<b>PURPOSE: </b>Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is common in cancer patients. Evidence has suggested that low molecular weight heparin (LMWH) might improve survival in patients with cancer by preventing both VTE and the progression of metastases. No trial in a single cancer type has been powered to demonstrate a clinically significant survival difference. The aim of this trial was to investigate this question in patients with lung cancer.<b>Patients and METHODS: </b>We conducted a multicenter, open-label, randomized trial to evaluate the addition of a primary prophylactic dose of LMWH for 24 weeks to standard treatment in patients with newly diagnosed lung cancer of any stage and histology. The primary outcome was 1-year survival. Secondary outcomes included metastasis-free survival, VTE-free survival, toxicity, and quality of life.<b>RESULTS: </b>For this trial, 2,202 patients were randomly assigned to the two treatment arms over 4 years. The trial did not reach its intended number of events for the primary analysis (2,047 deaths), and data were analyzed after 2,013 deaths after discussion with the independent data monitoring committee. There was no evidence of a difference in overall or metastasis-free survival between the two arms (hazard ratio [HR], 1.01; 95% CI, 0.93 to 1.10; P = .814; and HR, 0.99; 95% CI, 0.91 to 1.08; P = .864, respectively). There was a reduction in the risk of VTE from 9.7% to 5.5% (HR, 0.57; 95% CI, 0.42 to 0.79; P = .001) in the LMWH arm and no difference in major bleeding events but evidence of an increase in the composite of major and clinically relevant nonmajor bleeding in the LMWH arm.<b>CONCLUSION: </b>LMWH did not improve overall survival in the patients with lung cancer in this trial. A significant reduction in VTE is associated with an increase in clinically relevant nonmajor bleeding. Strategies to target those at greatest risk of VTE are warranted.
PURPOSE: Advanced pancreatic cancer (APC), in addition to its high mortality, accounts for the highest rates of venous thromboembolic events (VTEs). Enoxaparin, a low-molecular weight heparin, is effective in prevention and treatment of VTEs. Some small studies have indicated that this benefit might extend to patients with cancer.
PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with histologically proven APC were randomly assigned to ambulant first-line chemotherapy and prophylactic use of enoxaparin or chemotherapy alone to investigate the probable reduction in symptomatic VTEs and the impact on survival.
RESULTS: A total of 312 patients were recruited as one of the protocol end points was reached. Within the first 3 months, the numbers of symptomatic VTEs were as follows: 15 of 152 patients in the observation group and two of 160 patients in the enoxaparin group (hazard ratio [HR], 0.12; 95% CI, 0.03 to 0.52; χ(2) P = .001). The numbers of major bleeding events were as follows: five of 152 patients in the observation arm and seven of 160 patients in the enoxaparin arm (HR, 1.4; 95% CI, 0.35 to 3.72; χ(2) P = 1.0). Overall cumulative incidence rates of symptomatic VTEs were 15.1% (observation) and 6.4% (enoxaparin; HR, 0.40; 95% CI, 0.19 to 0.83; P = .01). Progression-free (HR, 1.06; 95% CI, 0.84 to 1.32; P = .64) and overall survival (HR, 1.01; 95% CI, 0.87 to 1.38; P = .44) did not differ between groups.
CONCLUSION: This study demonstrates the high efficacy and feasibility of primary pharmacologic prevention of symptomatic VTEs in outpatients with APC. Treatment efficacy was not affected by simultaneous treatment with enoxaparin in this trial setting.
Elevated levels of circulating tissue factor-bearing microparticles (TFMP) have been associated with an increased risk of developing venous thromboembolism (VTE) in cancer patients. We performed a randomized phase II study to evaluate the cumulative incidence of VTE in advanced cancer patients with lower levels of TFMP not receiving thromboprophylaxis and those with higher levels of circulating TFMP randomized to enoxaparin or observation. The cumulative incidence of VTE at 2 months in the higher TFMP group randomized to enoxaparin (N = 23) was 5·6% while the higher TFMP group observation arm (N = 11) was 27·3% (Gray test P = 0·06). The cumulative incidence of VTE in the low TFMP was 7·2% (N = 32). No major haemorrhages were observed in the enoxaparin arm. The median survival for patients with higher levels of TFMP followed by observation was 11·8 months compared with 17·8 months on enoxaparin (P = 0·58). In a prospective randomized trial, increased numbers of circulating TFMP detected by impedance flow cytometry identified cancer patients with a high incidence of VTE. Enoxaparin demonstrated a clear trend towards reducing the rate of VTE in patients with elevated levels of TFMP, with an overall rate of VTE similar in magnitude to the lower TFMP group.
PURPOSE: Whether an anticoagulant prophylaxis is needed for patients with cancer with a central venous catheter is a highly controversial subject. We designed a study to compare different prophylactic strategies over 3 months of treatment.
METHODS: We performed a phase III prospective, open-label randomized trial. After the insertion of a central venous access device, consecutive patients with planned chemotherapy for cancer were randomized to no anticoagulant prophylaxis, low molecular weight heparin [low molecular weight heparin (LMWH); with isocoagulation doses], or warfarin 1 mg/day. Treatments were given over the first 3 months. Doppler ultrasound and venographies were performed on days 1 and 90, respectively, or sooner in case of clinical presumption of thrombosis.
RESULTS: A total of 420 patients were randomized, and 407 were evaluable. Forty-two catheter-related deep vein thrombosis (DVT) occurred (10.3 %), 20 in those with no anticoagulation, 8 in those receiving warfarin, and 14 in those receiving LMWH. Nine additional non-related catheter deep vein thrombosis (CDVT) occurred. Anticoagulation significantly reduced the incidence of catheter-related DVT (p = 0.035) and catheter non-related DVT (p = 0.007), with no difference between warfarin and LMWH. Safety was good (3.4 % of attributable events) but compliance with randomized prophylaxis was lower than expected.
CONCLUSIONS: Prophylaxis showed a benefit regarding catheter-related and non-catheter-related DVT with no increase in serious side effects.
INTRODUCTION: The haemostatic system plays an important role in the process of cancer development and spread. Anticoagulants, mainly low molecular weight heparins, could prolong survival in cancer patients, particularly in patients with lung cancer, beyond prevention of thromboembolic events.
METHODS: In a multicenter, investigator-initiated, open-label, randomized, sequential study, 38 patients with newly-diagnosed, limited-stage small-cell lung cancer were randomized to receive standard chemoradiotherapy or the same therapy plus 3,500 IU daily of bemiparin for a maximum of 26 weeks. The primary outcome was progression-free survival.
RESULTS: The study was terminated early due to slow recruitment. Median progression-free survival was 272 days with chemoradiotherapy alone and 410 days in the bemiparin group; hazard ratio, 2.58 (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.15-5.80); p=0.022. Median overall survival was 345 days with chemoradiotherapy alone and 1133 days in the bemiparin group; hazard ratio, 2.96 (95% CI, 1.22-7.21); p=0.017. The rate of tumor response was similar in both study arms. There was no significant between-group difference in the rates of major bleeding. Toxicity related with the experimental treatment was minimal.
CONCLUSION: The addition of bemiparin to first line therapy with chemoradiotherapy significantly increases survival in patients with newly-diagnosed, limited-stage small-cell lung cancer. (Funded by the Instituto Científico y Tecnológico, University of Navarra. ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT00324558).
Abstract: BACKGROUND: Annualised figures show an up to 7-fold higher incidence of vascular thromboembolism (VTE) in patients with advanced pancreatic cancer (APC) compared to other common malignancies. Concurrent VTE has been shown to confer a worse overall prognosis in APC. METHODS: One hundred and twenty three APC patients were randomised to receive either gemcitabine 1000mg/m<sup>2</sup> or the same with weight-adjusted dalteparin (WAD) for 12weeks. Primary end-point was the reduction of all-type VTE during the study period. NCT00462852, ISRCTN: 76464767. FINDINGS: The incidence of all-type VTE during the WAD treatment period (<100days from randomisation) was reduced from 23% to 3.4% (p =0.002), with a risk ratio (RR)of 0.145, 95% confidence interval (CI) (0.035–0.612) and an 85% risk reduction. All-type VTE throughout the whole follow-up period was reduced from 28% to 12% (p =0.039), RR=0.419, 95% CI (0.187–0.935) and a 58% risk reduction. Lethal VTE <100days was seen only in the control arm, 8.3% compared to 0% (p =0.057), RR=0.092, 95% CI (0.005–1.635). INTERPRETATION: Weight adjusted dalteparin used as primary prophylaxis for 12weeks is safe and produces a highly significant reduction of all-type VTE during the prophylaxis period. The benefit is maintained after dalteparin withdrawal although decreases with time.
In 2 double-blind studies, ambulatory patients with objectively proven, disseminated metastatic breast carcinoma (TOPIC-1) or stage III/IV non-small-cell lung carcinoma (TOPIC-2) were randomized to certoparin 3000 IU or placebo subcutaneously once daily, for 6 months. Primary efficacy outcome was objectively confirmed symptomatic or asymptomatic venous thromboembolism (VTE). Safety outcomes included bleeding (major and minor), and thrombocytopenia. TOPIC-1 was halted after an interim analysis. Venous thromboembolism occurrence was not different between treatment groups in TOPIC-1 (4% treated with certoparin, 7 of 174 vs 4% receiving placebo, 7 of 177, odds ratio [OR] 1.02; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.30-3.48) and in TOPIC-2 (4.5%, 12 of 268) vs 8.3%, 22 of 264, respectively, OR 0.52; CI 0.23-1.12). Mortality was not different between groups. A post hoc analysis showed certoparin significantly reduced VTE in stage IV lung carcinoma (3.5% vs 10.2%; P = .032) without increased bleeding. In conclusion, thrombosis risk and prophylactic benefit was highest in stage IV lung carcinoma patients.
OBJECTIVE: To explore the incidence of postoperative venous thromboembolism (VTE) in adult patients with primary bone tumor undergoing knee operation and evaluate its efficacy and safety in the prevention of VTE.
METHODS: For this prospective, randomized and negative-control single-center trial, a total of 100 eligible patients were selected and randomly divided into observation and control groups. Observation group (rivaroxaban): the first rivaroxaban tablet was taken in the first 24 hours after operation. Rivaroxaban was administered daily every 24 hours up to Day 14.
CONTROL GROUP: no anticoagulant was taken postoperatively.
RESULTS: Efficacy indictors: 6 cases of DVT (an incidence of 12%) occurred in the observation group versus 15 (30%) in the control group. Significant statistical difference existed between two groups (P < 0.05). Furthermore, neither pulmonary embolism nor death was found in either group. Safety indicators:a total of 3 bleeding (1 major and 2 non-major) cases occurred in observation group versus a total of 2 bleeding (no major and 2 non-major) cases in control group. No significant statistical difference existed in bleeding events (P > 0.05). The total incidence of adverse effect was 6% (3/50) in the observation group. The drainage volume of the observation group was a little more than that of the control group. But no significant statistical difference existed in drainage duration (P > 0.05). And there was almost no change in the coagulation system by laboratory examination after oral administration.
CONCLUSION: With an excellent safety profile and a low incidence of adverse effects, Rivaroxaban is effective and safe in the prevention of VTE in adult patients with primary bone tumor undergoing knee operation.
CONTEXTE: Les patients cancéreux recevant une chimiothérapie courent un risque accru de thrombose. Apixaban, un inhibiteur du facteur Xa, est la voie orale et ne nécessite pas la surveillance de laboratoire.
OBJECTIFS: Une étude pilote a été réalisée afin d'évaluer si l'apixaban serait bien tolérée et acceptable chez les patients cancéreux recevant une chimiothérapie.
PATIENTS / METHODES: Les sujets recevant une chimiothérapie de première ou de deuxième ligne pour le poumon avancé ou métastatique, du sein, gastro-intestinal, de la vessie, des ovaires ou de la prostate, le cancer d'origine inconnue, le myélome ou lymphomes sélectionnés ont été randomisés à 5 mg, 10 mg ou 20 mg une fois par jour de l'apixaban, soit un placebo, en double aveugle pendant 12 semaines. L'utilisation du médicament à l'étude a commencé dans les 4 semaines suivant le début de la chimiothérapie. Le critère principal était soit saignement majeur ou non-major saignements cliniquement importants (CRNM). Les critères secondaires incluaient la thromboembolie veineuse (TEV) et de grade III ou événements indésirables plus élevés liés au médicament à l'étude. Trente-deux patients ont reçu 5 mg, 30 patients 10 mg, 33 patients de 20 mg et 30 patients sous placebo. Dans ces groupes, il y avait 0, 0, 2 et 1 saignements majeurs, respectivement. Les données correspondantes pour CRNM saignements étaient de 1, 1, 2 et 0. Le taux de saignements majeurs dans les 93 patients apixaban était de 2,2% (95% intervalle de confiance de 0,26 à 7,5%). Il n'y avait aucun saignements mortels. Trois patients du groupe placebo ont eu TEV symptomatique.
CONCLUSIONS: L'apixaban a été bien toléré dans notre population d'étude. Ces résultats confirment d'autres études de l'apixaban dans les essais de phase III pour prévenir la TEV chez les patients cancéreux recevant une chimiothérapie.
CONTEXTE: Les patients recevant une chimiothérapie pour cancer sont à risque accru de thromboembolie veineuse. Des données limitées appuient le bénéfice clinique de la prophylaxie antithrombotique.
Méthodes: Dans cette étude multicentrique à double insu, nous évaluons l'efficacité et la sécurité du semuloparin héparine ultra-faible poids moléculaire dans la prévention de la thromboembolie veineuse chez les patients recevant une chimiothérapie pour cancer. Les patients atteints de tumeurs solides métastatiques ou localement avancé qui commençaient à recevoir un traitement de chimiothérapie ont été randomisés pour recevoir semuloparin sous-cutanée de 20 mg une fois par jour, ou un placebo jusqu'à ce qu'il y avait un changement de chimiothérapie. Le critère principal d'efficacité était un critère composite d'une thrombose veineuse profonde symptomatique, d'embolie pulmonaire non fatale tout, et les décès liés à la maladie thromboembolique veineuse. Saignements cliniquement importants (majeur et nonmajor) a été le résultat de sécurité principal.
RÉSULTATS: La durée médiane de traitement était de 3,5 mois. Thromboembolie veineuse survenue chez 20 des 1608 patients (1,2%) recevant semuloparin, en comparaison avec 55 de 1604 (3,4%) recevant le placebo (hazard ratio 0,36, intervalle de confiance à 95% [IC], 0,21-0,60, P <0,001), avec une efficacité constante chez les sous-groupes définis selon l'origine et le stade du cancer et le risque de base de la thromboembolie veineuse. L'incidence des saignements cliniquement pertinents était de 2,8% et de 2,0% dans les groupes de semuloparine et placebo, respectivement (hazard ratio 1,40, IC 95% 0,89 à 2,21). Le saignement majeur est survenu dans 19 des 1589 patients (1,2%) recevant semuloparin et 18 de 1583 (1,1%) du groupe placebo (hazard ratio 1,05, IC 0,55 à 1,99 95%). L'incidence de tous les autres effets indésirables étaient similaires dans les deux groupes de l'étude.
CONCLUSIONS: semuloparine réduit l'incidence des événements thromboemboliques chez les patients recevant une chimiothérapie pour un cancer, sans augmentation apparente des saignements majeurs. (Financé par Sanofi, le nombre ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT00694382.).
Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is common in cancer patients. Evidence has suggested that low molecular weight heparin (LMWH) might improve survival in patients with cancer by preventing both VTE and the progression of metastases. No trial in a single cancer type has been powered to demonstrate a clinically significant survival difference. The aim of this trial was to investigate this question in patients with lung cancer.Patients and
METHODS:
We conducted a multicenter, open-label, randomized trial to evaluate the addition of a primary prophylactic dose of LMWH for 24 weeks to standard treatment in patients with newly diagnosed lung cancer of any stage and histology. The primary outcome was 1-year survival. Secondary outcomes included metastasis-free survival, VTE-free survival, toxicity, and quality of life.
RESULTS:
For this trial, 2,202 patients were randomly assigned to the two treatment arms over 4 years. The trial did not reach its intended number of events for the primary analysis (2,047 deaths), and data were analyzed after 2,013 deaths after discussion with the independent data monitoring committee. There was no evidence of a difference in overall or metastasis-free survival between the two arms (hazard ratio [HR], 1.01; 95% CI, 0.93 to 1.10; P = .814; and HR, 0.99; 95% CI, 0.91 to 1.08; P = .864, respectively). There was a reduction in the risk of VTE from 9.7% to 5.5% (HR, 0.57; 95% CI, 0.42 to 0.79; P = .001) in the LMWH arm and no difference in major bleeding events but evidence of an increase in the composite of major and clinically relevant nonmajor bleeding in the LMWH arm.
CONCLUSION:
LMWH did not improve overall survival in the patients with lung cancer in this trial. A significant reduction in VTE is associated with an increase in clinically relevant nonmajor bleeding. Strategies to target those at greatest risk of VTE are warranted.
