHR 0.89 [0.30-2.65), p = .84). Increased rates of overall bleeding were observed with apixaban in both the complete (aHR 2.11 [1.09-4.09], p < .05) and ≥ 8% predicted risk cohorts (aHR 2.87 [0.91-9.13], p = .07).

Conclusion: A 6-month VTE risk threshold of ≥8% increases the efficiency of risk-targeted thromboprophylaxis in ambulatory patients with cancer.

Implications For Practice: Ambulatory patients with cancer receiving chemotherapy have an increased risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE). A Khorana Risk Score (KRS) ≥2 is currently the suggested threshold for thromboprophylaxis. Using baseline D-dimer values from individuals enrolled to the AVERT trial, this retrospective validation study identifies a 6-month VTE risk of ≥8% as a more efficient threshold for thromboprophylaxis. At this threshold, the number needed to treat to prevent one VTE is 6, compared with 17 when using a KRS ≥2. Conversely, individuals with a predicted risk of <8% derive no clinical benefit from thromboprophylaxis. Future prospective studies should validate this threshold for outpatient thromboprophylaxis.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/onco.13540DOI Listing
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7938400PMC
December 2020

Use of direct oral anticoagulants in patients with thrombotic antiphospholipid syndrome: Guidance from the Scientific and Standardization Committee of the International Society on Thrombosis and Haemostasis.

J Thromb Haemost 2020 09;18(9):2126-2137

Coagulation Laboratory, Department of Diagnostic Sciences, Ghent University Hospital, Ghent, Belgium.

Clarity and guidance is required with regard to the use of direct oral anticoagulants in antiphospholipid syndrome (APS) patients, within the confines of the recent European Medicines Agency recommendations, discrepant recommendations in other international guidelines and the limited evidence base. To address this, the Lupus Anticoagulant/Antiphospholipid Antibodies Scientific and Standardization Committee (SSC) chair and co-chairs together with SSC Control of Anticoagulation members propose guidance for healthcare professionals to help them manage APS patients. Uncertainty in this field will be addressed. This guidance will also serve as a call and focus for research.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/jth.14935DOI Listing
September 2020

Effect of Hydrocortisone on Mortality and Organ Support in Patients With Severe COVID-19: The REMAP-CAP COVID-19 Corticosteroid Domain Randomized Clinical Trial.

Authors:
Derek C Angus Lennie Derde Farah Al-Beidh Djillali Annane Yaseen Arabi Abigail Beane Wilma van Bentum-Puijk Lindsay Berry Zahra Bhimani Marc Bonten Charlotte Bradbury Frank Brunkhorst Meredith Buxton Adrian Buzgau Allen C Cheng Menno de Jong Michelle Detry Lise Estcourt Mark Fitzgerald Herman Goossens Cameron Green Rashan Haniffa Alisa M Higgins Christopher Horvat Sebastiaan J Hullegie Peter Kruger Francois Lamontagne Patrick R Lawler Kelsey Linstrum Edward Litton Elizabeth Lorenzi John Marshall Daniel McAuley Anna McGlothin Shay McGuinness Bryan McVerry Stephanie Montgomery Paul Mouncey Srinivas Murthy Alistair Nichol Rachael Parke Jane Parker Kathryn Rowan Ashish Sanil Marlene Santos Christina Saunders Christopher Seymour Anne Turner Frank van de Veerdonk Balasubramanian Venkatesh Ryan Zarychanski Scott Berry Roger J Lewis Colin McArthur Steven A Webb Anthony C Gordon Farah Al-Beidh Derek Angus Djillali Annane Yaseen Arabi Wilma van Bentum-Puijk Scott Berry Abigail Beane Zahra Bhimani Marc Bonten Charlotte Bradbury Frank Brunkhorst Meredith Buxton Allen Cheng Menno De Jong Lennie Derde Lise Estcourt Herman Goossens Anthony Gordon Cameron Green Rashan Haniffa Francois Lamontagne Patrick Lawler Edward Litton John Marshall Colin McArthur Daniel McAuley Shay McGuinness Bryan McVerry Stephanie Montgomery Paul Mouncey Srinivas Murthy Alistair Nichol Rachael Parke Kathryn Rowan Christopher Seymour Anne Turner Frank van de Veerdonk Steve Webb Ryan Zarychanski Lewis Campbell Andrew Forbes David Gattas Stephane Heritier Lisa Higgins Peter Kruger Sandra Peake Jeffrey Presneill Ian Seppelt Tony Trapani Paul Young Sean Bagshaw Nick Daneman Niall Ferguson Cheryl Misak Marlene Santos Sebastiaan Hullegie Mathias Pletz Gernot Rohde Kathy Rowan Brian Alexander Kim Basile Timothy Girard Christopher Horvat David Huang Kelsey Linstrum Jennifer Vates Richard Beasley Robert Fowler Steve McGloughlin Susan Morpeth David Paterson Bala Venkatesh Tim Uyeki Kenneth Baillie Eamon Duffy Rob Fowler Thomas Hills Katrina Orr Asad Patanwala Steve Tong Mihai Netea Shilesh Bihari Marc Carrier Dean Fergusson Ewan Goligher Ghady Haidar Beverley Hunt Anand Kumar Mike Laffan Patrick Lawless Sylvain Lother Peter McCallum Saskia Middeldopr Zoe McQuilten Matthew Neal John Pasi Roger Schutgens Simon Stanworth Alexis Turgeon Alexandra Weissman Neill Adhikari Matthew Anstey Emily Brant Angelique de Man Francois Lamonagne Marie-Helene Masse Andrew Udy Donald Arnold Phillipe Begin Richard Charlewood Michael Chasse Mark Coyne Jamie Cooper James Daly Iain Gosbell Heli Harvala-Simmonds Tom Hills Sheila MacLennan David Menon John McDyer Nicole Pridee David Roberts Manu Shankar-Hari Helen Thomas Alan Tinmouth Darrell Triulzi Tim Walsh Erica Wood Carolyn Calfee Cecilia O’Kane Murali Shyamsundar Pratik Sinha Taylor Thompson Ian Young Shailesh Bihari Carol Hodgson John Laffey Danny McAuley Neil Orford Ary Neto Michelle Detry Mark Fitzgerald Roger Lewis Anna McGlothlin Ashish Sanil Christina Saunders Lindsay Berry Elizabeth Lorenzi Eliza Miller Vanessa Singh Claire Zammit Wilma van Bentum Puijk Wietske Bouwman Yara Mangindaan Lorraine Parker Svenja Peters Ilse Rietveld Kik Raymakers Radhika Ganpat Nicole Brillinger Rene Markgraf Kate Ainscough Kathy Brickell Aisha Anjum Janis-Best Lane Alvin Richards-Belle Michelle Saull Daisy Wiley Julian Bion Jason Connor Simon Gates Victoria Manax Tom van der Poll John Reynolds Marloes van Beurden Evelien Effelaar Joost Schotsman Craig Boyd Cain Harland Audrey Shearer Jess Wren Giles Clermont William Garrard Kyle Kalchthaler Andrew King Daniel Ricketts Salim Malakoutis Oscar Marroquin Edvin Music Kevin Quinn Heidi Cate Karen Pearson Joanne Collins Jane Hanson Penny Williams Shane Jackson Adeeba Asghar Sarah Dyas Mihaela Sutu Sheenagh Murphy Dawn Williamson Nhlanhla Mguni Alison Potter David Porter Jayne Goodwin Clare Rook Susie Harrison Hannah Williams Hilary Campbell Kaatje Lomme James Williamson Jonathan Sheffield Willian van’t Hoff Phobe McCracken Meredith Young Jasmin Board Emma Mart Cameron Knott Julie Smith Catherine Boschert Julia Affleck Mahesh Ramanan Ramsy D’Souza Kelsey Pateman Arif Shakih Winston Cheung Mark Kol Helen Wong Asim Shah Atul Wagh Joanne Simpson Graeme Duke Peter Chan Brittney Cartner Stephanie Hunter Russell Laver Tapaswi Shrestha Adrian Regli Annamaria Pellicano James McCullough Mandy Tallott Nikhil Kumar Rakshit Panwar Gail Brinkerhoff Cassandra Koppen Federica Cazzola Matthew Brain Sarah Mineall Roy Fischer Vishwanath Biradar Natalie Soar Hayden White Kristen Estensen Lynette Morrison Joanne Smith Melanie Cooper Monash Health Yahya Shehabi Wisam Al-Bassam Amanda Hulley Christina Whitehead Julie Lowrey Rebecca Gresha James Walsham Jason Meyer Meg Harward Ellen Venz Patricia Williams Catherine Kurenda Kirsy Smith Margaret Smith Rebecca Garcia Deborah Barge Deborah Byrne Kathleen Byrne Alana Driscoll Louise Fortune Pierre Janin Elizabeth Yarad Naomi Hammond Frances Bass Angela Ashelford Sharon Waterson Steve Wedd Robert McNamara Heidi Buhr Jennifer Coles Sacha Schweikert Bradley Wibrow Rashmi Rauniyar Erina Myers Ed Fysh Ashlish Dawda Bhaumik Mevavala Ed Litton Janet Ferrier Priya Nair Hergen Buscher Claire Reynolds John Santamaria Leanne Barbazza Jennifer Homes Roger Smith Lauren Murray Jane Brailsford Loretta Forbes Teena Maguire Vasanth Mariappa Judith Smith Scott Simpson Matthew Maiden Allsion Bone Michelle Horton Tania Salerno Martin Sterba Wenli Geng Pieter Depuydt Jan De Waele Liesbet De Bus Jan Fierens Stephanie Bracke Brenda Reeve William Dechert Michaël Chassé François Martin Carrier Dounia Boumahni Fatna Benettaib Ali Ghamraoui David Bellemare Ève Cloutier Charles Francoeur François Lamontagne Frédérick D’Aragon Elaine Carbonneau Julie Leblond Gloria Vazquez-Grande Nicole Marten Maggie Wilson Martin Albert Karim Serri Alexandros Cavayas Mathilde Duplaix Virginie Williams Bram Rochwerg Tim Karachi Simon Oczkowski John Centofanti Tina Millen Erick Duan Jennifer Tsang Lisa Patterson Shane English Irene Watpool Rebecca Porteous Sydney Miezitis Lauralyn McIntyre Laurent Brochard Karen Burns Gyan Sandhu Imrana Khalid Alexandra Binnie Elizabeth Powell Alexandra McMillan Tracy Luk Noah Aref Zdravko Andric Sabina Cviljevic Renata Đimoti Marija Zapalac Gordan Mirković Bruno Baršić Marko Kutleša Viktor Kotarski Ana Vujaklija Brajković Jakša Babel Helena Sever Lidija Dragija Ira Kušan Suvi Vaara Leena Pettilä Jonna Heinonen Anne Kuitunen Sari Karlsson Annukka Vahtera Heikki Kiiski Sanna Ristimäki Amine Azaiz Cyril Charron Mathieu Godement Guillaume Geri Antoine Vieillard-Baron Franck Pourcine Mehran Monchi David Luis Romain Mercier Anne Sagnier Nathalie Verrier Cecile Caplin Shidasp Siami Christelle Aparicio Sarah Vautier Asma Jeblaoui Muriel Fartoukh Laura Courtin Vincent Labbe Cécile Leparco Grégoire Muller Mai-Anh Nay Toufik Kamel Dalila Benzekri Sophie Jacquier Emmanuelle Mercier Delphine Chartier Charlotte Salmon PierreFrançois Dequin Francis Schneider Guillaume Morel Sylvie L’Hotellier Julio Badie Fernando Daniel Berdaguer Sylvain Malfroy Chaouki Mezher Charlotte Bourgoin Bruno Megarbane Sebastian Voicu Nicolas Deye Isabelle Malissin Laetitia Sutterlin Christophe Guitton Cédric Darreau Mickaël Landais Nicolas Chudeau Alain Robert Pierre Moine Nicholas Heming Virginie Maxime Isabelle Bossard Tiphaine Barbarin Nicholier Gwenhael Colin Vanessa Zinzoni Natacham Maquigneau André Finn Gabriele Kreß Uwe Hoff Carl Friedrich Hinrichs Jens Nee Mathias Pletz Stefan Hagel Juliane Ankert Steffi Kolanos Frank Bloos Sirak Petros Bastian Pasieka Kevin Kunz Peter Appelt Bianka Schütze Stefan Kluge Axel Nierhaus Dominik Jarczak Kevin Roedl Dirk Weismann Anna Frey Vivantes Klinikum Neukölln Lorenz Reill Michael Distler Astrid Maselli János Bélteczki István Magyar Ágnes Fazekas Sándor Kovács Viktória Szőke Gábor Szigligeti János Leszkoven Daniel Collins Patrick Breen Stephen Frohlich Ruth Whelan Bairbre McNicholas Michael Scully Siobhan Casey Maeve Kernan Peter Doran Michael O’Dywer Michelle Smyth Leanne Hayes Oscar Hoiting Marco Peters Els Rengers Mirjam Evers Anton Prinssen Jeroen Bosch Ziekenhuis Koen Simons Wim Rozendaal F Polderman P de Jager M Moviat A Paling A Salet Emma Rademaker Anna Linda Peters E de Jonge J Wigbers E Guilder M Butler Keri-Anne Cowdrey Lynette Newby Yan Chen Catherine Simmonds Rachael McConnochie Jay Ritzema Carter Seton Henderson Kym Van Der Heyden Jan Mehrtens Tony Williams Alex Kazemi Rima Song Vivian Lai Dinu Girijadevi Robert Everitt Robert Russell Danielle Hacking Ulrike Buehner Erin Williams Troy Browne Kate Grimwade Jennifer Goodson Owen Keet Owen Callender Robert Martynoga Kara Trask Amelia Butler Livia Schischka Chelsea Young Eden Lesona Shaanti Olatunji Yvonne Robertson Nuno José Teodoro Amaro dos Santos Catorze Tiago Nuno Alfaro de Lima Pereira Lucilia Maria Neves Pessoa Ricardo Manuel Castro Ferreira Joana Margarida Pereira Sousa Bastos Simin Aysel Florescu Delia Stanciu Miahela Florentina Zaharia Alma Gabriela Kosa Daniel Codreanu Yaseen Marabi Eman Al Qasim Mohamned Moneer Hagazy Lolowa Al Swaidan Hatim Arishi Rosana Muñoz-Bermúdez Judith Marin-Corral Anna Salazar Degracia Francisco Parrilla Gómez Maria Isabel Mateo López Jorge Rodriguez Fernandez Sheila Cárcel Fernández Rosario Carmona Flores Rafael León López Carmen de la Fuente Martos Angela Allan Petra Polgarova Neda Farahi Stephen McWilliam Daniel Hawcutt Laura Rad Laura O’Malley Jennifer Whitbread Olivia Kelsall Laura Wild Jessica Thrush Hannah Wood Karen Austin Adrian Donnelly Martin Kelly Sinéad O’Kane Declan McClintock Majella Warnock Paul Johnston Linda Jude Gallagher Clare Mc Goldrick Moyra Mc Master Anna Strzelecka Rajeev Jha Michael Kalogirou Christine Ellis Vinodh Krishnamurthy Vashish Deelchand Jon Silversides Peter McGuigan Kathryn Ward Aisling O’Neill Stephanie Finn Barbara Phillips Dee Mullan Laura Oritz-Ruiz de Gordoa Matthew Thomas Katie Sweet Lisa Grimmer Rebekah Johnson Jez Pinnell Matt Robinson Lisa Gledhill Tracy Wood Matt Morgan Jade Cole Helen Hill Michelle Davies David Antcliffe Maie Templeton Roceld Rojo Phoebe Coghlan Joanna Smee Euan Mackay Jon Cort Amanda Whileman Thomas Spencer Nick Spittle Vidya Kasipandian Amit Patel Suzanne Allibone Roman Mary Genetu Mohamed Ramali Alison Ghosh Peter Bamford Emily London Kathryn Cawley Maria Faulkner Helen Jeffrey Tim Smith Chris Brewer Jane Gregory James Limb Amanda Cowton Julie O’Brien Nikitas Nikitas Colin Wells Liana Lankester Mark Pulletz Patricia Williams Jenny Birch Sophie Wiseman Sarah Horton Ana Alegria Salah Turki Tarek Elsefi Nikki Crisp Louise Allen Iain McCullagh Philip Robinson Carole Hays Maite Babio-Galan Hannah Stevenson Divya Khare Meredith Pinder Selvin Selvamoni Amitha Gopinath Richard Pugh Daniel Menzies Callum Mackay Elizabeth Allan Gwyneth Davies Kathryn Puxty Claire McCue Susanne Cathcart Naomi Hickey Jane Ireland Hakeem Yusuff Graziella Isgro Chris Brightling Michelle Bourne Michelle Craner Malcolm Watters Rachel Prout Louisa Davies Suzannah Pegler Lynsey Kyeremeh Gill Arbane Karen Wilson Linda Gomm Federica Francia Stephen Brett Sonia Sousa Arias Rebecca Elin Hall Joanna Budd Charlotte Small Janine Birch Emma Collins Jeremy Henning Stephen Bonner Keith Hugill Emanuel Cirstea Dean Wilkinson Michal Karlikowski Helen Sutherland Elva Wilhelmsen Jane Woods Julie North Dhinesh Sundaran Laszlo Hollos Susan Coburn Joanne Walsh Margaret Turns Phil Hopkins John Smith Harriet Noble Maria Theresa Depante Emma Clarey Shondipon Laha Mark Verlander Alexandra Williams Abby Huckle Andrew Hall Jill Cooke Caroline Gardiner-Hill Carolyn Maloney Hafiz Qureshi Neil Flint Sarah Nicholson Sara Southin Andrew Nicholson Barbara Borgatta Ian Turner-Bone Amie Reddy Laura Wilding Loku Chamara Warnapura Ronan Agno Sathianathan David Golden Ciaran Hart Jo Jones Jonathan Bannard-Smith Joanne Henry Katie Birchall Fiona Pomeroy Rachael Quayle Arystarch Makowski Beata Misztal Iram Ahmed Thyra KyereDiabour Kevin Naiker Richard Stewart Esther Mwaura Louise Mew Lynn Wren Felicity Willams Richard Innes Patricia Doble Joanne Hutter Charmaine Shovelton Benjamin Plumb Tamas Szakmany Vincent Hamlyn Nancy Hawkins Sarah Lewis Amanda Dell Shameer Gopal Saibal Ganguly Andrew Smallwood Nichola Harris Stella Metherell Juan Martin Lazaro Tabitha Newman Simon Fletcher Jurgens Nortje Deirdre Fottrell-Gould Georgina Randell Mohsin Zaman Einas Elmahi Andrea Jones Kathryn Hall Gary Mills Kim Ryalls Helen Bowler Jas Sall Richard Bourne Zoe Borrill Tracey Duncan Thomas Lamb Joanne Shaw Claire Fox Jeronimo Moreno Cuesta Kugan Xavier Dharam Purohit Munzir Elhassan Dhanalakshmi Bakthavatsalam Matthew Rowland Paula Hutton Archana Bashyal Neil Davidson Clare Hird Manish Chhablani Gunjan Phalod Amy Kirkby Simon Archer Kimberley Netherton Henrik Reschreiter Julie Camsooksai Sarah Patch Sarah Jenkins David Pogson Steve Rose Zoe Daly Lutece Brimfield Helen Claridge Dhruv Parekh Colin Bergin Michelle Bates Joanne Dasgin Christopher McGhee Malcolm Sim Sophie Kennedy Hay Steven Henderson Mandeep-Kaur Phull Abbas Zaidi Tatiana Pogreban Lace Paulyn Rosaroso Daniel Harvey Benjamin Lowe Megan Meredith Lucy Ryan Anil Hormis Rachel Walker Dawn Collier Sarah Kimpton Susan Oakley Kevin Rooney Natalie Rodden Emma Hughes Nicola Thomson Deborah McGlynn Andrew Walden Nicola Jacques Holly Coles Emma Tilney Emma Vowell Martin Schuster-Bruce Sally Pitts Rebecca Miln Laura Purandare Luke Vamplew Michael Spivey Sarah Bean Karen Burt Lorraine Moore Christopher Day Charly Gibson Elizabeth Gordon Letizia Zitter Samantha Keenan Evelyn Baker Shiney Cherian Sean Cutler Anna Roynon-Reed Kate Harrington Ajay Raithatha Kris Bauchmuller Norfaizan Ahmad Irina Grecu Dawn Trodd Jane Martin Caroline Wrey Brown Ana-Marie Arias Thomas Craven David Hope Jo Singleton Sarah Clark Nicola Rae Ingeborg Welters David Oliver Hamilton Karen Williams Victoria Waugh David Shaw Zudin Puthucheary Timothy Martin Filipa Santos Ruzena Uddin Alastair Somerville Kate Colette Tatham Shaman Jhanji Ethel Black Arnold Dela Rosa Ryan Howle Redmond Tully Andrew Drummond Joy Dearden Jennifer Philbin Sheila Munt Alain Vuylsteke Charles Chan Saji Victor Ramprasad Matsa Minerva Gellamucho Ben Creagh-Brown Joe Tooley Laura Montague Fiona De Beaux Laetitia Bullman Ian Kersiake Carrie Demetriou Sarah Mitchard Lidia Ramos Katie White Phil Donnison Maggie Johns Ruth Casey Lehentha Mattocks Sarah Salisbury Paul Dark Andrew Claxton Danielle McLachlan Kathryn Slevin Stephanie Lee Jonathan Hulme Sibet Joseph Fiona Kinney Ho Jan Senya Aneta Oborska Abdul Kayani Bernard Hadebe Rajalakshmi Orath Prabakaran Lesley Nichols Matt Thomas Ruth Worner Beverley Faulkner Emma Gendall Kati Hayes Colin Hamilton-Davies Carmen Chan Celina Mfuko Hakam Abbass Vineela Mandadapu Susannah Leaver Daniel Forton Kamal Patel Elankumaran Paramasivam Matthew Powell Richard Gould Elizabeth Wilby Clare Howcroft Dorota Banach Ziortza Fernández de Pinedo Artaraz Leilani Cabreros Ian White Maria Croft Nicky Holland Rita Pereira Ahmed Zaki David Johnson Matthew Jackson Hywel Garrard Vera Juhaz Alistair Roy Anthony Rostron Lindsey Woods Sarah Cornell Suresh Pillai Rachel Harford Tabitha Rees Helen Ivatt Ajay Sundara Raman Miriam Davey Kelvin Lee Russell Barber Manish Chablani Farooq Brohi Vijay Jagannathan Michele Clark Sarah Purvis Bill Wetherill Ahilanandan Dushianthan Rebecca Cusack Kim de Courcy-Golder Simon Smith Susan Jackson Ben Attwood Penny Parsons Valerie Page Xiao Bei Zhao Deepali Oza Jonathan Rhodes Tom Anderson Sheila Morris Charlotte Xia Le Tai Amy Thomas Alexandra Keen Stephen Digby Nicholas Cowley Laura Wild David Southern Harsha Reddy Andy Campbell Claire Watkins Sara Smuts Omar Touma Nicky Barnes Peter Alexander Tim Felton Susan Ferguson Katharine Sellers Joanne Bradley-Potts David Yates Isobel Birkinshaw Kay Kell Nicola Marshall Lisa Carr-Knott Charlotte Summers

JAMA 2020 10;324(13):1317-1329

Division of Anaesthetics, Pain Medicine and Intensive Care Medicine, Department of Surgery and Cancer, Imperial College London and Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust, London, United Kingdom.

Importance: Evidence regarding corticosteroid use for severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is limited.

Objective: To determine whether hydrocortisone improves outcome for patients with severe COVID-19.

Design, Setting, And Participants: An ongoing adaptive platform trial testing multiple interventions within multiple therapeutic domains, for example, antiviral agents, corticosteroids, or immunoglobulin. Between March 9 and June 17, 2020, 614 adult patients with suspected or confirmed COVID-19 were enrolled and randomized within at least 1 domain following admission to an intensive care unit (ICU) for respiratory or cardiovascular organ support at 121 sites in 8 countries. Of these, 403 were randomized to open-label interventions within the corticosteroid domain. The domain was halted after results from another trial were released. Follow-up ended August 12, 2020.

Interventions: The corticosteroid domain randomized participants to a fixed 7-day course of intravenous hydrocortisone (50 mg or 100 mg every 6 hours) (n = 143), a shock-dependent course (50 mg every 6 hours when shock was clinically evident) (n = 152), or no hydrocortisone (n = 108).

Main Outcomes And Measures: The primary end point was organ support-free days (days alive and free of ICU-based respiratory or cardiovascular support) within 21 days, where patients who died were assigned -1 day. The primary analysis was a bayesian cumulative logistic model that included all patients enrolled with severe COVID-19, adjusting for age, sex, site, region, time, assignment to interventions within other domains, and domain and intervention eligibility. Superiority was defined as the posterior probability of an odds ratio greater than 1 (threshold for trial conclusion of superiority >99%).

Results: After excluding 19 participants who withdrew consent, there were 384 patients (mean age, 60 years; 29% female) randomized to the fixed-dose (n = 137), shock-dependent (n = 146), and no (n = 101) hydrocortisone groups; 379 (99%) completed the study and were included in the analysis. The mean age for the 3 groups ranged between 59.5 and 60.4 years; most patients were male (range, 70.6%-71.5%); mean body mass index ranged between 29.7 and 30.9; and patients receiving mechanical ventilation ranged between 50.0% and 63.5%. For the fixed-dose, shock-dependent, and no hydrocortisone groups, respectively, the median organ support-free days were 0 (IQR, -1 to 15), 0 (IQR, -1 to 13), and 0 (-1 to 11) days (composed of 30%, 26%, and 33% mortality rates and 11.5, 9.5, and 6 median organ support-free days among survivors). The median adjusted odds ratio and bayesian probability of superiority were 1.43 (95% credible interval, 0.91-2.27) and 93% for fixed-dose hydrocortisone, respectively, and were 1.22 (95% credible interval, 0.76-1.94) and 80% for shock-dependent hydrocortisone compared with no hydrocortisone. Serious adverse events were reported in 4 (3%), 5 (3%), and 1 (1%) patients in the fixed-dose, shock-dependent, and no hydrocortisone groups, respectively.

Conclusions And Relevance: Among patients with severe COVID-19, treatment with a 7-day fixed-dose course of hydrocortisone or shock-dependent dosing of hydrocortisone, compared with no hydrocortisone, resulted in 93% and 80% probabilities of superiority with regard to the odds of improvement in organ support-free days within 21 days. However, the trial was stopped early and no treatment strategy met prespecified criteria for statistical superiority, precluding definitive conclusions.

Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02735707.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1001/jama.2020.17022DOI Listing
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7489418PMC
October 2020

Anti-Thrombotic Therapy to Ameliorate Complications of COVID-19 (ATTACC): Study design and methodology for an international, adaptive Bayesian randomized controlled trial.

Clin Trials 2020 10 20;17(5):491-500. Epub 2020 Aug 20.

Max Rady Faculty of Health Sciences, Max Rady College of Medicine, Department of Internal Medicine, University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, MB, Canada.

Background: Mortality from COVID-19 is high among hospitalized patients and effective therapeutics are lacking. Hypercoagulability, thrombosis and hyperinflammation occur in COVID-19 and may contribute to severe complications. Therapeutic anticoagulation may improve clinical outcomes through anti-thrombotic, anti-inflammatory and anti-viral mechanisms. Our primary objective is to evaluate whether therapeutic-dose anticoagulation with low-molecular-weight heparin or unfractionated heparin prevents mechanical ventilation and/or death in patients hospitalized with COVID-19 compared to usual care.

Methods: An international, open-label, adaptive randomized controlled trial. Using a Bayesian framework, the trial will declare results as soon as pre-specified posterior probabilities for superiority, futility, or harm are reached. The trial uses response-adaptive randomization to maximize the probability that patients will receive the more beneficial treatment approach, as treatment effect information accumulates within the trial. By leveraging a common data safety monitoring board and pooling data with a second similar international Bayesian adaptive trial (REMAP-COVID anticoagulation domain), treatment efficacy and safety will be evaluated as efficiently as possible. The primary outcome is an ordinal endpoint with three possible outcomes based on the worst status of each patient through day 30: no requirement for invasive mechanical ventilation, invasive mechanical ventilation or death.

Conclusion: Using an adaptive trial design, the Anti-Thrombotic Therapy To Ameliorate Complications of COVID-19 trial will establish whether therapeutic anticoagulation can reduce mortality and/or avoid the need for mechanical ventilation in patients hospitalized with COVID-19. Leveraging existing networks to recruit sites will increase enrollment and mitigate enrollment risk in sites with declining COVID-19 cases.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1740774520943846DOI Listing
October 2020

Biomarkers in cancer patients at risk for venous thromboembolism: data from the AVERT study.

Thromb Res 2020 07;191 Suppl 1:S31-S36

Department of Medicine, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC, USA; Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC, USA. Electronic address:

Background: The mechanisms surrounding cancer-associated venous thromboembolism (VTE) are not well characterized. AVERT, a randomized placebo controlled thromboprophylaxis study in ambulatory cancer patients, provides a unique opportunity to gain insights into thrombotic mechanism(s).

Methods: All available citrated platelet-free plasma samples collected at the point of randomization from individuals enrolled in the AVERT study were evaluated for the expression of D-dimer, soluble P-selectin (sP- selectin), active plasminogen activator inhibitor 1 (aPAI-1), clot lysis time (CLT) and activated factor XIa-C1 inhibitor complex (FXIa-C1). We compared the differential expression of sP-selectin, aPAI-1, CLT and FXIa-C1 among individual tumor types with normal controls. We evaluated the impact of disease type (hematologic versus solid organ malignancy) and stage (metastatic versus non-metastatic) on individual biomarker expression.

Results: We included 449 AVERT participants in this analysis. Baseline expression of the selected thrombosis biomarkers differed significantly by individual tumor type compared with normal controls. Levels of aPAI-1, CLT, FXIa-C1 and sP-selectin were significantly elevated in individuals with lymphoma compared to individuals with non-metastatic solid organ malignancies (p<0.05). Individuals with metastatic solid organ disease had elevated levels of D-dimer and sP-selectin compared to those with non-metastatic disease (p<0.05).

Conclusion: Among a cohort of ambulatory patients at intermediate to high risk of VTE, these exploratory findings suggest that baseline activation of coagulation and fibrinolysis pathways vary significantly by tumor type and disease stage.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0049-3848(20)30394-7DOI Listing
July 2020

Screening for Occult Cancer in Patients with Venous Thromboembolism.

J Clin Med 2020 Jul 27;9(8). Epub 2020 Jul 27.

Division of Hematology, Department of Medicine, Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, General Campus, University of Ottawa, 501 Smyth Road, Box 201A, Ottawa, ON K1H 8L6, Canada.

Unprovoked venous thromboembolism (VTE) can be the first sign of an occult cancer. The rate of occult cancer detection within 12 months of a newly diagnosed unprovoked VTE is approximately 5%. Therefore, it is appealing for clinicians to screen patients with unprovoked VTE for occult cancer, as it could potentially decrease cancer-related mortality and morbidity and improve quality of life. However, several randomized controlled trials have failed to report that an extensive occult cancer screening strategy (e.g., computed tomography of the abdomen/pelvis) is improving these patient-important outcomes. Therefore, clinical guidance documents suggest that patients should only undergo a limited screening strategy including a thorough medical history, physical examination, basic laboratory investigations (i.e., complete blood count and liver function tests), chest X-ray, as well as age- and gender-specific cancer screening (breast, cervical, colon and prostate). More intensive occult cancer screening including additional investigations is not routinely recommended. This narrative review will focus on the epidemiology, timing, and evidence regarding occult cancer detection in patients with unprovoked VTE.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/jcm9082389DOI Listing
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7465888PMC
July 2020