User login
VTE prophylaxis often overused in low-risk patients
Background: Per Chest guidelines, VTE prophylaxis is recommended for hospitalized patients at increased risk for VTE but is not recommended for low-risk patients. Risk stratification can be guided by the Padua Prediction Score to categorize patients.
Study design: Multicenter observational study.
Setting: A total of 52 U.S. hospitals (Michigan Hospital Medicine Safety Consortium database).
Synopsis: Patients admitted during Jan. 1, 2015–Dec. 21, 2016, to 52 non–intensive care medical units for 2 or more days were analyzed and stratified as high or low risk for VTE using the Padua Prediction Score. Excessive VTE prophylaxis was defined as low-risk patients prescribed pharmacologic or mechanical prophylaxis, high-risk patients receiving therapy despite a contraindication to prophylaxis, or any patient who received both mechanical and pharmacologic therapy. Underuse of VTE prophylaxis included high-risk patients who did not receive pharmacologic or mechanical prophylaxis. Of the 44,775 patients included in the study, 32,549 were low risk, and 77.9% (25,369 patients) received excessive VTE prophylaxis. Overtreatment also was present in high-risk patients with and without a contraindication to VTE prophylaxis (26.9% and 32.3%, respectively). Underuse of VTE prophylaxis occurred in 2,693 high-risk patients (22%).
Bottom line: Patients who are at low risk for VTE by Padua Prediction Score often are prescribed pharmacologic or mechanical prophylaxis that may be unnecessary. Overuse of VTE prophylaxis was more common than is underuse.
Citation: Grant PJ et al. Use of venous thromboembolism prophylaxis in hospitalized patients. JAMA Intern Med. 2018 Aug 1;178(8):1122-4. Published online May 21, 2018.
Dr. Marr is assistant professor of medicine and an academic hospitalist, University of Utah, Salt Lake City.
Background: Per Chest guidelines, VTE prophylaxis is recommended for hospitalized patients at increased risk for VTE but is not recommended for low-risk patients. Risk stratification can be guided by the Padua Prediction Score to categorize patients.
Study design: Multicenter observational study.
Setting: A total of 52 U.S. hospitals (Michigan Hospital Medicine Safety Consortium database).
Synopsis: Patients admitted during Jan. 1, 2015–Dec. 21, 2016, to 52 non–intensive care medical units for 2 or more days were analyzed and stratified as high or low risk for VTE using the Padua Prediction Score. Excessive VTE prophylaxis was defined as low-risk patients prescribed pharmacologic or mechanical prophylaxis, high-risk patients receiving therapy despite a contraindication to prophylaxis, or any patient who received both mechanical and pharmacologic therapy. Underuse of VTE prophylaxis included high-risk patients who did not receive pharmacologic or mechanical prophylaxis. Of the 44,775 patients included in the study, 32,549 were low risk, and 77.9% (25,369 patients) received excessive VTE prophylaxis. Overtreatment also was present in high-risk patients with and without a contraindication to VTE prophylaxis (26.9% and 32.3%, respectively). Underuse of VTE prophylaxis occurred in 2,693 high-risk patients (22%).
Bottom line: Patients who are at low risk for VTE by Padua Prediction Score often are prescribed pharmacologic or mechanical prophylaxis that may be unnecessary. Overuse of VTE prophylaxis was more common than is underuse.
Citation: Grant PJ et al. Use of venous thromboembolism prophylaxis in hospitalized patients. JAMA Intern Med. 2018 Aug 1;178(8):1122-4. Published online May 21, 2018.
Dr. Marr is assistant professor of medicine and an academic hospitalist, University of Utah, Salt Lake City.
Background: Per Chest guidelines, VTE prophylaxis is recommended for hospitalized patients at increased risk for VTE but is not recommended for low-risk patients. Risk stratification can be guided by the Padua Prediction Score to categorize patients.
Study design: Multicenter observational study.
Setting: A total of 52 U.S. hospitals (Michigan Hospital Medicine Safety Consortium database).
Synopsis: Patients admitted during Jan. 1, 2015–Dec. 21, 2016, to 52 non–intensive care medical units for 2 or more days were analyzed and stratified as high or low risk for VTE using the Padua Prediction Score. Excessive VTE prophylaxis was defined as low-risk patients prescribed pharmacologic or mechanical prophylaxis, high-risk patients receiving therapy despite a contraindication to prophylaxis, or any patient who received both mechanical and pharmacologic therapy. Underuse of VTE prophylaxis included high-risk patients who did not receive pharmacologic or mechanical prophylaxis. Of the 44,775 patients included in the study, 32,549 were low risk, and 77.9% (25,369 patients) received excessive VTE prophylaxis. Overtreatment also was present in high-risk patients with and without a contraindication to VTE prophylaxis (26.9% and 32.3%, respectively). Underuse of VTE prophylaxis occurred in 2,693 high-risk patients (22%).
Bottom line: Patients who are at low risk for VTE by Padua Prediction Score often are prescribed pharmacologic or mechanical prophylaxis that may be unnecessary. Overuse of VTE prophylaxis was more common than is underuse.
Citation: Grant PJ et al. Use of venous thromboembolism prophylaxis in hospitalized patients. JAMA Intern Med. 2018 Aug 1;178(8):1122-4. Published online May 21, 2018.
Dr. Marr is assistant professor of medicine and an academic hospitalist, University of Utah, Salt Lake City.
Ticagrelor holds no edge over aspirin in CABG patients
CHICAGO – Ticagrelor performed about as well as aspirin did as monotherapy for preventing coronary bypass graft failure during the year following surgery in a randomized, multicenter trial with almost 1,900 patients.
Ticagrelor monotherapy also produced about the same number of major bleeding events as did aspirin monotherapy, Heribert Schunkert, MD, said at the American Heart Association scientific sessions. There were two limitations of the trial: The incidence of cardiovascular disease events that served as the efficacy endpoint for the study was less than what Dr. Schunkert and his associates expected, and they enrolled about half the projected number of patients because the study lost industry support and then, a couple of years later, showed a relentlessly neutral result leading to early termination of recruitment, said Dr. Schunkert, professor of cardiology and medical director of the German Heart Center in Munich.
The TiCAB (Study Comparing Ticagrelor With Aspirin for Prevention of Vascular Events in Patients Undergoing CABG) trial randomized 1,893 patients during 2013-2017 who underwent CABG at any of 26 centers in Austria, Germany, or Switzerland. Eligible patients underwent surgery for three-vessel disease, left main disease, or had two-vessel disease plus a left ventricular ejection fraction of less than 50%. About 31% of patients had unstable angina or non-ST elevation MI, with the remaining 69% having stable angina. The study included 931 patients who received 90 mg oral ticagrelor (Brilinta) b.i.d. plus aspirin placebo, and 928 who received 100 mg aspirin once daily plus ticagrelor placebo. The study medications began prior to surgery.
The study’s primary efficacy endpoint was the combined rate of cardiovascular death, MI, stroke, or need for revascularization by 1 year after surgery. This occurred in 9.7% of the ticagrelor patients and in 8.2% of those who received aspirin, a difference that was not statistically significant. Several secondary efficacy endpoints examined also showed a neutral result. The primary safety measure was the incidence of major bleeds by the Bleeding Academic Research Consortium criteria, which occurred in 3.7% of the ticagrelor patients and 3.2% of those on aspirin, not a statistically significant difference. After the year of follow-up about 85% of patients in both treatment arms remained on their assigned regimen, Dr. Schunkert said.
TiCAB received funding from AstraZeneca, which markets ticagrelor (Brilinta). Dr. Schunkert has received honoraria and research support from, and has been a speaker on behalf of, AstraZeneca. He has also received honoraria from Amgen, Bayer Vital, Boehringer Ingelheim, Daiichi Sankyo, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Novartis, Pfizer, Sanofi, and Servier.
SOURCE: Schunkert H et al. AHA 2018, Abstract 19561.
Because the TiCAB study was about half the size of the planned study, its power was low and yielded a result with wide confidence intervals. Despite that, I do not believe that a further, larger study is warranted. The TiCAB results are sufficient to show that monotherapy with ticagrelor is not superior to monotherapy with aspirin in patients undergoing coronary artery bypass grafting and during the year following surgery. The TiCAB results add to a larger body of evidence indicating ticagrelor’s noninferiority to and lack of superiority to aspirin as monotherapy for patients with coronary artery disease or a history of ischemic stroke or transient ischemic attack.
How can these two drugs produce similar efficacy outcomes? Aspirin is an effective antiplatelet drug, and evidence also suggests that treatment with opiates such as morphine (Circ Cardiovasc Interv. 2016 Sept;9[9]:e004229) and fentanyl (Circulation. 2018 Jan 16;137[3]:307-9) during and after surgery can interfere with the intestinal absorption of ticagrelor and other oral P2Y12 receptor antagonists, such as clopidogrel and prasugrel.
Another interesting finding in TiCAB was that aspirin and ticagrelor monotherapy produced similar rates of major bleeds. Results from prior studies had raised concerns about ticagrelor’s safety in patients undergoing coronary artery bypass surgery, but the new results show that this may be a problem when patients receive dual antiplatelet therapy but not when they receive ticagrelor monotherapy. Current evidence favors dual antiplatelet therapy to achieve a greater decrease in cardiovascular disease events, but this occurs at the expense of increased bleeding. Larger trials of dual therapy after coronary artery bypass grafting are warranted; further study of monotherapy is not.
Robert F. Storey, MD , is a professor of cardiology at the University of Sheffield (England). He has been a consultant to, and received honoraria and research support from, AstraZeneca, and he has been a consultant to Actelion, Avacta, Bayer, Bristol-Myers Squibb/Pfizer, Haemonetics, Novartis, PlaqueTec, and Thromboserin. He made these comments as designated discussant for the TiCAB report.
Because the TiCAB study was about half the size of the planned study, its power was low and yielded a result with wide confidence intervals. Despite that, I do not believe that a further, larger study is warranted. The TiCAB results are sufficient to show that monotherapy with ticagrelor is not superior to monotherapy with aspirin in patients undergoing coronary artery bypass grafting and during the year following surgery. The TiCAB results add to a larger body of evidence indicating ticagrelor’s noninferiority to and lack of superiority to aspirin as monotherapy for patients with coronary artery disease or a history of ischemic stroke or transient ischemic attack.
How can these two drugs produce similar efficacy outcomes? Aspirin is an effective antiplatelet drug, and evidence also suggests that treatment with opiates such as morphine (Circ Cardiovasc Interv. 2016 Sept;9[9]:e004229) and fentanyl (Circulation. 2018 Jan 16;137[3]:307-9) during and after surgery can interfere with the intestinal absorption of ticagrelor and other oral P2Y12 receptor antagonists, such as clopidogrel and prasugrel.
Another interesting finding in TiCAB was that aspirin and ticagrelor monotherapy produced similar rates of major bleeds. Results from prior studies had raised concerns about ticagrelor’s safety in patients undergoing coronary artery bypass surgery, but the new results show that this may be a problem when patients receive dual antiplatelet therapy but not when they receive ticagrelor monotherapy. Current evidence favors dual antiplatelet therapy to achieve a greater decrease in cardiovascular disease events, but this occurs at the expense of increased bleeding. Larger trials of dual therapy after coronary artery bypass grafting are warranted; further study of monotherapy is not.
Robert F. Storey, MD , is a professor of cardiology at the University of Sheffield (England). He has been a consultant to, and received honoraria and research support from, AstraZeneca, and he has been a consultant to Actelion, Avacta, Bayer, Bristol-Myers Squibb/Pfizer, Haemonetics, Novartis, PlaqueTec, and Thromboserin. He made these comments as designated discussant for the TiCAB report.
Because the TiCAB study was about half the size of the planned study, its power was low and yielded a result with wide confidence intervals. Despite that, I do not believe that a further, larger study is warranted. The TiCAB results are sufficient to show that monotherapy with ticagrelor is not superior to monotherapy with aspirin in patients undergoing coronary artery bypass grafting and during the year following surgery. The TiCAB results add to a larger body of evidence indicating ticagrelor’s noninferiority to and lack of superiority to aspirin as monotherapy for patients with coronary artery disease or a history of ischemic stroke or transient ischemic attack.
How can these two drugs produce similar efficacy outcomes? Aspirin is an effective antiplatelet drug, and evidence also suggests that treatment with opiates such as morphine (Circ Cardiovasc Interv. 2016 Sept;9[9]:e004229) and fentanyl (Circulation. 2018 Jan 16;137[3]:307-9) during and after surgery can interfere with the intestinal absorption of ticagrelor and other oral P2Y12 receptor antagonists, such as clopidogrel and prasugrel.
Another interesting finding in TiCAB was that aspirin and ticagrelor monotherapy produced similar rates of major bleeds. Results from prior studies had raised concerns about ticagrelor’s safety in patients undergoing coronary artery bypass surgery, but the new results show that this may be a problem when patients receive dual antiplatelet therapy but not when they receive ticagrelor monotherapy. Current evidence favors dual antiplatelet therapy to achieve a greater decrease in cardiovascular disease events, but this occurs at the expense of increased bleeding. Larger trials of dual therapy after coronary artery bypass grafting are warranted; further study of monotherapy is not.
Robert F. Storey, MD , is a professor of cardiology at the University of Sheffield (England). He has been a consultant to, and received honoraria and research support from, AstraZeneca, and he has been a consultant to Actelion, Avacta, Bayer, Bristol-Myers Squibb/Pfizer, Haemonetics, Novartis, PlaqueTec, and Thromboserin. He made these comments as designated discussant for the TiCAB report.
CHICAGO – Ticagrelor performed about as well as aspirin did as monotherapy for preventing coronary bypass graft failure during the year following surgery in a randomized, multicenter trial with almost 1,900 patients.
Ticagrelor monotherapy also produced about the same number of major bleeding events as did aspirin monotherapy, Heribert Schunkert, MD, said at the American Heart Association scientific sessions. There were two limitations of the trial: The incidence of cardiovascular disease events that served as the efficacy endpoint for the study was less than what Dr. Schunkert and his associates expected, and they enrolled about half the projected number of patients because the study lost industry support and then, a couple of years later, showed a relentlessly neutral result leading to early termination of recruitment, said Dr. Schunkert, professor of cardiology and medical director of the German Heart Center in Munich.
The TiCAB (Study Comparing Ticagrelor With Aspirin for Prevention of Vascular Events in Patients Undergoing CABG) trial randomized 1,893 patients during 2013-2017 who underwent CABG at any of 26 centers in Austria, Germany, or Switzerland. Eligible patients underwent surgery for three-vessel disease, left main disease, or had two-vessel disease plus a left ventricular ejection fraction of less than 50%. About 31% of patients had unstable angina or non-ST elevation MI, with the remaining 69% having stable angina. The study included 931 patients who received 90 mg oral ticagrelor (Brilinta) b.i.d. plus aspirin placebo, and 928 who received 100 mg aspirin once daily plus ticagrelor placebo. The study medications began prior to surgery.
The study’s primary efficacy endpoint was the combined rate of cardiovascular death, MI, stroke, or need for revascularization by 1 year after surgery. This occurred in 9.7% of the ticagrelor patients and in 8.2% of those who received aspirin, a difference that was not statistically significant. Several secondary efficacy endpoints examined also showed a neutral result. The primary safety measure was the incidence of major bleeds by the Bleeding Academic Research Consortium criteria, which occurred in 3.7% of the ticagrelor patients and 3.2% of those on aspirin, not a statistically significant difference. After the year of follow-up about 85% of patients in both treatment arms remained on their assigned regimen, Dr. Schunkert said.
TiCAB received funding from AstraZeneca, which markets ticagrelor (Brilinta). Dr. Schunkert has received honoraria and research support from, and has been a speaker on behalf of, AstraZeneca. He has also received honoraria from Amgen, Bayer Vital, Boehringer Ingelheim, Daiichi Sankyo, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Novartis, Pfizer, Sanofi, and Servier.
SOURCE: Schunkert H et al. AHA 2018, Abstract 19561.
CHICAGO – Ticagrelor performed about as well as aspirin did as monotherapy for preventing coronary bypass graft failure during the year following surgery in a randomized, multicenter trial with almost 1,900 patients.
Ticagrelor monotherapy also produced about the same number of major bleeding events as did aspirin monotherapy, Heribert Schunkert, MD, said at the American Heart Association scientific sessions. There were two limitations of the trial: The incidence of cardiovascular disease events that served as the efficacy endpoint for the study was less than what Dr. Schunkert and his associates expected, and they enrolled about half the projected number of patients because the study lost industry support and then, a couple of years later, showed a relentlessly neutral result leading to early termination of recruitment, said Dr. Schunkert, professor of cardiology and medical director of the German Heart Center in Munich.
The TiCAB (Study Comparing Ticagrelor With Aspirin for Prevention of Vascular Events in Patients Undergoing CABG) trial randomized 1,893 patients during 2013-2017 who underwent CABG at any of 26 centers in Austria, Germany, or Switzerland. Eligible patients underwent surgery for three-vessel disease, left main disease, or had two-vessel disease plus a left ventricular ejection fraction of less than 50%. About 31% of patients had unstable angina or non-ST elevation MI, with the remaining 69% having stable angina. The study included 931 patients who received 90 mg oral ticagrelor (Brilinta) b.i.d. plus aspirin placebo, and 928 who received 100 mg aspirin once daily plus ticagrelor placebo. The study medications began prior to surgery.
The study’s primary efficacy endpoint was the combined rate of cardiovascular death, MI, stroke, or need for revascularization by 1 year after surgery. This occurred in 9.7% of the ticagrelor patients and in 8.2% of those who received aspirin, a difference that was not statistically significant. Several secondary efficacy endpoints examined also showed a neutral result. The primary safety measure was the incidence of major bleeds by the Bleeding Academic Research Consortium criteria, which occurred in 3.7% of the ticagrelor patients and 3.2% of those on aspirin, not a statistically significant difference. After the year of follow-up about 85% of patients in both treatment arms remained on their assigned regimen, Dr. Schunkert said.
TiCAB received funding from AstraZeneca, which markets ticagrelor (Brilinta). Dr. Schunkert has received honoraria and research support from, and has been a speaker on behalf of, AstraZeneca. He has also received honoraria from Amgen, Bayer Vital, Boehringer Ingelheim, Daiichi Sankyo, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Novartis, Pfizer, Sanofi, and Servier.
SOURCE: Schunkert H et al. AHA 2018, Abstract 19561.
REPORTING FROM THE AHA SCIENTIFIC SESSIONS
Key clinical point: Ticagrelor was similar to aspirin for preventing graft failure in CABG patients.
Major finding: After 1 year, the combined cardiovascular disease endpoint occurred in 9.7% of ticagrelor patients and in 8.2% on aspirin.
Study details: TiCAB, a multicenter, randomized trial with 1,893 patients.
Disclosures: TiCAB received funding from AstraZeneca, which markets ticagrelor (Brilinta). Dr. Schunkert has received honoraria and research support from, and has been a speaker on behalf of, AstraZeneca. He has received honoraria from Amgen, Bayer Vital, Boehringer Ingelheim, Daiichi Sankyo, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Novartis, Pfizer, Sanofi, and Servier.
Source: Schunkert H et al. AHA 2018, Abstract 19561.
Reducing heart failure readmissions raises mortality
This week from MDedge Cardiology, the Hospital Readmissions Reduction Program may be doing more harm than good, ticagrelor holds no edge over aspirin in CABG patients, weight-loss apps lack evidence, and the Surgeon General sends out an alarm.
Subscribe to Cardiocast wherever you get your podcasts.
Amazon Alexa
Apple Podcasts
This week from MDedge Cardiology, the Hospital Readmissions Reduction Program may be doing more harm than good, ticagrelor holds no edge over aspirin in CABG patients, weight-loss apps lack evidence, and the Surgeon General sends out an alarm.
Subscribe to Cardiocast wherever you get your podcasts.
Amazon Alexa
Apple Podcasts
This week from MDedge Cardiology, the Hospital Readmissions Reduction Program may be doing more harm than good, ticagrelor holds no edge over aspirin in CABG patients, weight-loss apps lack evidence, and the Surgeon General sends out an alarm.
Subscribe to Cardiocast wherever you get your podcasts.
Amazon Alexa
Apple Podcasts
Anticoagulation shows promise in concurrent lupus nephritis, thrombotic microangiopathy
The use of anticoagulation in patients with comorbid lupus nephritis and thrombotic microangiopathy was linked with a greater rate of clinical response after 12 months of therapy, according to results from a study published in Annals of the Rheumatic Diseases.
“The purpose of this multicenter retrospective study was to analyze the impact of anticoagulation (vitamin K antagonists and/or heparins), in addition to conventional immunosuppression on kidney outcomes, according to the Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcomes guidelines,” wrote first author Savino Sciascia, MD, PhD, of the University of Turin (Italy), along with his colleagues.
The researchers analyzed data from 97 patients with biopsy-confirmed lupus nephritis (LN) and thrombotic microangiopathy (TMA) who were diagnosed during 2007-2017. The entire cohort was administered standard immunosuppressive agents, including corticosteroids, cyclophosphamide, and mycophenolate, among others. After 12 months of therapy, the patients were assessed for degree of clinical response, measured using complete, partial, or no response to therapy.
“Sixty-one patients (62.9%) were [antiphospholipid antibody] positive and 37 (38.1%) of these patients received anticoagulation with a vitamin K antagonist and/or heparins,” the investigators wrote. “Mean duration of anticoagulation therapy after TMA and LN diagnosis was 7.7 months,” they added.
After statistical analysis, the researchers found that patients treated with anticoagulation therapy experienced a greater rate of clinical response, compared with those not treated. The investigators saw a complete response to therapy in 22 (59.5%) patients given anticoagulation, compared with 15 (25.0%) patients without anticoagulation. Partial treatment responses were comparable, occurring in 7 (18.9%) with anticoagulation and 15 (25.0%) without. Without anticoagulation, 30 (50%) had no response to therapy, compared with 8 (21.6%) patients given anticoagulation.
“When limiting the analysis to patients with antiphospholipid antibodies, we observed a rate of any response (either complete response [or] partial response) as high as 66% in patients receiving anticoagulant treatment compared with those receiving immunosuppression alone (34%),” they added.
The authors acknowledged a major limitation of the study was the short duration of follow-up, which limited the ability to evaluate relapse rate.
“Despite its limitations, this study represents the largest available multicenter cohort of real-life systemic lupus erythematosus patients,” said Dr. Sciascia and his colleagues. “The use of anticoagulation appeared protective and warrants further investigation as a therapeutic tool,” they concluded.
The authors reported no conflicts of interest, and no specific study funding was declared.
SOURCE: Sciascia S et al. Ann Rheum Dis. 2018 Dec 14. doi: 10.1136/annrheumdis-2018-214559.
The use of anticoagulation in patients with comorbid lupus nephritis and thrombotic microangiopathy was linked with a greater rate of clinical response after 12 months of therapy, according to results from a study published in Annals of the Rheumatic Diseases.
“The purpose of this multicenter retrospective study was to analyze the impact of anticoagulation (vitamin K antagonists and/or heparins), in addition to conventional immunosuppression on kidney outcomes, according to the Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcomes guidelines,” wrote first author Savino Sciascia, MD, PhD, of the University of Turin (Italy), along with his colleagues.
The researchers analyzed data from 97 patients with biopsy-confirmed lupus nephritis (LN) and thrombotic microangiopathy (TMA) who were diagnosed during 2007-2017. The entire cohort was administered standard immunosuppressive agents, including corticosteroids, cyclophosphamide, and mycophenolate, among others. After 12 months of therapy, the patients were assessed for degree of clinical response, measured using complete, partial, or no response to therapy.
“Sixty-one patients (62.9%) were [antiphospholipid antibody] positive and 37 (38.1%) of these patients received anticoagulation with a vitamin K antagonist and/or heparins,” the investigators wrote. “Mean duration of anticoagulation therapy after TMA and LN diagnosis was 7.7 months,” they added.
After statistical analysis, the researchers found that patients treated with anticoagulation therapy experienced a greater rate of clinical response, compared with those not treated. The investigators saw a complete response to therapy in 22 (59.5%) patients given anticoagulation, compared with 15 (25.0%) patients without anticoagulation. Partial treatment responses were comparable, occurring in 7 (18.9%) with anticoagulation and 15 (25.0%) without. Without anticoagulation, 30 (50%) had no response to therapy, compared with 8 (21.6%) patients given anticoagulation.
“When limiting the analysis to patients with antiphospholipid antibodies, we observed a rate of any response (either complete response [or] partial response) as high as 66% in patients receiving anticoagulant treatment compared with those receiving immunosuppression alone (34%),” they added.
The authors acknowledged a major limitation of the study was the short duration of follow-up, which limited the ability to evaluate relapse rate.
“Despite its limitations, this study represents the largest available multicenter cohort of real-life systemic lupus erythematosus patients,” said Dr. Sciascia and his colleagues. “The use of anticoagulation appeared protective and warrants further investigation as a therapeutic tool,” they concluded.
The authors reported no conflicts of interest, and no specific study funding was declared.
SOURCE: Sciascia S et al. Ann Rheum Dis. 2018 Dec 14. doi: 10.1136/annrheumdis-2018-214559.
The use of anticoagulation in patients with comorbid lupus nephritis and thrombotic microangiopathy was linked with a greater rate of clinical response after 12 months of therapy, according to results from a study published in Annals of the Rheumatic Diseases.
“The purpose of this multicenter retrospective study was to analyze the impact of anticoagulation (vitamin K antagonists and/or heparins), in addition to conventional immunosuppression on kidney outcomes, according to the Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcomes guidelines,” wrote first author Savino Sciascia, MD, PhD, of the University of Turin (Italy), along with his colleagues.
The researchers analyzed data from 97 patients with biopsy-confirmed lupus nephritis (LN) and thrombotic microangiopathy (TMA) who were diagnosed during 2007-2017. The entire cohort was administered standard immunosuppressive agents, including corticosteroids, cyclophosphamide, and mycophenolate, among others. After 12 months of therapy, the patients were assessed for degree of clinical response, measured using complete, partial, or no response to therapy.
“Sixty-one patients (62.9%) were [antiphospholipid antibody] positive and 37 (38.1%) of these patients received anticoagulation with a vitamin K antagonist and/or heparins,” the investigators wrote. “Mean duration of anticoagulation therapy after TMA and LN diagnosis was 7.7 months,” they added.
After statistical analysis, the researchers found that patients treated with anticoagulation therapy experienced a greater rate of clinical response, compared with those not treated. The investigators saw a complete response to therapy in 22 (59.5%) patients given anticoagulation, compared with 15 (25.0%) patients without anticoagulation. Partial treatment responses were comparable, occurring in 7 (18.9%) with anticoagulation and 15 (25.0%) without. Without anticoagulation, 30 (50%) had no response to therapy, compared with 8 (21.6%) patients given anticoagulation.
“When limiting the analysis to patients with antiphospholipid antibodies, we observed a rate of any response (either complete response [or] partial response) as high as 66% in patients receiving anticoagulant treatment compared with those receiving immunosuppression alone (34%),” they added.
The authors acknowledged a major limitation of the study was the short duration of follow-up, which limited the ability to evaluate relapse rate.
“Despite its limitations, this study represents the largest available multicenter cohort of real-life systemic lupus erythematosus patients,” said Dr. Sciascia and his colleagues. “The use of anticoagulation appeared protective and warrants further investigation as a therapeutic tool,” they concluded.
The authors reported no conflicts of interest, and no specific study funding was declared.
SOURCE: Sciascia S et al. Ann Rheum Dis. 2018 Dec 14. doi: 10.1136/annrheumdis-2018-214559.
FROM ANNALS OF THE RHEUMATIC DISEASES
Key clinical point:
Major finding: A greater proportion of patients given anticoagulation achieved partial or complete response (78.4%) versus those not given anticoagulation (50.0%).
Study details: A retrospective analysis of 97 patients with biopsy-confirmed lupus nephritis and thrombotic microangiopathy.
Disclosures: The authors reported no conflicts of interest, and no specific study funding was declared.
Source: Sciascia S et al. Ann Rheum Dis. 2018 Dec 14. doi: 10.1136/annrheumdis-2018-214559.
FDA approves ravulizumab for PNH
The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has approved ravulizumab-cwvz (Ultomiris) to treat adults with paroxysmal nocturnal hemoglobinuria (PNH).
Ravulizumab is a long-acting C5 complement inhibitor, administered every 8 weeks, that has been shown to prevent hemolysis.
The prescribing information for ravulizumab includes a boxed warning stating that meningococcal infections/sepsis have occurred in patients treated with the drug, and these adverse effects can become life-threatening or fatal if not recognized and treated early.
Ravulizumab is available only through a restricted program under a Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategy.
The FDA previously granted the application for ravulizumab priority review, and the product received orphan drug designation from the FDA.
The FDA granted the approval of ravulizumab to Alexion Pharmaceuticals.
The FDA’s approval of ravulizumab is based on results from two phase 3 studies, one in patients who had previously received treatment with a complement inhibitor and one in patients who were complement-inhibitor-naïve. Both studies were recently published in Blood.
Efficacy in inhibitor-experienced patients
In one study (NCT03056040), researchers compared ravulizumab administered every 8 weeks to eculizumab administered every 2 weeks in complement-inhibitor-experienced patients.
The trial included 195 PNH patients who were taking eculizumab for more than 6 months. They were randomized to switch to ravulizumab (n=97) or continue on eculizumab (n=98).
Ravulizumab proved noninferior to eculizumab for all endpoints studied (P<0.0006), including:
- Percentage change in lactate dehydrogenase (LDH): difference, 9.21% (95% CI: -0.42 to 18.84; P=0.058 for superiority)
- Breakthrough hemolysis: difference, 5.1 (95% CI: -8.89 to 18.99)
- Change in FACIT-Fatigue score: difference, 1.47 (95% CI: -0.21 to 3.15)
- Transfusion avoidance: difference, 5.5 (95% CI: -4.27 to 15.68)
- Stabilized hemoglobin: difference, 1.4 (95% CI: -10.41 to 13.31).
Efficacy in inhibitor-naïve patients
In another study (NCT02946463), researchers compared ravulizumab and eculizumab in 246 PNH patients who had not previously received a complement inhibitor.
Ravulizumab was noninferior to eculizumab for all endpoints (P<0.0001), including:
- Transfusion avoidance: 73.6% vs 66.1%; difference of 6.8% (95% CI: -4.66 to 18.14)
- LDH normalization: 53.6% vs 49.4%; odds ratio=1.19 (95% CI: 0.80 to 1.77)
- Percent reduction in LDH: -76.8% vs -76.0%; difference of -0.83% (95% CI: -5.21 to 3.56)
- Change in FACIT-Fatigue score: 7.07 vs 6.40; difference of 0.67 (95% CI: -1.21 to 2.55)
- Breakthrough hemolysis: 4.0% vs 10.7%; difference of -6.7% (95% CI: -14.21 to 0.18)
- Stabilized hemoglobin: 68.0% vs 64.5%; difference of 2.9 (95% CI: -8.80 to 14.64).
Safety in both trials
The safety data from both trials included 441 adults who received ravulizumab (n=222) or eculizumab (n=219) for a median of 6 months.
The most frequent adverse events in both arms (ravulizumab and eculizumab, respectively) were upper respiratory tract infection (39% and 39%) and headache (32% and 26%).
Serious adverse events occurred in 15 (6.8%) patients treated with ravulizumab. These events included hyperthermia and pyrexia.
There was one fatal case of sepsis in a patient treated with ravulizumab.
The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has approved ravulizumab-cwvz (Ultomiris) to treat adults with paroxysmal nocturnal hemoglobinuria (PNH).
Ravulizumab is a long-acting C5 complement inhibitor, administered every 8 weeks, that has been shown to prevent hemolysis.
The prescribing information for ravulizumab includes a boxed warning stating that meningococcal infections/sepsis have occurred in patients treated with the drug, and these adverse effects can become life-threatening or fatal if not recognized and treated early.
Ravulizumab is available only through a restricted program under a Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategy.
The FDA previously granted the application for ravulizumab priority review, and the product received orphan drug designation from the FDA.
The FDA granted the approval of ravulizumab to Alexion Pharmaceuticals.
The FDA’s approval of ravulizumab is based on results from two phase 3 studies, one in patients who had previously received treatment with a complement inhibitor and one in patients who were complement-inhibitor-naïve. Both studies were recently published in Blood.
Efficacy in inhibitor-experienced patients
In one study (NCT03056040), researchers compared ravulizumab administered every 8 weeks to eculizumab administered every 2 weeks in complement-inhibitor-experienced patients.
The trial included 195 PNH patients who were taking eculizumab for more than 6 months. They were randomized to switch to ravulizumab (n=97) or continue on eculizumab (n=98).
Ravulizumab proved noninferior to eculizumab for all endpoints studied (P<0.0006), including:
- Percentage change in lactate dehydrogenase (LDH): difference, 9.21% (95% CI: -0.42 to 18.84; P=0.058 for superiority)
- Breakthrough hemolysis: difference, 5.1 (95% CI: -8.89 to 18.99)
- Change in FACIT-Fatigue score: difference, 1.47 (95% CI: -0.21 to 3.15)
- Transfusion avoidance: difference, 5.5 (95% CI: -4.27 to 15.68)
- Stabilized hemoglobin: difference, 1.4 (95% CI: -10.41 to 13.31).
Efficacy in inhibitor-naïve patients
In another study (NCT02946463), researchers compared ravulizumab and eculizumab in 246 PNH patients who had not previously received a complement inhibitor.
Ravulizumab was noninferior to eculizumab for all endpoints (P<0.0001), including:
- Transfusion avoidance: 73.6% vs 66.1%; difference of 6.8% (95% CI: -4.66 to 18.14)
- LDH normalization: 53.6% vs 49.4%; odds ratio=1.19 (95% CI: 0.80 to 1.77)
- Percent reduction in LDH: -76.8% vs -76.0%; difference of -0.83% (95% CI: -5.21 to 3.56)
- Change in FACIT-Fatigue score: 7.07 vs 6.40; difference of 0.67 (95% CI: -1.21 to 2.55)
- Breakthrough hemolysis: 4.0% vs 10.7%; difference of -6.7% (95% CI: -14.21 to 0.18)
- Stabilized hemoglobin: 68.0% vs 64.5%; difference of 2.9 (95% CI: -8.80 to 14.64).
Safety in both trials
The safety data from both trials included 441 adults who received ravulizumab (n=222) or eculizumab (n=219) for a median of 6 months.
The most frequent adverse events in both arms (ravulizumab and eculizumab, respectively) were upper respiratory tract infection (39% and 39%) and headache (32% and 26%).
Serious adverse events occurred in 15 (6.8%) patients treated with ravulizumab. These events included hyperthermia and pyrexia.
There was one fatal case of sepsis in a patient treated with ravulizumab.
The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has approved ravulizumab-cwvz (Ultomiris) to treat adults with paroxysmal nocturnal hemoglobinuria (PNH).
Ravulizumab is a long-acting C5 complement inhibitor, administered every 8 weeks, that has been shown to prevent hemolysis.
The prescribing information for ravulizumab includes a boxed warning stating that meningococcal infections/sepsis have occurred in patients treated with the drug, and these adverse effects can become life-threatening or fatal if not recognized and treated early.
Ravulizumab is available only through a restricted program under a Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategy.
The FDA previously granted the application for ravulizumab priority review, and the product received orphan drug designation from the FDA.
The FDA granted the approval of ravulizumab to Alexion Pharmaceuticals.
The FDA’s approval of ravulizumab is based on results from two phase 3 studies, one in patients who had previously received treatment with a complement inhibitor and one in patients who were complement-inhibitor-naïve. Both studies were recently published in Blood.
Efficacy in inhibitor-experienced patients
In one study (NCT03056040), researchers compared ravulizumab administered every 8 weeks to eculizumab administered every 2 weeks in complement-inhibitor-experienced patients.
The trial included 195 PNH patients who were taking eculizumab for more than 6 months. They were randomized to switch to ravulizumab (n=97) or continue on eculizumab (n=98).
Ravulizumab proved noninferior to eculizumab for all endpoints studied (P<0.0006), including:
- Percentage change in lactate dehydrogenase (LDH): difference, 9.21% (95% CI: -0.42 to 18.84; P=0.058 for superiority)
- Breakthrough hemolysis: difference, 5.1 (95% CI: -8.89 to 18.99)
- Change in FACIT-Fatigue score: difference, 1.47 (95% CI: -0.21 to 3.15)
- Transfusion avoidance: difference, 5.5 (95% CI: -4.27 to 15.68)
- Stabilized hemoglobin: difference, 1.4 (95% CI: -10.41 to 13.31).
Efficacy in inhibitor-naïve patients
In another study (NCT02946463), researchers compared ravulizumab and eculizumab in 246 PNH patients who had not previously received a complement inhibitor.
Ravulizumab was noninferior to eculizumab for all endpoints (P<0.0001), including:
- Transfusion avoidance: 73.6% vs 66.1%; difference of 6.8% (95% CI: -4.66 to 18.14)
- LDH normalization: 53.6% vs 49.4%; odds ratio=1.19 (95% CI: 0.80 to 1.77)
- Percent reduction in LDH: -76.8% vs -76.0%; difference of -0.83% (95% CI: -5.21 to 3.56)
- Change in FACIT-Fatigue score: 7.07 vs 6.40; difference of 0.67 (95% CI: -1.21 to 2.55)
- Breakthrough hemolysis: 4.0% vs 10.7%; difference of -6.7% (95% CI: -14.21 to 0.18)
- Stabilized hemoglobin: 68.0% vs 64.5%; difference of 2.9 (95% CI: -8.80 to 14.64).
Safety in both trials
The safety data from both trials included 441 adults who received ravulizumab (n=222) or eculizumab (n=219) for a median of 6 months.
The most frequent adverse events in both arms (ravulizumab and eculizumab, respectively) were upper respiratory tract infection (39% and 39%) and headache (32% and 26%).
Serious adverse events occurred in 15 (6.8%) patients treated with ravulizumab. These events included hyperthermia and pyrexia.
There was one fatal case of sepsis in a patient treated with ravulizumab.
Phase 3 data support apixaban for cancer-associated VTE
SAN DIEGO – according to the Phase 3 ADAM VTE trial.
The rates of major bleeding and clinically relevant nonmajor bleeding in patients who received apixaban were similar to those in patients who received dalteparin. However, the rate of VTE recurrence was significantly lower with apixaban than it was with dalteparin.
“[A]pixaban was associated with very low bleeding rates and venous thrombosis recurrence rates compared to dalteparin,” said Robert D. McBane II, MD, of the Mayo Clinic in Rochester, Minn., at the annual meeting of the American Society of Hematology.
The trial included 300 adults (aged 18 years and older) with active cancer and acute VTE who were randomized to receive apixaban (n = 150) or dalteparin (n = 150). The dose and schedule for oral apixaban was 10 mg twice daily for 7 days followed by 5 mg twice daily for 6 months. Dalteparin was given subcutaneously at 200 IU/kg per day for 1 month followed by 150 IU/kg daily for 6 months. Among the patients in the study, 145 patients in the apixaban arm and 142 in the dalteparin arm ultimately received their assigned treatment.
Every month, patients completed an anticoagulation satisfaction survey and bruise survey (a modification of the Duke Anticoagulation Satisfaction Scale). They also underwent lab testing (complete blood count, liver and renal function testing) and were assessed for outcomes, medication reconciliation, drug compliance, and ECOG status on a monthly basis.
Patient characteristics
Baseline characteristics were similar between the treatment arms. The mean age was 64 years in both arms, and roughly half of patients in both arms were female. Hematologic malignancies were present in 9% of patients in the apixaban arm and 11% in the dalteparin arm. Others included lung, colorectal,
pancreatic/hepatobiliary, gynecologic, breast, genitourinary, upper gastrointestinal, and brain cancers.
Of patients in the study, 65% of those in the apixaban arm and 66% in the dalteparin arm had distant metastasis, and 74% of patients in both arms were receiving chemotherapy while on study.
Patients had the following qualifying thrombotic events:
- Any pulmonary embolism (PE) – 55% of patients in the apixaban arm and 51% in the dalteparin arm
- Any deep vein thrombosis (DVT) – 48% and 47%, respectively
- PE only – 44% and 39%, respectively
- PE with DVT – 12% in both arms
- DVT only – 37% and 35%, respectively
- Lower extremity DVT – 31% and 34%, respectively
- Upper extremity DVT – 17% and 14%, respectively
- Cerebral venous thrombosis (VT) – 1% and 0%, respectively
- Splanchnic VT – 8% and 18%, respectively.
Bleeding, thrombosis, and death
The study’s primary endpoint was major bleeding, which did not occur in any of the apixaban-treated patients. However, major bleeding did occur in two (1.4%) patients in the dalteparin arm (P = .14).
A secondary endpoint was major bleeding plus clinically relevant nonmajor bleeding. This occurred in nine (6.2%) patients in the apixaban arm and nine (6.3%) in the dalteparin arm (P = .88).
The researchers also assessed VTE recurrence. One patient in the apixaban arm (0.7%) and nine in the dalteparin arm (6.3%) had VTE recurrence (P = .03).
The patient in the apixaban arm experienced cerebral VT, and the patients with recurrence in the dalteparin arm had leg (n = 4) or arm (n = 2) VTE, PE (n = 1), or splanchnic VT (n = 2).
One patient in each arm (0.7%) had arterial thrombosis.
There was no significant difference in cumulative mortality between the treatment arms (hazard ratio, 1.40; P = .3078).
Satisfaction and discontinuation
Overall, apixaban fared better than dalteparin in the monthly patient satisfaction surveys. At various time points, apixaban-treated patients were significantly less likely to be concerned about excessive bruising, find anticoagulant treatment a burden or difficult to carry out, or say anticoagulant treatment added stress to their lives, negatively impacted their quality of life, or caused them “a great deal” of worry, irritation, or frustration.
However, apixaban-treated patients were less likely than dalteparin recipients to have confidence that their drug protected them from VTE recurrence, while the apixaban recipients were more likely than the dalteparin group to report overall satisfaction with their treatment.
In addition, premature treatment discontinuation was more common in the dalteparin group than in the apixaban group – 15% and 4%, respectively (P = .0012).
“Apixaban was well tolerated with superior patient safety satisfaction, as well as significantly fewer study drug discontinuations compared to dalteparin,” Dr. McBane said. “I believe that these data support the use of apixaban for the acute treatment of cancer-associated venous thromboembolism.”
This study was funded by BMS/Pfizer Alliance. Dr. McBane declared no other conflicts of interest.
SOURCE: McBane RD et al. ASH 2018, Abstract 421.
SAN DIEGO – according to the Phase 3 ADAM VTE trial.
The rates of major bleeding and clinically relevant nonmajor bleeding in patients who received apixaban were similar to those in patients who received dalteparin. However, the rate of VTE recurrence was significantly lower with apixaban than it was with dalteparin.
“[A]pixaban was associated with very low bleeding rates and venous thrombosis recurrence rates compared to dalteparin,” said Robert D. McBane II, MD, of the Mayo Clinic in Rochester, Minn., at the annual meeting of the American Society of Hematology.
The trial included 300 adults (aged 18 years and older) with active cancer and acute VTE who were randomized to receive apixaban (n = 150) or dalteparin (n = 150). The dose and schedule for oral apixaban was 10 mg twice daily for 7 days followed by 5 mg twice daily for 6 months. Dalteparin was given subcutaneously at 200 IU/kg per day for 1 month followed by 150 IU/kg daily for 6 months. Among the patients in the study, 145 patients in the apixaban arm and 142 in the dalteparin arm ultimately received their assigned treatment.
Every month, patients completed an anticoagulation satisfaction survey and bruise survey (a modification of the Duke Anticoagulation Satisfaction Scale). They also underwent lab testing (complete blood count, liver and renal function testing) and were assessed for outcomes, medication reconciliation, drug compliance, and ECOG status on a monthly basis.
Patient characteristics
Baseline characteristics were similar between the treatment arms. The mean age was 64 years in both arms, and roughly half of patients in both arms were female. Hematologic malignancies were present in 9% of patients in the apixaban arm and 11% in the dalteparin arm. Others included lung, colorectal,
pancreatic/hepatobiliary, gynecologic, breast, genitourinary, upper gastrointestinal, and brain cancers.
Of patients in the study, 65% of those in the apixaban arm and 66% in the dalteparin arm had distant metastasis, and 74% of patients in both arms were receiving chemotherapy while on study.
Patients had the following qualifying thrombotic events:
- Any pulmonary embolism (PE) – 55% of patients in the apixaban arm and 51% in the dalteparin arm
- Any deep vein thrombosis (DVT) – 48% and 47%, respectively
- PE only – 44% and 39%, respectively
- PE with DVT – 12% in both arms
- DVT only – 37% and 35%, respectively
- Lower extremity DVT – 31% and 34%, respectively
- Upper extremity DVT – 17% and 14%, respectively
- Cerebral venous thrombosis (VT) – 1% and 0%, respectively
- Splanchnic VT – 8% and 18%, respectively.
Bleeding, thrombosis, and death
The study’s primary endpoint was major bleeding, which did not occur in any of the apixaban-treated patients. However, major bleeding did occur in two (1.4%) patients in the dalteparin arm (P = .14).
A secondary endpoint was major bleeding plus clinically relevant nonmajor bleeding. This occurred in nine (6.2%) patients in the apixaban arm and nine (6.3%) in the dalteparin arm (P = .88).
The researchers also assessed VTE recurrence. One patient in the apixaban arm (0.7%) and nine in the dalteparin arm (6.3%) had VTE recurrence (P = .03).
The patient in the apixaban arm experienced cerebral VT, and the patients with recurrence in the dalteparin arm had leg (n = 4) or arm (n = 2) VTE, PE (n = 1), or splanchnic VT (n = 2).
One patient in each arm (0.7%) had arterial thrombosis.
There was no significant difference in cumulative mortality between the treatment arms (hazard ratio, 1.40; P = .3078).
Satisfaction and discontinuation
Overall, apixaban fared better than dalteparin in the monthly patient satisfaction surveys. At various time points, apixaban-treated patients were significantly less likely to be concerned about excessive bruising, find anticoagulant treatment a burden or difficult to carry out, or say anticoagulant treatment added stress to their lives, negatively impacted their quality of life, or caused them “a great deal” of worry, irritation, or frustration.
However, apixaban-treated patients were less likely than dalteparin recipients to have confidence that their drug protected them from VTE recurrence, while the apixaban recipients were more likely than the dalteparin group to report overall satisfaction with their treatment.
In addition, premature treatment discontinuation was more common in the dalteparin group than in the apixaban group – 15% and 4%, respectively (P = .0012).
“Apixaban was well tolerated with superior patient safety satisfaction, as well as significantly fewer study drug discontinuations compared to dalteparin,” Dr. McBane said. “I believe that these data support the use of apixaban for the acute treatment of cancer-associated venous thromboembolism.”
This study was funded by BMS/Pfizer Alliance. Dr. McBane declared no other conflicts of interest.
SOURCE: McBane RD et al. ASH 2018, Abstract 421.
SAN DIEGO – according to the Phase 3 ADAM VTE trial.
The rates of major bleeding and clinically relevant nonmajor bleeding in patients who received apixaban were similar to those in patients who received dalteparin. However, the rate of VTE recurrence was significantly lower with apixaban than it was with dalteparin.
“[A]pixaban was associated with very low bleeding rates and venous thrombosis recurrence rates compared to dalteparin,” said Robert D. McBane II, MD, of the Mayo Clinic in Rochester, Minn., at the annual meeting of the American Society of Hematology.
The trial included 300 adults (aged 18 years and older) with active cancer and acute VTE who were randomized to receive apixaban (n = 150) or dalteparin (n = 150). The dose and schedule for oral apixaban was 10 mg twice daily for 7 days followed by 5 mg twice daily for 6 months. Dalteparin was given subcutaneously at 200 IU/kg per day for 1 month followed by 150 IU/kg daily for 6 months. Among the patients in the study, 145 patients in the apixaban arm and 142 in the dalteparin arm ultimately received their assigned treatment.
Every month, patients completed an anticoagulation satisfaction survey and bruise survey (a modification of the Duke Anticoagulation Satisfaction Scale). They also underwent lab testing (complete blood count, liver and renal function testing) and were assessed for outcomes, medication reconciliation, drug compliance, and ECOG status on a monthly basis.
Patient characteristics
Baseline characteristics were similar between the treatment arms. The mean age was 64 years in both arms, and roughly half of patients in both arms were female. Hematologic malignancies were present in 9% of patients in the apixaban arm and 11% in the dalteparin arm. Others included lung, colorectal,
pancreatic/hepatobiliary, gynecologic, breast, genitourinary, upper gastrointestinal, and brain cancers.
Of patients in the study, 65% of those in the apixaban arm and 66% in the dalteparin arm had distant metastasis, and 74% of patients in both arms were receiving chemotherapy while on study.
Patients had the following qualifying thrombotic events:
- Any pulmonary embolism (PE) – 55% of patients in the apixaban arm and 51% in the dalteparin arm
- Any deep vein thrombosis (DVT) – 48% and 47%, respectively
- PE only – 44% and 39%, respectively
- PE with DVT – 12% in both arms
- DVT only – 37% and 35%, respectively
- Lower extremity DVT – 31% and 34%, respectively
- Upper extremity DVT – 17% and 14%, respectively
- Cerebral venous thrombosis (VT) – 1% and 0%, respectively
- Splanchnic VT – 8% and 18%, respectively.
Bleeding, thrombosis, and death
The study’s primary endpoint was major bleeding, which did not occur in any of the apixaban-treated patients. However, major bleeding did occur in two (1.4%) patients in the dalteparin arm (P = .14).
A secondary endpoint was major bleeding plus clinically relevant nonmajor bleeding. This occurred in nine (6.2%) patients in the apixaban arm and nine (6.3%) in the dalteparin arm (P = .88).
The researchers also assessed VTE recurrence. One patient in the apixaban arm (0.7%) and nine in the dalteparin arm (6.3%) had VTE recurrence (P = .03).
The patient in the apixaban arm experienced cerebral VT, and the patients with recurrence in the dalteparin arm had leg (n = 4) or arm (n = 2) VTE, PE (n = 1), or splanchnic VT (n = 2).
One patient in each arm (0.7%) had arterial thrombosis.
There was no significant difference in cumulative mortality between the treatment arms (hazard ratio, 1.40; P = .3078).
Satisfaction and discontinuation
Overall, apixaban fared better than dalteparin in the monthly patient satisfaction surveys. At various time points, apixaban-treated patients were significantly less likely to be concerned about excessive bruising, find anticoagulant treatment a burden or difficult to carry out, or say anticoagulant treatment added stress to their lives, negatively impacted their quality of life, or caused them “a great deal” of worry, irritation, or frustration.
However, apixaban-treated patients were less likely than dalteparin recipients to have confidence that their drug protected them from VTE recurrence, while the apixaban recipients were more likely than the dalteparin group to report overall satisfaction with their treatment.
In addition, premature treatment discontinuation was more common in the dalteparin group than in the apixaban group – 15% and 4%, respectively (P = .0012).
“Apixaban was well tolerated with superior patient safety satisfaction, as well as significantly fewer study drug discontinuations compared to dalteparin,” Dr. McBane said. “I believe that these data support the use of apixaban for the acute treatment of cancer-associated venous thromboembolism.”
This study was funded by BMS/Pfizer Alliance. Dr. McBane declared no other conflicts of interest.
SOURCE: McBane RD et al. ASH 2018, Abstract 421.
REPORTING FROM ASH 2018
Key clinical point: Apixaban is associated with a similar risk of major bleeding and a lower risk of VTE recurrence when compared with dalteparin in patients with cancer-associated VTE.
Major finding: There were no major bleeding events in the apixaban arm and two in the dalteparin arm (P = .14).
Study details: Phase 3 study of 300 patients.
Disclosures: This study was funded by BMS/Pfizer Alliance.
Source: McBane RD et al. ASH 2018, Abstract 421.
Rivaroxaban can reduce VTE in cancer patients
SAN DIEGO—In the phase 3 CASSINI trial, prophylaxis with rivaroxaban reduced the rate of venous thromboembolism (VTE) and VTE-related death in high-risk ambulatory cancer patients receiving systemic therapy.
The reduction in VTE and related death was not statistically significant in the primary analysis, which included a period of time after treatment had stopped.
However, the reduction in VTE and related death was significant in a prespecified secondary analysis limited to the on-treatment period.
Alok A. Khorana, MD, of the Cleveland Clinic in Ohio, presented these results at the 2018 ASH Annual Meeting (abstract LBA-1).
The trial (NCT02555878) included 841 patients enrolled at 143 centers in 11 countries. The patients had solid tumor malignancies or lymphomas and a high risk of VTE (Khorana score of 2 or greater).
The patients were randomized to either rivaroxaban at 10 mg once daily (n=420) or placebo once daily (n=421).
In the primary analysis period of 180 days, the composite endpoint of VTE or VTE-related death occurred in 5.95% of the rivaroxaban-treated group and 8.79% of the placebo group (hazard ratio [HR]=0.66; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.40-1.09; P=0.101).
However, 177 patients (43.7%) in the rivaroxaban group stopped treatment before the 180-day mark, as did 203 patients (50.2%) in the placebo group.
In a prespecified secondary analysis looking only at the treatment period, rivaroxaban did significantly reduce the risk of VTE and VTE-related death, Dr. Khorana said. The composite endpoint occurred in 2.62% of rivaroxaban-treated patients and 6.41% of placebo-treated patients in that analysis (HR=0.40; 95% CI, 0.20-0.80; P=0.007).
Rates of major bleeding and clinically relevant nonmajor bleeding were not significantly different between the groups.
Major bleeding occurred in 1.98% (n=8) of rivaroxaban-treated patients and 0.99% (n=4) of placebo-treated patients (HR=1.96, 0.59-6.49; P=0.265).
Clinically relevant nonmajor bleeding occurred in 2.72% (n=11) and 1.98% (n=8), respectively (HR=1.34, 95% CI, 0.54-3.32; P=0.532).
CASSINI was sponsored by Bayer and Janssen. Dr. Khorana reported relationships with Janssen, Pharmacyclics, PharmaCyte, TriSalus Life Sciences, PAREXEL, Pfizer, Sanofi, Halozyme, Seattle Genetics, AngioDynamics, LEO Pharma, Medscape/WebMD, and Bayer.
SAN DIEGO—In the phase 3 CASSINI trial, prophylaxis with rivaroxaban reduced the rate of venous thromboembolism (VTE) and VTE-related death in high-risk ambulatory cancer patients receiving systemic therapy.
The reduction in VTE and related death was not statistically significant in the primary analysis, which included a period of time after treatment had stopped.
However, the reduction in VTE and related death was significant in a prespecified secondary analysis limited to the on-treatment period.
Alok A. Khorana, MD, of the Cleveland Clinic in Ohio, presented these results at the 2018 ASH Annual Meeting (abstract LBA-1).
The trial (NCT02555878) included 841 patients enrolled at 143 centers in 11 countries. The patients had solid tumor malignancies or lymphomas and a high risk of VTE (Khorana score of 2 or greater).
The patients were randomized to either rivaroxaban at 10 mg once daily (n=420) or placebo once daily (n=421).
In the primary analysis period of 180 days, the composite endpoint of VTE or VTE-related death occurred in 5.95% of the rivaroxaban-treated group and 8.79% of the placebo group (hazard ratio [HR]=0.66; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.40-1.09; P=0.101).
However, 177 patients (43.7%) in the rivaroxaban group stopped treatment before the 180-day mark, as did 203 patients (50.2%) in the placebo group.
In a prespecified secondary analysis looking only at the treatment period, rivaroxaban did significantly reduce the risk of VTE and VTE-related death, Dr. Khorana said. The composite endpoint occurred in 2.62% of rivaroxaban-treated patients and 6.41% of placebo-treated patients in that analysis (HR=0.40; 95% CI, 0.20-0.80; P=0.007).
Rates of major bleeding and clinically relevant nonmajor bleeding were not significantly different between the groups.
Major bleeding occurred in 1.98% (n=8) of rivaroxaban-treated patients and 0.99% (n=4) of placebo-treated patients (HR=1.96, 0.59-6.49; P=0.265).
Clinically relevant nonmajor bleeding occurred in 2.72% (n=11) and 1.98% (n=8), respectively (HR=1.34, 95% CI, 0.54-3.32; P=0.532).
CASSINI was sponsored by Bayer and Janssen. Dr. Khorana reported relationships with Janssen, Pharmacyclics, PharmaCyte, TriSalus Life Sciences, PAREXEL, Pfizer, Sanofi, Halozyme, Seattle Genetics, AngioDynamics, LEO Pharma, Medscape/WebMD, and Bayer.
SAN DIEGO—In the phase 3 CASSINI trial, prophylaxis with rivaroxaban reduced the rate of venous thromboembolism (VTE) and VTE-related death in high-risk ambulatory cancer patients receiving systemic therapy.
The reduction in VTE and related death was not statistically significant in the primary analysis, which included a period of time after treatment had stopped.
However, the reduction in VTE and related death was significant in a prespecified secondary analysis limited to the on-treatment period.
Alok A. Khorana, MD, of the Cleveland Clinic in Ohio, presented these results at the 2018 ASH Annual Meeting (abstract LBA-1).
The trial (NCT02555878) included 841 patients enrolled at 143 centers in 11 countries. The patients had solid tumor malignancies or lymphomas and a high risk of VTE (Khorana score of 2 or greater).
The patients were randomized to either rivaroxaban at 10 mg once daily (n=420) or placebo once daily (n=421).
In the primary analysis period of 180 days, the composite endpoint of VTE or VTE-related death occurred in 5.95% of the rivaroxaban-treated group and 8.79% of the placebo group (hazard ratio [HR]=0.66; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.40-1.09; P=0.101).
However, 177 patients (43.7%) in the rivaroxaban group stopped treatment before the 180-day mark, as did 203 patients (50.2%) in the placebo group.
In a prespecified secondary analysis looking only at the treatment period, rivaroxaban did significantly reduce the risk of VTE and VTE-related death, Dr. Khorana said. The composite endpoint occurred in 2.62% of rivaroxaban-treated patients and 6.41% of placebo-treated patients in that analysis (HR=0.40; 95% CI, 0.20-0.80; P=0.007).
Rates of major bleeding and clinically relevant nonmajor bleeding were not significantly different between the groups.
Major bleeding occurred in 1.98% (n=8) of rivaroxaban-treated patients and 0.99% (n=4) of placebo-treated patients (HR=1.96, 0.59-6.49; P=0.265).
Clinically relevant nonmajor bleeding occurred in 2.72% (n=11) and 1.98% (n=8), respectively (HR=1.34, 95% CI, 0.54-3.32; P=0.532).
CASSINI was sponsored by Bayer and Janssen. Dr. Khorana reported relationships with Janssen, Pharmacyclics, PharmaCyte, TriSalus Life Sciences, PAREXEL, Pfizer, Sanofi, Halozyme, Seattle Genetics, AngioDynamics, LEO Pharma, Medscape/WebMD, and Bayer.
Rivaroxaban may reduce VTE risk in cancer patients
SAN DIEGO – Prophylaxis with rivaroxaban significantly reduced the rate of venous thromboembolism and associated death in high-risk ambulatory cancer patients receiving systemic therapy, results of a randomized trial show.
The reduction in venous thromboembolism (VTE) or VTE-related death was not statistically significant in the primary analysis, in part because a large proportion of patients stopped taking the direct oral anticoagulant, according to investigator Alok A. Khorana, MD, of the Cleveland Clinic.
However, the reduction in events was significant in a prespecified secondary analysis limited to the on-treatment period, Dr. Khorana reported at the annual meeting of the American Society of Hematology, adding that rates of major and nonmajor bleeding were low.
Results are “eagerly awaited” from a different prophylaxis trial – the AVERT study – looking at another direct oral anticoagulant in high-risk cancer patients, Dr. Khorana said in a late-breaking abstracts session.
“If the findings of that trial are consistent with ours, then we certainly hope that these findings should inform future recommendations regarding thromboprophylaxis for high-risk ambulatory cancer patients, and then the landscape of anticoagulation in the cancer population should start to shift from management of events to primary prevention,” he said.
In the study by Dr. Khorana and his colleagues, known as CASSINI, 841 patients with various solid tumors and lymphomas were randomized to either rivaroxaban 10 mg or placebo once daily. The patients, enrolled at 143 study centers in 11 countries, all had a Khorana risk score of 2 or greater.
In the primary analysis period of 180 days, the composite endpoint of VTE or VTE-related death occurred in 5.95% of the rivaroxaban-treated group and 8.79% of the placebo group (hazard ratio, 0.66; 95% confidence interval, 0.40-1.09; P = .101). However, a total of 177 patients (43.7%) stopped rivaroxaban earlier than 180 days, and likewise, 203 patients (50.2%) stopped placebo early.
In a prespecified secondary analysis looking just at the period of time when patients were actually taking rivaroxaban or placebo, rivaroxaban did significantly reduce risk of VTE or VTE-related death, Dr. Khorana said. The composite endpoint occurred in 2.62% of the rivaroxaban patients and 6.41% of placebo patients in that on-treatment analysis (HR, 0.40; 95% CI, 0.20-0.80; P = .007).
Rates of major bleeding and clinically relevant nonmajor bleeding were not significantly different between groups, according to results of a safety analysis. Major bleeding occurred in eight rivaroxaban patients and four placebo patients, or 1.98% and 0.99%, respectively (P = .265).
CASSINI was sponsored by Bayer and Janssen. Dr. Khorana reported disclosures related to Janssen, Bayer, PAREXEL, Sanofi, Pfizer, TriSalus Life Sciences, Halozyme, Seattle Genetics, AngioDynamics, and others.
SAN DIEGO – Prophylaxis with rivaroxaban significantly reduced the rate of venous thromboembolism and associated death in high-risk ambulatory cancer patients receiving systemic therapy, results of a randomized trial show.
The reduction in venous thromboembolism (VTE) or VTE-related death was not statistically significant in the primary analysis, in part because a large proportion of patients stopped taking the direct oral anticoagulant, according to investigator Alok A. Khorana, MD, of the Cleveland Clinic.
However, the reduction in events was significant in a prespecified secondary analysis limited to the on-treatment period, Dr. Khorana reported at the annual meeting of the American Society of Hematology, adding that rates of major and nonmajor bleeding were low.
Results are “eagerly awaited” from a different prophylaxis trial – the AVERT study – looking at another direct oral anticoagulant in high-risk cancer patients, Dr. Khorana said in a late-breaking abstracts session.
“If the findings of that trial are consistent with ours, then we certainly hope that these findings should inform future recommendations regarding thromboprophylaxis for high-risk ambulatory cancer patients, and then the landscape of anticoagulation in the cancer population should start to shift from management of events to primary prevention,” he said.
In the study by Dr. Khorana and his colleagues, known as CASSINI, 841 patients with various solid tumors and lymphomas were randomized to either rivaroxaban 10 mg or placebo once daily. The patients, enrolled at 143 study centers in 11 countries, all had a Khorana risk score of 2 or greater.
In the primary analysis period of 180 days, the composite endpoint of VTE or VTE-related death occurred in 5.95% of the rivaroxaban-treated group and 8.79% of the placebo group (hazard ratio, 0.66; 95% confidence interval, 0.40-1.09; P = .101). However, a total of 177 patients (43.7%) stopped rivaroxaban earlier than 180 days, and likewise, 203 patients (50.2%) stopped placebo early.
In a prespecified secondary analysis looking just at the period of time when patients were actually taking rivaroxaban or placebo, rivaroxaban did significantly reduce risk of VTE or VTE-related death, Dr. Khorana said. The composite endpoint occurred in 2.62% of the rivaroxaban patients and 6.41% of placebo patients in that on-treatment analysis (HR, 0.40; 95% CI, 0.20-0.80; P = .007).
Rates of major bleeding and clinically relevant nonmajor bleeding were not significantly different between groups, according to results of a safety analysis. Major bleeding occurred in eight rivaroxaban patients and four placebo patients, or 1.98% and 0.99%, respectively (P = .265).
CASSINI was sponsored by Bayer and Janssen. Dr. Khorana reported disclosures related to Janssen, Bayer, PAREXEL, Sanofi, Pfizer, TriSalus Life Sciences, Halozyme, Seattle Genetics, AngioDynamics, and others.
SAN DIEGO – Prophylaxis with rivaroxaban significantly reduced the rate of venous thromboembolism and associated death in high-risk ambulatory cancer patients receiving systemic therapy, results of a randomized trial show.
The reduction in venous thromboembolism (VTE) or VTE-related death was not statistically significant in the primary analysis, in part because a large proportion of patients stopped taking the direct oral anticoagulant, according to investigator Alok A. Khorana, MD, of the Cleveland Clinic.
However, the reduction in events was significant in a prespecified secondary analysis limited to the on-treatment period, Dr. Khorana reported at the annual meeting of the American Society of Hematology, adding that rates of major and nonmajor bleeding were low.
Results are “eagerly awaited” from a different prophylaxis trial – the AVERT study – looking at another direct oral anticoagulant in high-risk cancer patients, Dr. Khorana said in a late-breaking abstracts session.
“If the findings of that trial are consistent with ours, then we certainly hope that these findings should inform future recommendations regarding thromboprophylaxis for high-risk ambulatory cancer patients, and then the landscape of anticoagulation in the cancer population should start to shift from management of events to primary prevention,” he said.
In the study by Dr. Khorana and his colleagues, known as CASSINI, 841 patients with various solid tumors and lymphomas were randomized to either rivaroxaban 10 mg or placebo once daily. The patients, enrolled at 143 study centers in 11 countries, all had a Khorana risk score of 2 or greater.
In the primary analysis period of 180 days, the composite endpoint of VTE or VTE-related death occurred in 5.95% of the rivaroxaban-treated group and 8.79% of the placebo group (hazard ratio, 0.66; 95% confidence interval, 0.40-1.09; P = .101). However, a total of 177 patients (43.7%) stopped rivaroxaban earlier than 180 days, and likewise, 203 patients (50.2%) stopped placebo early.
In a prespecified secondary analysis looking just at the period of time when patients were actually taking rivaroxaban or placebo, rivaroxaban did significantly reduce risk of VTE or VTE-related death, Dr. Khorana said. The composite endpoint occurred in 2.62% of the rivaroxaban patients and 6.41% of placebo patients in that on-treatment analysis (HR, 0.40; 95% CI, 0.20-0.80; P = .007).
Rates of major bleeding and clinically relevant nonmajor bleeding were not significantly different between groups, according to results of a safety analysis. Major bleeding occurred in eight rivaroxaban patients and four placebo patients, or 1.98% and 0.99%, respectively (P = .265).
CASSINI was sponsored by Bayer and Janssen. Dr. Khorana reported disclosures related to Janssen, Bayer, PAREXEL, Sanofi, Pfizer, TriSalus Life Sciences, Halozyme, Seattle Genetics, AngioDynamics, and others.
REPORTING FROM ASH 2018
Key clinical point:
Major finding: In an on-treatment analysis, the composite endpoint occurred in 2.62% of the rivaroxaban patients and 6.41% of placebo patients (hazard ratio, 0.40; 95% confidence interval, 0.20-0.80; P = .007).
Study details: The results from CASSINI included 841 patients with various solid tumors and lymphomas randomized to rivaroxaban or placebo daily.
Disclosures: CASSINI was sponsored by Bayer and Janssen. Dr. Khorana reported disclosures related to Janssen, Bayer, PAREXEL, Sanofi, Pfizer, TriSalus Life Sciences, Halozyme, Seattle Genetics, AngioDynamics, and others.
Anticoagulant choice, PPI cotherapy impact risk of upper GI bleeding
Patients receiving oral anticoagulant treatment had the lowest risk of gastrointestinal bleeding when taking apixaban, compared with rivaroxaban, dabigatran, and warfarin, according to a recent study.
Further, patients who received proton pump inhibitor (PPI) cotherapy had a lower overall risk of gastrointestinal bleeding, according to Wayne A. Ray, PhD, from the department of health policy at Vanderbilt University, Nashville, Tenn., and his colleagues.
“These findings indicate the potential benefits of a gastrointestinal bleeding risk assessment before initiating anticoagulant treatment,” Dr. Ray and his colleagues wrote in their study, which was published in JAMA.
Dr. Ray and his colleagues performed a retrospective, population-based study of 1,643,123 Medicare beneficiaries (mean age, 76.4 years) who received 1,713,183 new episodes of oral anticoagulant treatment between January 2011 and September 2015. They analyzed how patients reacted to apixaban, dabigatran, rivaroxaban, or warfarin both with and without PPI cotherapy.
Overall, the risk of gastrointestinal bleeding across 754,389 person-years without PPI therapy was 115 per 10,000 person-years (95% confidence interval, 112-118) in 7,119 patients. The researchers found the risk of gastrointestinal bleeding was highest in patients taking rivaroxaban (1,278 patients; 144 per 10,000 person-years; 95% CI, 136-152) and lowest when taking apixaban (279 patients; 120 per 10,000 person-years; incidence rate ratio, 1,97; 95% CI, 1.73-2.25), compared with dabigatran (629 patients; 120 per 10,000 person-years; IRR, 1.19; 95% CI, 1.08-1.32) and warfarin (4,933 patients; 113 per 10,000 person-years; IRR, 1.27; 95% CI, 1.19-1.35). There was a significantly lower incidence of gastrointestinal bleeding for apixaban, compared with warfarin (IRR, 0.64; 95% CI, 0.57-0.73) and dabigatran (IRR, 0.61; 95% CI, 0.52-0.70).
There was a lower overall incidence of gastrointestinal bleeding when receiving PPI cotherapy (264,447 person-years; 76 per 10,000 person-years), compared with patients who received anticoagulant treatment without PPI cotherapy (IRR, 0.66; 95% CI, 0.62-0.69). This reduced incidence of gastrointestinal bleeding was also seen in patients receiving PPI cotherapy and taking apixaban (IRR, 0.66; 95% CI, 0.52-0.85), dabigatran (IRR, 0.49; 95% CI, 0.41-0.59), rivaroxaban (IRR, 0.75; 95% CI, 0.68-0.84), and warfarin (IRR, 0.65; 95% CI, 0.62-0.69).
The researchers noted that limitations in this study included potential misclassification of anticoagulant treatment, PPI cotherapy, and NSAIDs because of a reliance on filled prescription data; confounding by unmeasured factors such as aspirin exposure or Helicobacter pylori infection; and gastrointestinal bleeding being measured using a disease risk score.
This study was supported by a grant from the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute. The authors reported no relevant conflicts of interest.
SOURCE: Ray WA et al. JAMA. 2018 Dec 4. doi: 10.1001/jama.2018.17242.
Patients receiving oral anticoagulant treatment had the lowest risk of gastrointestinal bleeding when taking apixaban, compared with rivaroxaban, dabigatran, and warfarin, according to a recent study.
Further, patients who received proton pump inhibitor (PPI) cotherapy had a lower overall risk of gastrointestinal bleeding, according to Wayne A. Ray, PhD, from the department of health policy at Vanderbilt University, Nashville, Tenn., and his colleagues.
“These findings indicate the potential benefits of a gastrointestinal bleeding risk assessment before initiating anticoagulant treatment,” Dr. Ray and his colleagues wrote in their study, which was published in JAMA.
Dr. Ray and his colleagues performed a retrospective, population-based study of 1,643,123 Medicare beneficiaries (mean age, 76.4 years) who received 1,713,183 new episodes of oral anticoagulant treatment between January 2011 and September 2015. They analyzed how patients reacted to apixaban, dabigatran, rivaroxaban, or warfarin both with and without PPI cotherapy.
Overall, the risk of gastrointestinal bleeding across 754,389 person-years without PPI therapy was 115 per 10,000 person-years (95% confidence interval, 112-118) in 7,119 patients. The researchers found the risk of gastrointestinal bleeding was highest in patients taking rivaroxaban (1,278 patients; 144 per 10,000 person-years; 95% CI, 136-152) and lowest when taking apixaban (279 patients; 120 per 10,000 person-years; incidence rate ratio, 1,97; 95% CI, 1.73-2.25), compared with dabigatran (629 patients; 120 per 10,000 person-years; IRR, 1.19; 95% CI, 1.08-1.32) and warfarin (4,933 patients; 113 per 10,000 person-years; IRR, 1.27; 95% CI, 1.19-1.35). There was a significantly lower incidence of gastrointestinal bleeding for apixaban, compared with warfarin (IRR, 0.64; 95% CI, 0.57-0.73) and dabigatran (IRR, 0.61; 95% CI, 0.52-0.70).
There was a lower overall incidence of gastrointestinal bleeding when receiving PPI cotherapy (264,447 person-years; 76 per 10,000 person-years), compared with patients who received anticoagulant treatment without PPI cotherapy (IRR, 0.66; 95% CI, 0.62-0.69). This reduced incidence of gastrointestinal bleeding was also seen in patients receiving PPI cotherapy and taking apixaban (IRR, 0.66; 95% CI, 0.52-0.85), dabigatran (IRR, 0.49; 95% CI, 0.41-0.59), rivaroxaban (IRR, 0.75; 95% CI, 0.68-0.84), and warfarin (IRR, 0.65; 95% CI, 0.62-0.69).
The researchers noted that limitations in this study included potential misclassification of anticoagulant treatment, PPI cotherapy, and NSAIDs because of a reliance on filled prescription data; confounding by unmeasured factors such as aspirin exposure or Helicobacter pylori infection; and gastrointestinal bleeding being measured using a disease risk score.
This study was supported by a grant from the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute. The authors reported no relevant conflicts of interest.
SOURCE: Ray WA et al. JAMA. 2018 Dec 4. doi: 10.1001/jama.2018.17242.
Patients receiving oral anticoagulant treatment had the lowest risk of gastrointestinal bleeding when taking apixaban, compared with rivaroxaban, dabigatran, and warfarin, according to a recent study.
Further, patients who received proton pump inhibitor (PPI) cotherapy had a lower overall risk of gastrointestinal bleeding, according to Wayne A. Ray, PhD, from the department of health policy at Vanderbilt University, Nashville, Tenn., and his colleagues.
“These findings indicate the potential benefits of a gastrointestinal bleeding risk assessment before initiating anticoagulant treatment,” Dr. Ray and his colleagues wrote in their study, which was published in JAMA.
Dr. Ray and his colleagues performed a retrospective, population-based study of 1,643,123 Medicare beneficiaries (mean age, 76.4 years) who received 1,713,183 new episodes of oral anticoagulant treatment between January 2011 and September 2015. They analyzed how patients reacted to apixaban, dabigatran, rivaroxaban, or warfarin both with and without PPI cotherapy.
Overall, the risk of gastrointestinal bleeding across 754,389 person-years without PPI therapy was 115 per 10,000 person-years (95% confidence interval, 112-118) in 7,119 patients. The researchers found the risk of gastrointestinal bleeding was highest in patients taking rivaroxaban (1,278 patients; 144 per 10,000 person-years; 95% CI, 136-152) and lowest when taking apixaban (279 patients; 120 per 10,000 person-years; incidence rate ratio, 1,97; 95% CI, 1.73-2.25), compared with dabigatran (629 patients; 120 per 10,000 person-years; IRR, 1.19; 95% CI, 1.08-1.32) and warfarin (4,933 patients; 113 per 10,000 person-years; IRR, 1.27; 95% CI, 1.19-1.35). There was a significantly lower incidence of gastrointestinal bleeding for apixaban, compared with warfarin (IRR, 0.64; 95% CI, 0.57-0.73) and dabigatran (IRR, 0.61; 95% CI, 0.52-0.70).
There was a lower overall incidence of gastrointestinal bleeding when receiving PPI cotherapy (264,447 person-years; 76 per 10,000 person-years), compared with patients who received anticoagulant treatment without PPI cotherapy (IRR, 0.66; 95% CI, 0.62-0.69). This reduced incidence of gastrointestinal bleeding was also seen in patients receiving PPI cotherapy and taking apixaban (IRR, 0.66; 95% CI, 0.52-0.85), dabigatran (IRR, 0.49; 95% CI, 0.41-0.59), rivaroxaban (IRR, 0.75; 95% CI, 0.68-0.84), and warfarin (IRR, 0.65; 95% CI, 0.62-0.69).
The researchers noted that limitations in this study included potential misclassification of anticoagulant treatment, PPI cotherapy, and NSAIDs because of a reliance on filled prescription data; confounding by unmeasured factors such as aspirin exposure or Helicobacter pylori infection; and gastrointestinal bleeding being measured using a disease risk score.
This study was supported by a grant from the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute. The authors reported no relevant conflicts of interest.
SOURCE: Ray WA et al. JAMA. 2018 Dec 4. doi: 10.1001/jama.2018.17242.
FROM JAMA
Key clinical point: In patients receiving oral anticoagulant treatment, risk of gastrointestinal bleeding was highest in patients taking rivaroxaban, lowest when taking apixaban, and there was a lower overall incidence of gastrointestinal bleeding when receiving proton pump inhibitor cotherapy.
Major finding: Per 10,000 person-years, the incidence rate of gastrointestinal bleeding was 144 for rivaroxaban, 73 for apixaban, 120 for dabigatran, and 113 for warfarin; there was a gastrointestinal bleeding incidence rate ratio of 0.66 for patients using protein pump inhibitor cotherapy.
Study details: A retrospective, population-based study of 1,643,123 Medicare beneficiaries who received oral anticoagulant treatment between January 2011 and September 2015.
Disclosures: This study was supported by a grant from the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute. The authors reported no relevant conflicts of interest.
Source: Ray WA et al. JAMA. 2018 Dec 4. doi: 10.1001/jama.2018.17242.
Large cohort study IDs prognostic factors in thromboangiitis obliterans
CHICAGO – Nonwhite ethnicity and limb infection at diagnosis predict vascular events in patients with thromboangiitis obliterans (TAO), and the latter also predicts amputation, which occurs within 10 years of diagnosis in nearly a third of patients, according to findings from a large retrospective French cohort study.
After a mean follow-up of 5.7 years, 58.9% of 224 patients with TAO – also known as Buerger’s disease – experienced a vascular event, 21.4% experienced at least one amputation, and 1.3% died, Alexandre Le Joncour, MD, reported at the annual meeting of the American College of Rheumatology.
The 5- and 15-year vascular event-free survival rates were 45% and 28%, respectively, and the 10- and 15-year amputation-free survival rates were 74%, and 66%, respectively, said Dr. Le Joncour of Sorbonne University, Paris.
Of note, no significant difference was seen in the vascular event-free survival rates based on tobacco use levels (more than 22 pack-years vs. 22 or fewer pack-years; HR, 1.2), he said.
Patient characteristics and clinical factors found to independently predict vascular events included nonwhite ethnicity (hazard ratio, 2.35; P = .005) and limb infection at diagnosis (HR, 3.29; P = .045). Limb infection at diagnosis also independently predicted amputation (HR, 12.1; P less than .001), he said.
“But there was no significant [association with amputation] in patients who had claudication, critical ischemia, or ischemic ulcers/necrosis,” he noted, adding that a comparison of white and nonwhite patients showed that the groups were similar with respect to epidemiologic and cardiovascular factors, clinical symptom distribution, and rates of addiction to tobacco, alcohol, and illicit drugs.
It was also clear that patients who quit using tobacco had a significantly lower risk of amputation than did those who continued using tobacco (P = .001), he said, explaining that 43 of the 48 patients who experienced amputation were current smokers, and 5 were ex-smokers at the time of amputation.
Dr. Le Joncour and his colleagues included TAO patients diagnosed between 1967 and 2016 at a median age of 36 years at the time of first symptoms, with a median of 12 months from symptom onset until diagnosis. About 76% were men, and about 83% were white. Patients with diabetes, atherosclerosis, arterial emboli, connective tissue disease, and/or thrombophilia were excluded.
Vascular events in this study were defined as “an acute worsening of the disease course requiring treatment modifications,” and included critical ischemia (35% of cases), ulcers/necrosis (33%), claudication worsening (16%), deep vein thrombosis (3%), superficial phlebitis (7%), limb infection (4%), and “other” events (2%).
Major amputation was defined as “an amputation involving the tibio-tarsian articulation for lower limbs and the metacarpophalangeal articulation for upper limbs,” he explained.
The median time to amputation was 4 years, and patients who experienced amputation had a median age of 39 years. Half of the 48 patients who experienced amputation had one amputation, nearly a third had two amputations, and 19% had three amputations. About two-thirds had minor amputations and a third had major amputations.
The findings provide important prognostic information regarding TAO, Dr. Le Joncour said, noting that long-term data on outcomes in TAO patients have been lacking.
“We found specific characteristics that identified those at highest risk for subsequent vascular complications, and these factors are not only important predictors of vascular complications or relapse, but may also serve to adjust more aggressive management and close follow-up of these patients,” he concluded.
Dr. Le Joncour reported having no disclosures.
SOURCE: Le Joncour A et al. Arthritis Rheumatol. 2018;70(Suppl 10): Abstract 1885.
CHICAGO – Nonwhite ethnicity and limb infection at diagnosis predict vascular events in patients with thromboangiitis obliterans (TAO), and the latter also predicts amputation, which occurs within 10 years of diagnosis in nearly a third of patients, according to findings from a large retrospective French cohort study.
After a mean follow-up of 5.7 years, 58.9% of 224 patients with TAO – also known as Buerger’s disease – experienced a vascular event, 21.4% experienced at least one amputation, and 1.3% died, Alexandre Le Joncour, MD, reported at the annual meeting of the American College of Rheumatology.
The 5- and 15-year vascular event-free survival rates were 45% and 28%, respectively, and the 10- and 15-year amputation-free survival rates were 74%, and 66%, respectively, said Dr. Le Joncour of Sorbonne University, Paris.
Of note, no significant difference was seen in the vascular event-free survival rates based on tobacco use levels (more than 22 pack-years vs. 22 or fewer pack-years; HR, 1.2), he said.
Patient characteristics and clinical factors found to independently predict vascular events included nonwhite ethnicity (hazard ratio, 2.35; P = .005) and limb infection at diagnosis (HR, 3.29; P = .045). Limb infection at diagnosis also independently predicted amputation (HR, 12.1; P less than .001), he said.
“But there was no significant [association with amputation] in patients who had claudication, critical ischemia, or ischemic ulcers/necrosis,” he noted, adding that a comparison of white and nonwhite patients showed that the groups were similar with respect to epidemiologic and cardiovascular factors, clinical symptom distribution, and rates of addiction to tobacco, alcohol, and illicit drugs.
It was also clear that patients who quit using tobacco had a significantly lower risk of amputation than did those who continued using tobacco (P = .001), he said, explaining that 43 of the 48 patients who experienced amputation were current smokers, and 5 were ex-smokers at the time of amputation.
Dr. Le Joncour and his colleagues included TAO patients diagnosed between 1967 and 2016 at a median age of 36 years at the time of first symptoms, with a median of 12 months from symptom onset until diagnosis. About 76% were men, and about 83% were white. Patients with diabetes, atherosclerosis, arterial emboli, connective tissue disease, and/or thrombophilia were excluded.
Vascular events in this study were defined as “an acute worsening of the disease course requiring treatment modifications,” and included critical ischemia (35% of cases), ulcers/necrosis (33%), claudication worsening (16%), deep vein thrombosis (3%), superficial phlebitis (7%), limb infection (4%), and “other” events (2%).
Major amputation was defined as “an amputation involving the tibio-tarsian articulation for lower limbs and the metacarpophalangeal articulation for upper limbs,” he explained.
The median time to amputation was 4 years, and patients who experienced amputation had a median age of 39 years. Half of the 48 patients who experienced amputation had one amputation, nearly a third had two amputations, and 19% had three amputations. About two-thirds had minor amputations and a third had major amputations.
The findings provide important prognostic information regarding TAO, Dr. Le Joncour said, noting that long-term data on outcomes in TAO patients have been lacking.
“We found specific characteristics that identified those at highest risk for subsequent vascular complications, and these factors are not only important predictors of vascular complications or relapse, but may also serve to adjust more aggressive management and close follow-up of these patients,” he concluded.
Dr. Le Joncour reported having no disclosures.
SOURCE: Le Joncour A et al. Arthritis Rheumatol. 2018;70(Suppl 10): Abstract 1885.
CHICAGO – Nonwhite ethnicity and limb infection at diagnosis predict vascular events in patients with thromboangiitis obliterans (TAO), and the latter also predicts amputation, which occurs within 10 years of diagnosis in nearly a third of patients, according to findings from a large retrospective French cohort study.
After a mean follow-up of 5.7 years, 58.9% of 224 patients with TAO – also known as Buerger’s disease – experienced a vascular event, 21.4% experienced at least one amputation, and 1.3% died, Alexandre Le Joncour, MD, reported at the annual meeting of the American College of Rheumatology.
The 5- and 15-year vascular event-free survival rates were 45% and 28%, respectively, and the 10- and 15-year amputation-free survival rates were 74%, and 66%, respectively, said Dr. Le Joncour of Sorbonne University, Paris.
Of note, no significant difference was seen in the vascular event-free survival rates based on tobacco use levels (more than 22 pack-years vs. 22 or fewer pack-years; HR, 1.2), he said.
Patient characteristics and clinical factors found to independently predict vascular events included nonwhite ethnicity (hazard ratio, 2.35; P = .005) and limb infection at diagnosis (HR, 3.29; P = .045). Limb infection at diagnosis also independently predicted amputation (HR, 12.1; P less than .001), he said.
“But there was no significant [association with amputation] in patients who had claudication, critical ischemia, or ischemic ulcers/necrosis,” he noted, adding that a comparison of white and nonwhite patients showed that the groups were similar with respect to epidemiologic and cardiovascular factors, clinical symptom distribution, and rates of addiction to tobacco, alcohol, and illicit drugs.
It was also clear that patients who quit using tobacco had a significantly lower risk of amputation than did those who continued using tobacco (P = .001), he said, explaining that 43 of the 48 patients who experienced amputation were current smokers, and 5 were ex-smokers at the time of amputation.
Dr. Le Joncour and his colleagues included TAO patients diagnosed between 1967 and 2016 at a median age of 36 years at the time of first symptoms, with a median of 12 months from symptom onset until diagnosis. About 76% were men, and about 83% were white. Patients with diabetes, atherosclerosis, arterial emboli, connective tissue disease, and/or thrombophilia were excluded.
Vascular events in this study were defined as “an acute worsening of the disease course requiring treatment modifications,” and included critical ischemia (35% of cases), ulcers/necrosis (33%), claudication worsening (16%), deep vein thrombosis (3%), superficial phlebitis (7%), limb infection (4%), and “other” events (2%).
Major amputation was defined as “an amputation involving the tibio-tarsian articulation for lower limbs and the metacarpophalangeal articulation for upper limbs,” he explained.
The median time to amputation was 4 years, and patients who experienced amputation had a median age of 39 years. Half of the 48 patients who experienced amputation had one amputation, nearly a third had two amputations, and 19% had three amputations. About two-thirds had minor amputations and a third had major amputations.
The findings provide important prognostic information regarding TAO, Dr. Le Joncour said, noting that long-term data on outcomes in TAO patients have been lacking.
“We found specific characteristics that identified those at highest risk for subsequent vascular complications, and these factors are not only important predictors of vascular complications or relapse, but may also serve to adjust more aggressive management and close follow-up of these patients,” he concluded.
Dr. Le Joncour reported having no disclosures.
SOURCE: Le Joncour A et al. Arthritis Rheumatol. 2018;70(Suppl 10): Abstract 1885.
REPORTING FROM THE ACR ANNUAL MEETING
Key clinical point: Nonwhite ethnicity and limb infection predict poor prognosis in TAO.
Major finding: Ethnicity predicts vascular events (HR, 2.35); limb infection at diagnosis predicts vascular events and amputation (HR, 3.29 and 12.1, respectively).
Study details: A retrospective cohort study of 224 patients.
Disclosures: Dr. Le Joncour reported having no disclosures.
Source: Le Joncour A et al. Arthritis Rheumatol. 2018;70(Suppl 10): Abstract 1885.