Thrombosis

Clinical question: How does inferior vena cava (IVC) filter placement affect 30-day mortality in patients with venous thromboembolism (VTE) with increased risk of bleeding when anticoagulation is not feasible?

Background: Standard treatment for VTE, including deep venous thrombosis (DVT) and pulmonary embolism (PE), is anticoagulation. However, for patients with active bleeding or increased risk of bleeding, anticoagulation may be contraindicated. In these circumstances, placing an IVC filter is recommended by major professional societies; however, the mortality benefit of IVC filter placement is uncertain.

Study design: A retrospective cohort study.

Setting: State Inpatient and Emergency Department Databases from California, Florida, and New York hospitals from 2005 to 2012.

Synopsis: The authors compared the 30-day mortality rates in 45,771 hospitalized adult patients with inpatient diagnosis codes of PE and/or DVT, as well as a contraindication to anticoagulation, who underwent IVC filter placement with 80,259 similar patients who did not undergo IVC filter placement. Baseline characteristics and coexisting conditions were similar in the two populations. The authors found that patients with IVC filter placement had an increased risk of 30-day mortality, compared with patients without an IVC filter placed (HR, 1.18; 95% CI, 1.13-1.22; P less than .001).

This study used observational data derived from reimbursement codes, which lacked unmeasured confounders (for example, severity of VTE and fragility score), so randomized, controlled trials are required to confirm the results. Nevertheless, this study should prompt physicians to carefully consider decisions to place an IVC filter in the setting of a contraindication to anticoagulation.

Bottom line: IVC filter placement in patients with VTE and contraindication for anticoagulation was associated with an increased 30-day mortality. Randomized, controlled trials are required to confirm the observed results.

Citation: Turner TE et al. Association of inferior vena cava filter placement for venous thromboembolic disease and a contraindication to anticoagulation with 30-day mortality. JAMA Network Open. 2018;1(3):e180452.

Dr. Kobaidze is an assistant professor of medicine in the division of hospital medicine at Emory University, Atlanta.

Clinical question: How does inferior vena cava (IVC) filter placement affect 30-day mortality in patients with venous thromboembolism (VTE) with increased risk of bleeding when anticoagulation is not feasible?

Background: Standard treatment for VTE, including deep venous thrombosis (DVT) and pulmonary embolism (PE), is anticoagulation. However, for patients with active bleeding or increased risk of bleeding, anticoagulation may be contraindicated. In these circumstances, placing an IVC filter is recommended by major professional societies; however, the mortality benefit of IVC filter placement is uncertain.

Study design: A retrospective cohort study.

Setting: State Inpatient and Emergency Department Databases from California, Florida, and New York hospitals from 2005 to 2012.

Synopsis: The authors compared the 30-day mortality rates in 45,771 hospitalized adult patients with inpatient diagnosis codes of PE and/or DVT, as well as a contraindication to anticoagulation, who underwent IVC filter placement with 80,259 similar patients who did not undergo IVC filter placement. Baseline characteristics and coexisting conditions were similar in the two populations. The authors found that patients with IVC filter placement had an increased risk of 30-day mortality, compared with patients without an IVC filter placed (HR, 1.18; 95% CI, 1.13-1.22; P less than .001).

This study used observational data derived from reimbursement codes, which lacked unmeasured confounders (for example, severity of VTE and fragility score), so randomized, controlled trials are required to confirm the results. Nevertheless, this study should prompt physicians to carefully consider decisions to place an IVC filter in the setting of a contraindication to anticoagulation.

Bottom line: IVC filter placement in patients with VTE and contraindication for anticoagulation was associated with an increased 30-day mortality. Randomized, controlled trials are required to confirm the observed results.

Citation: Turner TE et al. Association of inferior vena cava filter placement for venous thromboembolic disease and a contraindication to anticoagulation with 30-day mortality. JAMA Network Open. 2018;1(3):e180452.

Dr. Kobaidze is an assistant professor of medicine in the division of hospital medicine at Emory University, Atlanta.

Clinical question: How does inferior vena cava (IVC) filter placement affect 30-day mortality in patients with venous thromboembolism (VTE) with increased risk of bleeding when anticoagulation is not feasible?

Background: Standard treatment for VTE, including deep venous thrombosis (DVT) and pulmonary embolism (PE), is anticoagulation. However, for patients with active bleeding or increased risk of bleeding, anticoagulation may be contraindicated. In these circumstances, placing an IVC filter is recommended by major professional societies; however, the mortality benefit of IVC filter placement is uncertain.

Study design: A retrospective cohort study.

Setting: State Inpatient and Emergency Department Databases from California, Florida, and New York hospitals from 2005 to 2012.

Synopsis: The authors compared the 30-day mortality rates in 45,771 hospitalized adult patients with inpatient diagnosis codes of PE and/or DVT, as well as a contraindication to anticoagulation, who underwent IVC filter placement with 80,259 similar patients who did not undergo IVC filter placement. Baseline characteristics and coexisting conditions were similar in the two populations. The authors found that patients with IVC filter placement had an increased risk of 30-day mortality, compared with patients without an IVC filter placed (HR, 1.18; 95% CI, 1.13-1.22; P less than .001).

This study used observational data derived from reimbursement codes, which lacked unmeasured confounders (for example, severity of VTE and fragility score), so randomized, controlled trials are required to confirm the results. Nevertheless, this study should prompt physicians to carefully consider decisions to place an IVC filter in the setting of a contraindication to anticoagulation.

Bottom line: IVC filter placement in patients with VTE and contraindication for anticoagulation was associated with an increased 30-day mortality. Randomized, controlled trials are required to confirm the observed results.

Citation: Turner TE et al. Association of inferior vena cava filter placement for venous thromboembolic disease and a contraindication to anticoagulation with 30-day mortality. JAMA Network Open. 2018;1(3):e180452.

Dr. Kobaidze is an assistant professor of medicine in the division of hospital medicine at Emory University, Atlanta.

GLASGOW – Targeting circulating parasitic histones may hold promise for patients with cerebral malaria (CM), according to investigators.

A retrospective study, involving over 300 individuals, compared parasitic histone concentrations among patients with various forms of malaria and non-malarial illnesses, in addition to healthy controls, finding that elevated histone levels were associated with malarial disease severity and death, reported Simon Abrams, PhD, of the University of Liverpool, UK, a coauthor of the study. He noted that this research could guide the development of treatment strategies for hundreds of thousands of patients each year, particularly children.

“Cerebral malaria is the most severe form of Plasmodium falciparum infection, and despite effective anti-malarial therapy, between 10% and 20% of children that develop cerebral malaria die,” Dr. Abrams said during his presentation at the annual meeting of the British Society for Haematology. “This accounts for a huge amount of deaths per annum. Around 400,000 malarial deaths are in children in subSaharan Africa, and death typically occurs within 24 hours of hospital admission.”

In CM, the blood-brain barrier deteriorates, leading to brain swelling, hemorrhaging, clot formation, and in many cases, death, Dr. Abrams said. CM patients with the worst outcomes typically have retinal abnormalities on fundic exam, granting the disease subtype “retinopathy-positive.”

Aided by colleagues in Malawi, the investigators gathered over 300 patient samples for analysis. They found that patients with retinopathy-positive CM had higher mean extracellular histone levels than retinopathy-negative CM patients and healthy controls (22.6 mcg/ml, 6.31 mcg/ml, and 0.33 mcg/ml, respectively). In addition, retinopathy-positive CM patients who died had significantly higher levels of circulating histones, compared with similar patients who survived (35.7 mcg/ml vs. 21.6 mcg/ml).

These findings translated to predictive capability, as the investigators showed that patients with CM who had elevated histones when admitted to the hospital were at a higher risk of death than those with normal histone levels (P = .04). Unlike patients with CM, patients with uncomplicated malaria had relatively low histone levels (0.57 mcg/ml), as did patients with mild non-malarial febrile illness (1.73 mcg/ml) and non-malarial coma (1.73 mcg/ml).

During his presentation, Dr. Abrams elaborated on the origins of these histones and how they contribute to poor outcomes in patients.

“Histones are small positively charged proteins that bind to negatively charged DNA,” Dr. Abrams said. “Typically, they are found within the cell nucleus, where they are involved in the packaging of DNA. However, during cell death and cell damage, histones are released from the nucleus, extracellularly, and we find that they are very much elevated in critically ill patients that have undergone huge amounts of cell death and damage.”

Once in circulation, histones can make a bad situation even worse.

“Work by ourselves and others around the globe have found that when circulating histones are elevated in these critically ill patients, they’re extremely toxic,” Dr. Abrams said. “Histones can induce endothelial damage and vascular permeability.” In addition, he pointed out that histones are pro-inflammatory and pro-coagulant. “If you bring all of these phenomena together,” he pointed out, “histones induce organ injury and mortality in critically ill patients.”

“The current hypothesis is that if you’re treating patients with these antimalarials, and it’s killing off the parasite, it may cause the histones to be released, which is actually worse for certain patients,” Dr. Abrams explained.

Based on this hypothesis, the investigators developed an anti-histone therapy.

“We’ve got a small peptide that we use to bind to the histones that reduces their toxicity,” Dr. Abrams said. “If we coincubate the serum of [CM] patients with our anti-histone reagent and then put this onto a monolayer of endothelial cells, we see that this toxicity is inhibited. Therefore, this is suggestive that a major toxic factor within these patients are the extracellular histones.”

Providing additional support for the role of histones in cerebral toxicity, postmortem brain tissue from patients with CM showed localization of histones to the endothelium, which has been tied with increased permeability of vascular tissue. In addition, “we are seeing co-localization between the histones and the sequestration of the malarial parasite itself,” Dr. Abrams said. 

Concluding his presentation, he looked to the future.

“It’s difficult to get an animal model for malaria,” but he and his associates are currently working with other investigators to develop one. Once developed, the investigators plan on testing concurrent administration of anti-malarial therapy with antihistone therapy.

“What we’re hoping is that sometime in the future, maybe we’d be able to target circulating histones in this patient cohort to improve the survival of these patients,” Dr. Abrams said.

The investigators declared no conflicts of interest.

SOURCE: Moxon et al. BSH 2019. Abstract OR-034.

GLASGOW – Targeting circulating parasitic histones may hold promise for patients with cerebral malaria (CM), according to investigators.

A retrospective study, involving over 300 individuals, compared parasitic histone concentrations among patients with various forms of malaria and non-malarial illnesses, in addition to healthy controls, finding that elevated histone levels were associated with malarial disease severity and death, reported Simon Abrams, PhD, of the University of Liverpool, UK, a coauthor of the study. He noted that this research could guide the development of treatment strategies for hundreds of thousands of patients each year, particularly children.

“Cerebral malaria is the most severe form of Plasmodium falciparum infection, and despite effective anti-malarial therapy, between 10% and 20% of children that develop cerebral malaria die,” Dr. Abrams said during his presentation at the annual meeting of the British Society for Haematology. “This accounts for a huge amount of deaths per annum. Around 400,000 malarial deaths are in children in subSaharan Africa, and death typically occurs within 24 hours of hospital admission.”

In CM, the blood-brain barrier deteriorates, leading to brain swelling, hemorrhaging, clot formation, and in many cases, death, Dr. Abrams said. CM patients with the worst outcomes typically have retinal abnormalities on fundic exam, granting the disease subtype “retinopathy-positive.”

Aided by colleagues in Malawi, the investigators gathered over 300 patient samples for analysis. They found that patients with retinopathy-positive CM had higher mean extracellular histone levels than retinopathy-negative CM patients and healthy controls (22.6 mcg/ml, 6.31 mcg/ml, and 0.33 mcg/ml, respectively). In addition, retinopathy-positive CM patients who died had significantly higher levels of circulating histones, compared with similar patients who survived (35.7 mcg/ml vs. 21.6 mcg/ml).

These findings translated to predictive capability, as the investigators showed that patients with CM who had elevated histones when admitted to the hospital were at a higher risk of death than those with normal histone levels (P = .04). Unlike patients with CM, patients with uncomplicated malaria had relatively low histone levels (0.57 mcg/ml), as did patients with mild non-malarial febrile illness (1.73 mcg/ml) and non-malarial coma (1.73 mcg/ml).

During his presentation, Dr. Abrams elaborated on the origins of these histones and how they contribute to poor outcomes in patients.

“Histones are small positively charged proteins that bind to negatively charged DNA,” Dr. Abrams said. “Typically, they are found within the cell nucleus, where they are involved in the packaging of DNA. However, during cell death and cell damage, histones are released from the nucleus, extracellularly, and we find that they are very much elevated in critically ill patients that have undergone huge amounts of cell death and damage.”

Once in circulation, histones can make a bad situation even worse.

“Work by ourselves and others around the globe have found that when circulating histones are elevated in these critically ill patients, they’re extremely toxic,” Dr. Abrams said. “Histones can induce endothelial damage and vascular permeability.” In addition, he pointed out that histones are pro-inflammatory and pro-coagulant. “If you bring all of these phenomena together,” he pointed out, “histones induce organ injury and mortality in critically ill patients.”

“The current hypothesis is that if you’re treating patients with these antimalarials, and it’s killing off the parasite, it may cause the histones to be released, which is actually worse for certain patients,” Dr. Abrams explained.

Based on this hypothesis, the investigators developed an anti-histone therapy.

“We’ve got a small peptide that we use to bind to the histones that reduces their toxicity,” Dr. Abrams said. “If we coincubate the serum of [CM] patients with our anti-histone reagent and then put this onto a monolayer of endothelial cells, we see that this toxicity is inhibited. Therefore, this is suggestive that a major toxic factor within these patients are the extracellular histones.”

Providing additional support for the role of histones in cerebral toxicity, postmortem brain tissue from patients with CM showed localization of histones to the endothelium, which has been tied with increased permeability of vascular tissue. In addition, “we are seeing co-localization between the histones and the sequestration of the malarial parasite itself,” Dr. Abrams said. 

Concluding his presentation, he looked to the future.

“It’s difficult to get an animal model for malaria,” but he and his associates are currently working with other investigators to develop one. Once developed, the investigators plan on testing concurrent administration of anti-malarial therapy with antihistone therapy.

“What we’re hoping is that sometime in the future, maybe we’d be able to target circulating histones in this patient cohort to improve the survival of these patients,” Dr. Abrams said.

The investigators declared no conflicts of interest.

SOURCE: Moxon et al. BSH 2019. Abstract OR-034.

GLASGOW – Targeting circulating parasitic histones may hold promise for patients with cerebral malaria (CM), according to investigators.

A retrospective study, involving over 300 individuals, compared parasitic histone concentrations among patients with various forms of malaria and non-malarial illnesses, in addition to healthy controls, finding that elevated histone levels were associated with malarial disease severity and death, reported Simon Abrams, PhD, of the University of Liverpool, UK, a coauthor of the study. He noted that this research could guide the development of treatment strategies for hundreds of thousands of patients each year, particularly children.

“Cerebral malaria is the most severe form of Plasmodium falciparum infection, and despite effective anti-malarial therapy, between 10% and 20% of children that develop cerebral malaria die,” Dr. Abrams said during his presentation at the annual meeting of the British Society for Haematology. “This accounts for a huge amount of deaths per annum. Around 400,000 malarial deaths are in children in subSaharan Africa, and death typically occurs within 24 hours of hospital admission.”

In CM, the blood-brain barrier deteriorates, leading to brain swelling, hemorrhaging, clot formation, and in many cases, death, Dr. Abrams said. CM patients with the worst outcomes typically have retinal abnormalities on fundic exam, granting the disease subtype “retinopathy-positive.”

Aided by colleagues in Malawi, the investigators gathered over 300 patient samples for analysis. They found that patients with retinopathy-positive CM had higher mean extracellular histone levels than retinopathy-negative CM patients and healthy controls (22.6 mcg/ml, 6.31 mcg/ml, and 0.33 mcg/ml, respectively). In addition, retinopathy-positive CM patients who died had significantly higher levels of circulating histones, compared with similar patients who survived (35.7 mcg/ml vs. 21.6 mcg/ml).

These findings translated to predictive capability, as the investigators showed that patients with CM who had elevated histones when admitted to the hospital were at a higher risk of death than those with normal histone levels (P = .04). Unlike patients with CM, patients with uncomplicated malaria had relatively low histone levels (0.57 mcg/ml), as did patients with mild non-malarial febrile illness (1.73 mcg/ml) and non-malarial coma (1.73 mcg/ml).

During his presentation, Dr. Abrams elaborated on the origins of these histones and how they contribute to poor outcomes in patients.

“Histones are small positively charged proteins that bind to negatively charged DNA,” Dr. Abrams said. “Typically, they are found within the cell nucleus, where they are involved in the packaging of DNA. However, during cell death and cell damage, histones are released from the nucleus, extracellularly, and we find that they are very much elevated in critically ill patients that have undergone huge amounts of cell death and damage.”

Once in circulation, histones can make a bad situation even worse.

“Work by ourselves and others around the globe have found that when circulating histones are elevated in these critically ill patients, they’re extremely toxic,” Dr. Abrams said. “Histones can induce endothelial damage and vascular permeability.” In addition, he pointed out that histones are pro-inflammatory and pro-coagulant. “If you bring all of these phenomena together,” he pointed out, “histones induce organ injury and mortality in critically ill patients.”

“The current hypothesis is that if you’re treating patients with these antimalarials, and it’s killing off the parasite, it may cause the histones to be released, which is actually worse for certain patients,” Dr. Abrams explained.

Based on this hypothesis, the investigators developed an anti-histone therapy.

“We’ve got a small peptide that we use to bind to the histones that reduces their toxicity,” Dr. Abrams said. “If we coincubate the serum of [CM] patients with our anti-histone reagent and then put this onto a monolayer of endothelial cells, we see that this toxicity is inhibited. Therefore, this is suggestive that a major toxic factor within these patients are the extracellular histones.”

Providing additional support for the role of histones in cerebral toxicity, postmortem brain tissue from patients with CM showed localization of histones to the endothelium, which has been tied with increased permeability of vascular tissue. In addition, “we are seeing co-localization between the histones and the sequestration of the malarial parasite itself,” Dr. Abrams said. 

Concluding his presentation, he looked to the future.

“It’s difficult to get an animal model for malaria,” but he and his associates are currently working with other investigators to develop one. Once developed, the investigators plan on testing concurrent administration of anti-malarial therapy with antihistone therapy.

“What we’re hoping is that sometime in the future, maybe we’d be able to target circulating histones in this patient cohort to improve the survival of these patients,” Dr. Abrams said.

The investigators declared no conflicts of interest.

SOURCE: Moxon et al. BSH 2019. Abstract OR-034.

NEW ORLEANS – A novel targeted ticagrelor reversal agent demonstrated rapid and sustained reversal of the potent antiplatelet agent in a phase 1 proof-of-concept study, Deepak L. Bhatt, MD, reported at the annual meeting of the American College of Cardiology.

“Hopefully the FDA will view this as something that really is a breakthrough,” commented Dr. Bhatt, executive director of interventional cardiology programs at Brigham and Women’s Hospital and professor of medicine at Harvard University, both in Boston.

Why a breakthrough? Because despite recent major advances in the ability to reverse the action of the direct-acting oral anticoagulants and thereby greatly improve their safety margin, there have been no parallel developments with regard to the potent antiplatelet agents ticagrelor (Brilinta), prasugrel (Effient), and clopidogrel. The effects of these antiplatelet drugs take 3-5 days to dissipate after they’ve been stopped, which is highly problematic when they’ve induced catastrophic bleeding or a patient requires emergent or urgent surgery, the cardiologist explained.

“The ability to reverse tigracelor’s antiplatelet effects rapidly could distinguish it from other antiplatelet agents such as prasugrel or even generic clopidogrel and, for that matter, even aspirin,” Dr. Bhatt said.

The ticagrelor reversal agent, known for now as PB2452, is an intravenously administered recombinant human immunoglobulin G1 monoclonal antibody antigen-binding fragment. It binds specifically and with high affinity to ticagrelor and its active metabolite. In the phase 1, placebo-controlled, double-blind study conducted in 64 healthy volunteers pretreated with ticagrelor for 48 hours, it reversed oral ticagrelor’s antiplatelet effects within 5 minutes and, with prolonged infusion, showed sustained effect for at least 20 hours.

The only adverse events observed in blinded assessment were minor injection site issues.

PB2452 is specific to ticagrelor and will not reverse the activity of other potent antiplatelet agents. Indeed, because of their chemical structure, neither prasugrel nor clopidogrel is reversible, according to Dr. Bhatt.

[email protected]

NEW ORLEANS – A novel targeted ticagrelor reversal agent demonstrated rapid and sustained reversal of the potent antiplatelet agent in a phase 1 proof-of-concept study, Deepak L. Bhatt, MD, reported at the annual meeting of the American College of Cardiology.

“Hopefully the FDA will view this as something that really is a breakthrough,” commented Dr. Bhatt, executive director of interventional cardiology programs at Brigham and Women’s Hospital and professor of medicine at Harvard University, both in Boston.

Why a breakthrough? Because despite recent major advances in the ability to reverse the action of the direct-acting oral anticoagulants and thereby greatly improve their safety margin, there have been no parallel developments with regard to the potent antiplatelet agents ticagrelor (Brilinta), prasugrel (Effient), and clopidogrel. The effects of these antiplatelet drugs take 3-5 days to dissipate after they’ve been stopped, which is highly problematic when they’ve induced catastrophic bleeding or a patient requires emergent or urgent surgery, the cardiologist explained.

“The ability to reverse tigracelor’s antiplatelet effects rapidly could distinguish it from other antiplatelet agents such as prasugrel or even generic clopidogrel and, for that matter, even aspirin,” Dr. Bhatt said.

The ticagrelor reversal agent, known for now as PB2452, is an intravenously administered recombinant human immunoglobulin G1 monoclonal antibody antigen-binding fragment. It binds specifically and with high affinity to ticagrelor and its active metabolite. In the phase 1, placebo-controlled, double-blind study conducted in 64 healthy volunteers pretreated with ticagrelor for 48 hours, it reversed oral ticagrelor’s antiplatelet effects within 5 minutes and, with prolonged infusion, showed sustained effect for at least 20 hours.

The only adverse events observed in blinded assessment were minor injection site issues.

PB2452 is specific to ticagrelor and will not reverse the activity of other potent antiplatelet agents. Indeed, because of their chemical structure, neither prasugrel nor clopidogrel is reversible, according to Dr. Bhatt.

[email protected]

NEW ORLEANS – A novel targeted ticagrelor reversal agent demonstrated rapid and sustained reversal of the potent antiplatelet agent in a phase 1 proof-of-concept study, Deepak L. Bhatt, MD, reported at the annual meeting of the American College of Cardiology.

“Hopefully the FDA will view this as something that really is a breakthrough,” commented Dr. Bhatt, executive director of interventional cardiology programs at Brigham and Women’s Hospital and professor of medicine at Harvard University, both in Boston.

Why a breakthrough? Because despite recent major advances in the ability to reverse the action of the direct-acting oral anticoagulants and thereby greatly improve their safety margin, there have been no parallel developments with regard to the potent antiplatelet agents ticagrelor (Brilinta), prasugrel (Effient), and clopidogrel. The effects of these antiplatelet drugs take 3-5 days to dissipate after they’ve been stopped, which is highly problematic when they’ve induced catastrophic bleeding or a patient requires emergent or urgent surgery, the cardiologist explained.

“The ability to reverse tigracelor’s antiplatelet effects rapidly could distinguish it from other antiplatelet agents such as prasugrel or even generic clopidogrel and, for that matter, even aspirin,” Dr. Bhatt said.

The ticagrelor reversal agent, known for now as PB2452, is an intravenously administered recombinant human immunoglobulin G1 monoclonal antibody antigen-binding fragment. It binds specifically and with high affinity to ticagrelor and its active metabolite. In the phase 1, placebo-controlled, double-blind study conducted in 64 healthy volunteers pretreated with ticagrelor for 48 hours, it reversed oral ticagrelor’s antiplatelet effects within 5 minutes and, with prolonged infusion, showed sustained effect for at least 20 hours.

The only adverse events observed in blinded assessment were minor injection site issues.

PB2452 is specific to ticagrelor and will not reverse the activity of other potent antiplatelet agents. Indeed, because of their chemical structure, neither prasugrel nor clopidogrel is reversible, according to Dr. Bhatt.

[email protected]

NEW ORLEANS – The incidence of pulmonary embolism diagnosed in hospitalized U.S. patients nearly doubled during the period 2004-2015 based on data collected by the National Inpatient Sample.

During 2004-2015 the incidence of all diagnosed pulmonary embolism (PE), based on discharge diagnoses, rose from 5.4 cases/1,000 hospitalized patients in 2004 to 9.7 cases/1,000 hospitalized patients in 2015, an 80% increase, Joshua B. Goldberg, MD said at the annual meeting of the American College of Cardiology. The incidence of major PE – defined as a patient who needed vasopressor treatment, mechanical ventilation, or had nonseptic shock – rose from 7.9% of all hospitalized PE diagnoses in 2004 to 9.7% in 2015, a 23% relative increase.

Mitchel L. Zoler/MDedge News

The data also documented a shifting pattern of treatment for all hospitalized patients with PE, and especially among patients with major PE. During the study period, treatment with systemic thrombolysis for all PE rose nearly threefold, and catheter-directed therapy began to show a steady rise in use from 0.2% of all patients in 2011 (and before) to 1% of all patients by 2015. Surgical intervention remained lightly used throughout, with about 0.2% of all PE patients undergoing surgery annually.

Most of these intervention options focused on patients with major PE. Among patients in this subgroup with more severe disease, use of one of these three types of interventions rose from 6% in 2004 to 12% in 2015, mostly driven by a rise in systemic thrombolysis, which jumped from 3% of major PE in 2004 to 9% in 2015. However, the efficacy of systemic thrombolysis in patients with major PE remains suspect. In 2004, 39% of patients with major PE treated with systemic thrombolysis died in hospital; in 2015 the number was 47%. “The data don’t support using systemic thrombolysis to treat major PE; the mortality is high,” noted Dr. Goldberg, a cardiothoracic surgeon at Westchester Medical Center in Valhalla, N.Y.

Although catheter-directed therapy began to be much more widely used in U.S. practice starting in about 2015, during the period studied its use for major PE held fairly steady at roughly 2%-3%, but this approach also showed substantial shortcomings for the major PE population. These sicker patients treated with catheter-directed therapy had 37% mortality in 2004 and a 31% mortality in 2015, a difference that was not statistically significant. In general, PE patients enrolled in the catheter-directed therapy trials were not as sick as the major PE patients who get treated with surgery in routine practice, Dr. Goldberg said in an interview.

The data showed much better performance using surgery, although only 1,237 patients of the entire group of 713,083 PE patients studied in the database underwent surgical embolectomy. Overall, in-hospital mortality in these patients was 22%, but in a time trend analysis, mortality among all PE patients treated with surgery fell from 32% in 2004 to 14% in 2015; among patients with major PE treated with surgery, mortality fell from 52% in 2004 to 21% in 2015.

Dr. Goldberg attributed the success of surgery in severe PE patients to the definitive nature of embolectomy and the concurrent use of extracorporeal membrane oxygenation that helps stabilize acutely ill PE patients. He also cited refinements that surgery underwent during the 2004-2015 period based on the experience managing chronic thromboembolic pulmonary hypertension, including routine use of cardiopulmonary bypass during surgery. “Very high risk [PE] patients should go straight to surgery, unless the patient is at high risk for surgery because of conditions like prior sternotomy or very advanced age, in which case catheter-directed therapy may be a safer option, he said. He cited a recent 5% death rate after surgery at his center among patients with major PE who did not require cardiopulmonary resuscitation.

The database Dr. Goldberg and his collaborator reviewed included 12,735 patients treated by systemic thrombolysis, and 2,595 treated by catheter-directed therapy. Patients averaged 63 years old. The most common indicator of major PE was mechanical ventilation, used on 8% of all PE patients in the study. Non-septic shock occurred in 2%, and just under 1% needed vasopressor treatment.

Published guidelines on PE management from several medical groups are “vague and have numerous caveats,” Dr. Goldberg said. He is participating in an update to the 2011 PE management statement from the American College of Cardiology and American Heart Association (Circulation. 2011 April 26;123[16]:1788-1830).

The study received no commercial funding. Dr. Goldberg had no disclosures.

[email protected]

SOURCE: Haider A et al. J Amer Coll Cardiol. 2019 March;73:9[suppl 1]: doi: 10.1016/S0735-1097(19)32507-0

NEW ORLEANS – The incidence of pulmonary embolism diagnosed in hospitalized U.S. patients nearly doubled during the period 2004-2015 based on data collected by the National Inpatient Sample.

During 2004-2015 the incidence of all diagnosed pulmonary embolism (PE), based on discharge diagnoses, rose from 5.4 cases/1,000 hospitalized patients in 2004 to 9.7 cases/1,000 hospitalized patients in 2015, an 80% increase, Joshua B. Goldberg, MD said at the annual meeting of the American College of Cardiology. The incidence of major PE – defined as a patient who needed vasopressor treatment, mechanical ventilation, or had nonseptic shock – rose from 7.9% of all hospitalized PE diagnoses in 2004 to 9.7% in 2015, a 23% relative increase.

Mitchel L. Zoler/MDedge News

The data also documented a shifting pattern of treatment for all hospitalized patients with PE, and especially among patients with major PE. During the study period, treatment with systemic thrombolysis for all PE rose nearly threefold, and catheter-directed therapy began to show a steady rise in use from 0.2% of all patients in 2011 (and before) to 1% of all patients by 2015. Surgical intervention remained lightly used throughout, with about 0.2% of all PE patients undergoing surgery annually.

Most of these intervention options focused on patients with major PE. Among patients in this subgroup with more severe disease, use of one of these three types of interventions rose from 6% in 2004 to 12% in 2015, mostly driven by a rise in systemic thrombolysis, which jumped from 3% of major PE in 2004 to 9% in 2015. However, the efficacy of systemic thrombolysis in patients with major PE remains suspect. In 2004, 39% of patients with major PE treated with systemic thrombolysis died in hospital; in 2015 the number was 47%. “The data don’t support using systemic thrombolysis to treat major PE; the mortality is high,” noted Dr. Goldberg, a cardiothoracic surgeon at Westchester Medical Center in Valhalla, N.Y.

Although catheter-directed therapy began to be much more widely used in U.S. practice starting in about 2015, during the period studied its use for major PE held fairly steady at roughly 2%-3%, but this approach also showed substantial shortcomings for the major PE population. These sicker patients treated with catheter-directed therapy had 37% mortality in 2004 and a 31% mortality in 2015, a difference that was not statistically significant. In general, PE patients enrolled in the catheter-directed therapy trials were not as sick as the major PE patients who get treated with surgery in routine practice, Dr. Goldberg said in an interview.

The data showed much better performance using surgery, although only 1,237 patients of the entire group of 713,083 PE patients studied in the database underwent surgical embolectomy. Overall, in-hospital mortality in these patients was 22%, but in a time trend analysis, mortality among all PE patients treated with surgery fell from 32% in 2004 to 14% in 2015; among patients with major PE treated with surgery, mortality fell from 52% in 2004 to 21% in 2015.

Dr. Goldberg attributed the success of surgery in severe PE patients to the definitive nature of embolectomy and the concurrent use of extracorporeal membrane oxygenation that helps stabilize acutely ill PE patients. He also cited refinements that surgery underwent during the 2004-2015 period based on the experience managing chronic thromboembolic pulmonary hypertension, including routine use of cardiopulmonary bypass during surgery. “Very high risk [PE] patients should go straight to surgery, unless the patient is at high risk for surgery because of conditions like prior sternotomy or very advanced age, in which case catheter-directed therapy may be a safer option, he said. He cited a recent 5% death rate after surgery at his center among patients with major PE who did not require cardiopulmonary resuscitation.

The database Dr. Goldberg and his collaborator reviewed included 12,735 patients treated by systemic thrombolysis, and 2,595 treated by catheter-directed therapy. Patients averaged 63 years old. The most common indicator of major PE was mechanical ventilation, used on 8% of all PE patients in the study. Non-septic shock occurred in 2%, and just under 1% needed vasopressor treatment.

Published guidelines on PE management from several medical groups are “vague and have numerous caveats,” Dr. Goldberg said. He is participating in an update to the 2011 PE management statement from the American College of Cardiology and American Heart Association (Circulation. 2011 April 26;123[16]:1788-1830).

The study received no commercial funding. Dr. Goldberg had no disclosures.

[email protected]

SOURCE: Haider A et al. J Amer Coll Cardiol. 2019 March;73:9[suppl 1]: doi: 10.1016/S0735-1097(19)32507-0

NEW ORLEANS – The incidence of pulmonary embolism diagnosed in hospitalized U.S. patients nearly doubled during the period 2004-2015 based on data collected by the National Inpatient Sample.

During 2004-2015 the incidence of all diagnosed pulmonary embolism (PE), based on discharge diagnoses, rose from 5.4 cases/1,000 hospitalized patients in 2004 to 9.7 cases/1,000 hospitalized patients in 2015, an 80% increase, Joshua B. Goldberg, MD said at the annual meeting of the American College of Cardiology. The incidence of major PE – defined as a patient who needed vasopressor treatment, mechanical ventilation, or had nonseptic shock – rose from 7.9% of all hospitalized PE diagnoses in 2004 to 9.7% in 2015, a 23% relative increase.

Mitchel L. Zoler/MDedge News

The data also documented a shifting pattern of treatment for all hospitalized patients with PE, and especially among patients with major PE. During the study period, treatment with systemic thrombolysis for all PE rose nearly threefold, and catheter-directed therapy began to show a steady rise in use from 0.2% of all patients in 2011 (and before) to 1% of all patients by 2015. Surgical intervention remained lightly used throughout, with about 0.2% of all PE patients undergoing surgery annually.

Most of these intervention options focused on patients with major PE. Among patients in this subgroup with more severe disease, use of one of these three types of interventions rose from 6% in 2004 to 12% in 2015, mostly driven by a rise in systemic thrombolysis, which jumped from 3% of major PE in 2004 to 9% in 2015. However, the efficacy of systemic thrombolysis in patients with major PE remains suspect. In 2004, 39% of patients with major PE treated with systemic thrombolysis died in hospital; in 2015 the number was 47%. “The data don’t support using systemic thrombolysis to treat major PE; the mortality is high,” noted Dr. Goldberg, a cardiothoracic surgeon at Westchester Medical Center in Valhalla, N.Y.

Although catheter-directed therapy began to be much more widely used in U.S. practice starting in about 2015, during the period studied its use for major PE held fairly steady at roughly 2%-3%, but this approach also showed substantial shortcomings for the major PE population. These sicker patients treated with catheter-directed therapy had 37% mortality in 2004 and a 31% mortality in 2015, a difference that was not statistically significant. In general, PE patients enrolled in the catheter-directed therapy trials were not as sick as the major PE patients who get treated with surgery in routine practice, Dr. Goldberg said in an interview.

The data showed much better performance using surgery, although only 1,237 patients of the entire group of 713,083 PE patients studied in the database underwent surgical embolectomy. Overall, in-hospital mortality in these patients was 22%, but in a time trend analysis, mortality among all PE patients treated with surgery fell from 32% in 2004 to 14% in 2015; among patients with major PE treated with surgery, mortality fell from 52% in 2004 to 21% in 2015.

Dr. Goldberg attributed the success of surgery in severe PE patients to the definitive nature of embolectomy and the concurrent use of extracorporeal membrane oxygenation that helps stabilize acutely ill PE patients. He also cited refinements that surgery underwent during the 2004-2015 period based on the experience managing chronic thromboembolic pulmonary hypertension, including routine use of cardiopulmonary bypass during surgery. “Very high risk [PE] patients should go straight to surgery, unless the patient is at high risk for surgery because of conditions like prior sternotomy or very advanced age, in which case catheter-directed therapy may be a safer option, he said. He cited a recent 5% death rate after surgery at his center among patients with major PE who did not require cardiopulmonary resuscitation.

The database Dr. Goldberg and his collaborator reviewed included 12,735 patients treated by systemic thrombolysis, and 2,595 treated by catheter-directed therapy. Patients averaged 63 years old. The most common indicator of major PE was mechanical ventilation, used on 8% of all PE patients in the study. Non-septic shock occurred in 2%, and just under 1% needed vasopressor treatment.

Published guidelines on PE management from several medical groups are “vague and have numerous caveats,” Dr. Goldberg said. He is participating in an update to the 2011 PE management statement from the American College of Cardiology and American Heart Association (Circulation. 2011 April 26;123[16]:1788-1830).

The study received no commercial funding. Dr. Goldberg had no disclosures.

[email protected]

SOURCE: Haider A et al. J Amer Coll Cardiol. 2019 March;73:9[suppl 1]: doi: 10.1016/S0735-1097(19)32507-0

Antithrombotic therapy with low-dose rivaroxaban plus aspirin should be considered in low–bleeding risk patients with peripheral arterial disease who are at increased risk for ischemic and/or limb events, according to an analysis of the COMPASS trial published in Current Opinion in Cardiology.

Patrice Wendling/MDedge News

Mohamad A. Hussain, MD, of the University of Toronto and his colleagues assessed the ramifications of COMPASS to vascular surgeons. They used two clinical case studies of patients with peripheral arterial disease (PAD) to illustrate differing considerations in care.

The COMPASS (Cardiovascular Outcomes for People Using Anticoagulation Strategies) trial showed that low-dose rivaroxaban at 2.5 mg twice daily plus daily aspirin was superior to aspirin alone in reducing major adverse cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events, as well as major adverse limb events, among patients with stable atherosclerotic vascular disease, including those with PAD. However, the risk for major bleeding was higher with rivaroxaban plus aspirin and is a serious consideration for patient treatment.

In clinical case 1, used to illustrate the pertinence of COMPASS to patient care, Dr. Hussain and his colleagues detailed a 68-year-old man presenting with a 3-month history of intermittent claudication of bilateral calves at 10 minutes of brisk walking. His comorbidities include a MI with percutaneous coronary stenting 2 years ago, diabetes mellitus, hypertension, hyperlipidemia, and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease on the basis of prior smoking.

Clinical case 2 was a 70-year-old woman with a small gangrenous ulcer on the dorsal part of her first toe on the left foot. She has history of coronary artery disease with coronary artery bypass graft surgery 5 years prior, diabetes mellitus, mild chronic kidney disease, and hypertension. She underwent an uneventful lower extremity bypass using a prosthetic graft and had an uncomplicated postoperative course.

Both patients were on daily 81 mg aspirin.

In order to determine the appropriate care for these patients, the authors presented a flowchart of considerations regarding risk and benefits. Patients with symptomatic PAD who had no recent major bleeds, history of stroke, congestive heart failure, chronic kidney disease, frailty, or anemia were considered for rivaroxaban treatment, otherwise they were put on single antiplatelet therapy.

The investigators recommended that, if the patients were at high limb risk or high ischemic risk, they should be treated with either rivaroxaban plus aspirin or dual antiplatelet therapy (the latter if there was a recent MI or peripheral stenting). If the patients were not at risk, they were deemed eligible for either the rivaroxaban plus aspirin therapy or single antiplatelet therapy.

With regard to the clinical case studies, the authors discussed the rationale for putting both patients on the rivaroxaban plus aspirin therapy after an assessment of the risk/benefit profile for each patient based upon the above considerations. In both cases the bleeding risk was considered low; the ischemic risk in the first patient and the limb risk in the second patient was considered high. Although the second patient had chronic kidney disease, it was not considered severe enough to preclude such treatment.

“Future data from trials such as Vascular Outcomes Study of ASA Along With Rivaroxaban in Endovascular or Surgical Limb Revascularization For Peripheral Artery Disease [VOYAGER PAD] will provide data with regards to the role of low-dose rivaroxaban plus aspirin following peripheral artery revascularization for PAD,” the researchers concluded.

Dr. Hussain reported having no conflicts; his coauthors reported receiving funding from various pharmaceutical companies, including Bayer, which was a sponsor of the original COMPASS trial.

[email protected]

SOURCE: Hussain MA et al. Curr Opin Cardiol. 2019;34:178-84.

Antithrombotic therapy with low-dose rivaroxaban plus aspirin should be considered in low–bleeding risk patients with peripheral arterial disease who are at increased risk for ischemic and/or limb events, according to an analysis of the COMPASS trial published in Current Opinion in Cardiology.

Patrice Wendling/MDedge News

Mohamad A. Hussain, MD, of the University of Toronto and his colleagues assessed the ramifications of COMPASS to vascular surgeons. They used two clinical case studies of patients with peripheral arterial disease (PAD) to illustrate differing considerations in care.

The COMPASS (Cardiovascular Outcomes for People Using Anticoagulation Strategies) trial showed that low-dose rivaroxaban at 2.5 mg twice daily plus daily aspirin was superior to aspirin alone in reducing major adverse cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events, as well as major adverse limb events, among patients with stable atherosclerotic vascular disease, including those with PAD. However, the risk for major bleeding was higher with rivaroxaban plus aspirin and is a serious consideration for patient treatment.

In clinical case 1, used to illustrate the pertinence of COMPASS to patient care, Dr. Hussain and his colleagues detailed a 68-year-old man presenting with a 3-month history of intermittent claudication of bilateral calves at 10 minutes of brisk walking. His comorbidities include a MI with percutaneous coronary stenting 2 years ago, diabetes mellitus, hypertension, hyperlipidemia, and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease on the basis of prior smoking.

Clinical case 2 was a 70-year-old woman with a small gangrenous ulcer on the dorsal part of her first toe on the left foot. She has history of coronary artery disease with coronary artery bypass graft surgery 5 years prior, diabetes mellitus, mild chronic kidney disease, and hypertension. She underwent an uneventful lower extremity bypass using a prosthetic graft and had an uncomplicated postoperative course.

Both patients were on daily 81 mg aspirin.

In order to determine the appropriate care for these patients, the authors presented a flowchart of considerations regarding risk and benefits. Patients with symptomatic PAD who had no recent major bleeds, history of stroke, congestive heart failure, chronic kidney disease, frailty, or anemia were considered for rivaroxaban treatment, otherwise they were put on single antiplatelet therapy.

The investigators recommended that, if the patients were at high limb risk or high ischemic risk, they should be treated with either rivaroxaban plus aspirin or dual antiplatelet therapy (the latter if there was a recent MI or peripheral stenting). If the patients were not at risk, they were deemed eligible for either the rivaroxaban plus aspirin therapy or single antiplatelet therapy.

With regard to the clinical case studies, the authors discussed the rationale for putting both patients on the rivaroxaban plus aspirin therapy after an assessment of the risk/benefit profile for each patient based upon the above considerations. In both cases the bleeding risk was considered low; the ischemic risk in the first patient and the limb risk in the second patient was considered high. Although the second patient had chronic kidney disease, it was not considered severe enough to preclude such treatment.

“Future data from trials such as Vascular Outcomes Study of ASA Along With Rivaroxaban in Endovascular or Surgical Limb Revascularization For Peripheral Artery Disease [VOYAGER PAD] will provide data with regards to the role of low-dose rivaroxaban plus aspirin following peripheral artery revascularization for PAD,” the researchers concluded.

Dr. Hussain reported having no conflicts; his coauthors reported receiving funding from various pharmaceutical companies, including Bayer, which was a sponsor of the original COMPASS trial.

[email protected]

SOURCE: Hussain MA et al. Curr Opin Cardiol. 2019;34:178-84.

Antithrombotic therapy with low-dose rivaroxaban plus aspirin should be considered in low–bleeding risk patients with peripheral arterial disease who are at increased risk for ischemic and/or limb events, according to an analysis of the COMPASS trial published in Current Opinion in Cardiology.

Patrice Wendling/MDedge News

Mohamad A. Hussain, MD, of the University of Toronto and his colleagues assessed the ramifications of COMPASS to vascular surgeons. They used two clinical case studies of patients with peripheral arterial disease (PAD) to illustrate differing considerations in care.

The COMPASS (Cardiovascular Outcomes for People Using Anticoagulation Strategies) trial showed that low-dose rivaroxaban at 2.5 mg twice daily plus daily aspirin was superior to aspirin alone in reducing major adverse cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events, as well as major adverse limb events, among patients with stable atherosclerotic vascular disease, including those with PAD. However, the risk for major bleeding was higher with rivaroxaban plus aspirin and is a serious consideration for patient treatment.

In clinical case 1, used to illustrate the pertinence of COMPASS to patient care, Dr. Hussain and his colleagues detailed a 68-year-old man presenting with a 3-month history of intermittent claudication of bilateral calves at 10 minutes of brisk walking. His comorbidities include a MI with percutaneous coronary stenting 2 years ago, diabetes mellitus, hypertension, hyperlipidemia, and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease on the basis of prior smoking.

Clinical case 2 was a 70-year-old woman with a small gangrenous ulcer on the dorsal part of her first toe on the left foot. She has history of coronary artery disease with coronary artery bypass graft surgery 5 years prior, diabetes mellitus, mild chronic kidney disease, and hypertension. She underwent an uneventful lower extremity bypass using a prosthetic graft and had an uncomplicated postoperative course.

Both patients were on daily 81 mg aspirin.

In order to determine the appropriate care for these patients, the authors presented a flowchart of considerations regarding risk and benefits. Patients with symptomatic PAD who had no recent major bleeds, history of stroke, congestive heart failure, chronic kidney disease, frailty, or anemia were considered for rivaroxaban treatment, otherwise they were put on single antiplatelet therapy.

The investigators recommended that, if the patients were at high limb risk or high ischemic risk, they should be treated with either rivaroxaban plus aspirin or dual antiplatelet therapy (the latter if there was a recent MI or peripheral stenting). If the patients were not at risk, they were deemed eligible for either the rivaroxaban plus aspirin therapy or single antiplatelet therapy.

With regard to the clinical case studies, the authors discussed the rationale for putting both patients on the rivaroxaban plus aspirin therapy after an assessment of the risk/benefit profile for each patient based upon the above considerations. In both cases the bleeding risk was considered low; the ischemic risk in the first patient and the limb risk in the second patient was considered high. Although the second patient had chronic kidney disease, it was not considered severe enough to preclude such treatment.

“Future data from trials such as Vascular Outcomes Study of ASA Along With Rivaroxaban in Endovascular or Surgical Limb Revascularization For Peripheral Artery Disease [VOYAGER PAD] will provide data with regards to the role of low-dose rivaroxaban plus aspirin following peripheral artery revascularization for PAD,” the researchers concluded.

Dr. Hussain reported having no conflicts; his coauthors reported receiving funding from various pharmaceutical companies, including Bayer, which was a sponsor of the original COMPASS trial.

[email protected]

SOURCE: Hussain MA et al. Curr Opin Cardiol. 2019;34:178-84.

NEW ORLEANS – For patients with atrial fibrillation and either a recent acute coronary syndrome or percutaneous coronary intervention, combined treatment for 6 months with the anticoagulant apixaban and a P2Y12 inhibitor antiplatelet drug, but without aspirin, was safer than and as effective as a regimen that either also included aspirin or that substituted a vitamin K antagonist, such as warfarin, for the direct-acting oral anticoagulant, based on results from a multicenter, randomized trial with more than 4,600 patients.

The apixaban plus P2Y12 inhibitor (typically, clopidogrel) combination “resulted in less bleeding and fewer hospitalizations without significant differences in ischemic events than regimens that included a vitamin K antagonist, aspirin, or both,” Renato D. Lopes, MD, said at the annual meeting of the American College of Cardiology. Concurrently, his report of the results also appeared in an online article.

This finding in the AUGUSTUS trial gives clinicians more guidance for the long-standing dilemma of how to best prevent arterial thrombus formation in patients with atrial fibrillation (AFib). To prevent a stroke, these patients routinely receive treatment with an anticoagulant when they have an acute coronary syndrome (ACS) event or undergo percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). Typically, they receive several months of dual antiplatelet therapy with aspirin plus a P2Y12 inhibitor to prevent a clot from forming in the stented or unstable region of a coronary artery.

These patients are not uncommon; this circumstance occurs for about 20% of all AFib patients, and poses the question of what is the safest and most effective way to treat them. Should they get triple therapy with an anticoagulant, aspirin, and a P2Y12 inhibitor, an option that could cause excess bleeding; or should one of the three drugs drop out with the potential for an increased rate of ischemic events? The AUGUSTUS findings suggest that one solution is treatment with a combination of the direct-acting oral anticoagulant apixaban (Eliquis) and the P2Y12 inhibitor clopidogrel (Plavix) but without aspirin.

For the majority of patients like the ones enrolled, “less is more.” By dropping aspirin from the treatment mix, patients did better, said Dr. Lopes, a professor of medicine at Duke University in Durham, N.C.

Dr. Lopes and his associates designed AUGUSTUS (A Study of Apixaban in Patients With Atrial Fibrillation, Not Caused by a Heart Valve Problem, Who Are at Risk for Thrombosis [Blood Clots] Due to Having Had a Recent Coronary Event, Such as a Heart Attack or a Procedure to Open the Vessels of the Heart) as a two-by-two factorial study to address two different questions: During 6 months of treatment, how did apixaban compare with a vitamin K antagonist (usually warfarin) in these patients for safety and efficacy, and how did aspirin compare with placebo in this setting for the same endpoints?

The trial enrolled 4,614 patients at 492 sites in 33 countries. All patients in the study received a P2Y12 inhibitor, with 93% treated with clopidogrel. The study had roughly as many patients as the combined total of patients enrolled in two smaller, prior studies that had looked at roughly the same questions in similar patients.

“The aspirin part is the more interesting, and probably more unique and important finding,” John H. Alexander, MD, a coinvestigator on the study, said in a video interview. Regardless of the anticoagulant used, patients who received aspirin had a 16% rate of major bleeds or clinically relevant non-major bleeds, compared with a 9% rate among those on placebo, a statistically significant result that underscored the bleeding risk posed by adding aspirin to an anticoagulant and a P2Y12 inhibitor.

The results also showed no statistically significant difference in any efficacy measure with or without aspirin, including the rate of death or hospitalization, or of any individual ischemic endpoint. However the results showed a signal of a small increase in the rates of each of three types of ischemic events – stent thrombosis, MI, and need for urgent revascularization, each of which showed a numerical increase when aspirin was dropped. But the increase was small.

Dr. Lopes calculated that, for example, to prevent one episode of stent thrombosis by treating with aspirin also would cause 15 major or clinically relevant non-major bleeds, which makes inclusion of aspirin something of a judgment call for each patient, said Dr. Alexander, a professor of medicine at Duke. An AFib patient with a high risk for thrombosis but a low risk for bleeding following PCI or an ACS event might be a reasonable patient to treat with aspirin along with apixaban and a P2Y12 inhibitor, he explained.

The rate of major or clinically relevant bleeds was 11% with apixaban and 15% with a vitamin K antagonist, a statistically significant difference. Patients treated with apixaban also had a significantly reduced rate of death or hospitalization, 24%, compared with 27% among those on the vitamin K antagonist, as well as a significantly lower rate of stroke.

Overall the lowest bleeding rate was in patients on apixaban but no aspirin, a 7% rate, while the highest rate was in patients on a vitamin K antagonist plus aspirin, a 19% rate.

Dr. Alexander said that it would be an overreach to extrapolate these findings to other direct-acting oral anticoagulants, compared with a vitamin K antagonist, but he believed that the findings the study generated about aspirin were probably relevant regardless of the anticoagulant used.
 

[email protected]

On Twitter @mitchelzoler

NEW ORLEANS – For patients with atrial fibrillation and either a recent acute coronary syndrome or percutaneous coronary intervention, combined treatment for 6 months with the anticoagulant apixaban and a P2Y12 inhibitor antiplatelet drug, but without aspirin, was safer than and as effective as a regimen that either also included aspirin or that substituted a vitamin K antagonist, such as warfarin, for the direct-acting oral anticoagulant, based on results from a multicenter, randomized trial with more than 4,600 patients.

The apixaban plus P2Y12 inhibitor (typically, clopidogrel) combination “resulted in less bleeding and fewer hospitalizations without significant differences in ischemic events than regimens that included a vitamin K antagonist, aspirin, or both,” Renato D. Lopes, MD, said at the annual meeting of the American College of Cardiology. Concurrently, his report of the results also appeared in an online article.

This finding in the AUGUSTUS trial gives clinicians more guidance for the long-standing dilemma of how to best prevent arterial thrombus formation in patients with atrial fibrillation (AFib). To prevent a stroke, these patients routinely receive treatment with an anticoagulant when they have an acute coronary syndrome (ACS) event or undergo percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). Typically, they receive several months of dual antiplatelet therapy with aspirin plus a P2Y12 inhibitor to prevent a clot from forming in the stented or unstable region of a coronary artery.

These patients are not uncommon; this circumstance occurs for about 20% of all AFib patients, and poses the question of what is the safest and most effective way to treat them. Should they get triple therapy with an anticoagulant, aspirin, and a P2Y12 inhibitor, an option that could cause excess bleeding; or should one of the three drugs drop out with the potential for an increased rate of ischemic events? The AUGUSTUS findings suggest that one solution is treatment with a combination of the direct-acting oral anticoagulant apixaban (Eliquis) and the P2Y12 inhibitor clopidogrel (Plavix) but without aspirin.

For the majority of patients like the ones enrolled, “less is more.” By dropping aspirin from the treatment mix, patients did better, said Dr. Lopes, a professor of medicine at Duke University in Durham, N.C.

Dr. Lopes and his associates designed AUGUSTUS (A Study of Apixaban in Patients With Atrial Fibrillation, Not Caused by a Heart Valve Problem, Who Are at Risk for Thrombosis [Blood Clots] Due to Having Had a Recent Coronary Event, Such as a Heart Attack or a Procedure to Open the Vessels of the Heart) as a two-by-two factorial study to address two different questions: During 6 months of treatment, how did apixaban compare with a vitamin K antagonist (usually warfarin) in these patients for safety and efficacy, and how did aspirin compare with placebo in this setting for the same endpoints?

The trial enrolled 4,614 patients at 492 sites in 33 countries. All patients in the study received a P2Y12 inhibitor, with 93% treated with clopidogrel. The study had roughly as many patients as the combined total of patients enrolled in two smaller, prior studies that had looked at roughly the same questions in similar patients.

“The aspirin part is the more interesting, and probably more unique and important finding,” John H. Alexander, MD, a coinvestigator on the study, said in a video interview. Regardless of the anticoagulant used, patients who received aspirin had a 16% rate of major bleeds or clinically relevant non-major bleeds, compared with a 9% rate among those on placebo, a statistically significant result that underscored the bleeding risk posed by adding aspirin to an anticoagulant and a P2Y12 inhibitor.

The results also showed no statistically significant difference in any efficacy measure with or without aspirin, including the rate of death or hospitalization, or of any individual ischemic endpoint. However the results showed a signal of a small increase in the rates of each of three types of ischemic events – stent thrombosis, MI, and need for urgent revascularization, each of which showed a numerical increase when aspirin was dropped. But the increase was small.

Dr. Lopes calculated that, for example, to prevent one episode of stent thrombosis by treating with aspirin also would cause 15 major or clinically relevant non-major bleeds, which makes inclusion of aspirin something of a judgment call for each patient, said Dr. Alexander, a professor of medicine at Duke. An AFib patient with a high risk for thrombosis but a low risk for bleeding following PCI or an ACS event might be a reasonable patient to treat with aspirin along with apixaban and a P2Y12 inhibitor, he explained.

The rate of major or clinically relevant bleeds was 11% with apixaban and 15% with a vitamin K antagonist, a statistically significant difference. Patients treated with apixaban also had a significantly reduced rate of death or hospitalization, 24%, compared with 27% among those on the vitamin K antagonist, as well as a significantly lower rate of stroke.

Overall the lowest bleeding rate was in patients on apixaban but no aspirin, a 7% rate, while the highest rate was in patients on a vitamin K antagonist plus aspirin, a 19% rate.

Dr. Alexander said that it would be an overreach to extrapolate these findings to other direct-acting oral anticoagulants, compared with a vitamin K antagonist, but he believed that the findings the study generated about aspirin were probably relevant regardless of the anticoagulant used.
 

[email protected]

On Twitter @mitchelzoler

NEW ORLEANS – For patients with atrial fibrillation and either a recent acute coronary syndrome or percutaneous coronary intervention, combined treatment for 6 months with the anticoagulant apixaban and a P2Y12 inhibitor antiplatelet drug, but without aspirin, was safer than and as effective as a regimen that either also included aspirin or that substituted a vitamin K antagonist, such as warfarin, for the direct-acting oral anticoagulant, based on results from a multicenter, randomized trial with more than 4,600 patients.

The apixaban plus P2Y12 inhibitor (typically, clopidogrel) combination “resulted in less bleeding and fewer hospitalizations without significant differences in ischemic events than regimens that included a vitamin K antagonist, aspirin, or both,” Renato D. Lopes, MD, said at the annual meeting of the American College of Cardiology. Concurrently, his report of the results also appeared in an online article.

This finding in the AUGUSTUS trial gives clinicians more guidance for the long-standing dilemma of how to best prevent arterial thrombus formation in patients with atrial fibrillation (AFib). To prevent a stroke, these patients routinely receive treatment with an anticoagulant when they have an acute coronary syndrome (ACS) event or undergo percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). Typically, they receive several months of dual antiplatelet therapy with aspirin plus a P2Y12 inhibitor to prevent a clot from forming in the stented or unstable region of a coronary artery.

These patients are not uncommon; this circumstance occurs for about 20% of all AFib patients, and poses the question of what is the safest and most effective way to treat them. Should they get triple therapy with an anticoagulant, aspirin, and a P2Y12 inhibitor, an option that could cause excess bleeding; or should one of the three drugs drop out with the potential for an increased rate of ischemic events? The AUGUSTUS findings suggest that one solution is treatment with a combination of the direct-acting oral anticoagulant apixaban (Eliquis) and the P2Y12 inhibitor clopidogrel (Plavix) but without aspirin.

For the majority of patients like the ones enrolled, “less is more.” By dropping aspirin from the treatment mix, patients did better, said Dr. Lopes, a professor of medicine at Duke University in Durham, N.C.

Dr. Lopes and his associates designed AUGUSTUS (A Study of Apixaban in Patients With Atrial Fibrillation, Not Caused by a Heart Valve Problem, Who Are at Risk for Thrombosis [Blood Clots] Due to Having Had a Recent Coronary Event, Such as a Heart Attack or a Procedure to Open the Vessels of the Heart) as a two-by-two factorial study to address two different questions: During 6 months of treatment, how did apixaban compare with a vitamin K antagonist (usually warfarin) in these patients for safety and efficacy, and how did aspirin compare with placebo in this setting for the same endpoints?

The trial enrolled 4,614 patients at 492 sites in 33 countries. All patients in the study received a P2Y12 inhibitor, with 93% treated with clopidogrel. The study had roughly as many patients as the combined total of patients enrolled in two smaller, prior studies that had looked at roughly the same questions in similar patients.

“The aspirin part is the more interesting, and probably more unique and important finding,” John H. Alexander, MD, a coinvestigator on the study, said in a video interview. Regardless of the anticoagulant used, patients who received aspirin had a 16% rate of major bleeds or clinically relevant non-major bleeds, compared with a 9% rate among those on placebo, a statistically significant result that underscored the bleeding risk posed by adding aspirin to an anticoagulant and a P2Y12 inhibitor.

The results also showed no statistically significant difference in any efficacy measure with or without aspirin, including the rate of death or hospitalization, or of any individual ischemic endpoint. However the results showed a signal of a small increase in the rates of each of three types of ischemic events – stent thrombosis, MI, and need for urgent revascularization, each of which showed a numerical increase when aspirin was dropped. But the increase was small.

Dr. Lopes calculated that, for example, to prevent one episode of stent thrombosis by treating with aspirin also would cause 15 major or clinically relevant non-major bleeds, which makes inclusion of aspirin something of a judgment call for each patient, said Dr. Alexander, a professor of medicine at Duke. An AFib patient with a high risk for thrombosis but a low risk for bleeding following PCI or an ACS event might be a reasonable patient to treat with aspirin along with apixaban and a P2Y12 inhibitor, he explained.

The rate of major or clinically relevant bleeds was 11% with apixaban and 15% with a vitamin K antagonist, a statistically significant difference. Patients treated with apixaban also had a significantly reduced rate of death or hospitalization, 24%, compared with 27% among those on the vitamin K antagonist, as well as a significantly lower rate of stroke.

Overall the lowest bleeding rate was in patients on apixaban but no aspirin, a 7% rate, while the highest rate was in patients on a vitamin K antagonist plus aspirin, a 19% rate.

Dr. Alexander said that it would be an overreach to extrapolate these findings to other direct-acting oral anticoagulants, compared with a vitamin K antagonist, but he believed that the findings the study generated about aspirin were probably relevant regardless of the anticoagulant used.
 

[email protected]

On Twitter @mitchelzoler

HONOLULU – Andexanet alfa rapidly reverses factor Xa inhibition and effectively establishes hemostasis in patients with acute major bleeding, according to a study presented at the International Stroke Conference sponsored by the American Heart Association. The medication is associated with a low rate of mortality resulting from intracerebral hemorrhage (ICH), compared with the general population of patients with ICH receiving anticoagulation.

Factor Xa inhibitors such as apixaban and rivaroxaban effectively prevent thromboembolic events but may cause or exacerbate acute major bleeding. Andexanet alfa, a modified, recombinant, inactive form of human factor Xa, was developed and approved as a reversal agent for factor Xa inhibitors. In a 2015 study, andexanet rapidly and safely reversed anti–factor Xa activity in large cohorts of patients without bleeding.
 

A single-cohort study

Truman John Milling Jr., MD, an emergency medicine physician at Dell Seton Medical Center at the University of Texas in Austin, and his colleagues conducted the Andexanet Alfa, a Novel Antidote to the Anticoagulation Effects of Factor Xa Inhibitors (ANNEXA-4) study to evaluate the drug’s safety and efficacy in patients with acute major bleeding associated with treatment with a factor Xa inhibitor. For participants to be eligible, their bleeding had to be life threatening with signs of hemodynamic compromise, be associated with a decrease in hemoglobin level of at least 2 g/dL, or occur in a critical organ such as the brain. An independent academic committee determined whether patients met these criteria.

The trial’s primary efficacy outcomes were change from baseline in anti–factor Xa activity and the percentage of patients with excellent or good hemostatic efficacy at 12 hours. The primary safety endpoints were death, thrombotic events, and the development of neutralizing antibodies to andexanet or to native factor X and factor Xa. The efficacy population included patients with major bleeding and baseline anti–factor Xa activity of at least 75 ng/mL. The safety population included all patients who received a dose of andexanet. The independent committee adjudicated the efficacy and safety outcomes.
 

Hemostasis was sustained for 12 hours

The investigators enrolled 352 participants into the study, all of whom received andexanet and were followed for at least 30 days or until death. The population’s mean age was 77 years. “These were older and sicker patients with a significant amount of comorbid disease,” said Dr. Milling. The primary indication for anticoagulation was atrial fibrillation in 80% of patients. The primary site of bleeding was intracranial in 64% of patients and gastrointestinal in 26% of patients. The remaining 10% of patients had bleeding affecting other areas (such as pericardial or intramuscular bleeding).

The investigators included 254 patients in the efficacy population. At the end of the administration of the andexanet bolus, the median value for anti–factor Xa activity decreased by 92% among participants receiving apixaban, 92% among participants receiving rivaroxaban, and 75% among patients receiving enoxaparin. Among patients receiving apixaban, the median value for anti–factor Xa activity was decreased by 32% at 4 hours, 34% at 8 hours, and 38% at 12 hours. Among patients receiving rivaroxaban, the median value for anti–factor Xa activity was decreased by 42% at 4 hours, 48% at 8 hours, and 62% at 12 hours.

Dr. Milling and his colleagues assessed hemostatic efficacy in 249 patients. Of this group, 82% achieved good or excellent hemostasis. Among participants with good or excellent hemostasis, 84% had excellent results, and 16% had good results. Subanalysis by factor Xa inhibitor, type of bleed, age, and dose of andexanet did not alter the findings significantly.

To determine whether hemostasis had been sustained sufficiently to prevent clinical deterioration, the investigators examined 71 patients with ICH and a single-compartment bleed. From 1 hour to 12 hours, one patient’s outcome changed from excellent/good to poor/none, and one patient’s outcome changed from excellent to good. For the majority of these patients, however, good hemostasis was sustained from 1 to 12 hours.

The rate of thromboembolic events was 9.7%, which is in the expected range for this population, said Dr. Milling. These events were distributed evenly among the 4 weeks of the study. Stroke and deep vein thrombosis accounted for most of these events, and pulmonary emboli and heart attacks occurred as well. “Once we restarted oral anticoagulation ... there were no more thrombotic events,” said Dr. Milling. No patient developed neutralizing antibodies to factor X or factor Xa, nor did any patient develop neutralizing antibodies to andexanet.

The overall mortality rate was 13.9%. The rate of mortality resulting from ICH was 15%, and the rate of mortality resulting from gastrointestinal bleeding was 11%. These results are impressive, considering that patients had received anticoagulants, said Dr. Milling.

Portola Pharmaceuticals, the maker of andexanet alfa, funded the study. Dr. Milling reported receiving funding and honoraria from the Population Health Research Institute at McMasters University, Janssen, CSL Behring, and Octapharma. He also received a small research payment from Portola Pharmaceuticals. Several of the investigators reported receiving funding from Portola Pharmaceuticals.

[email protected]

SOURCE: Milling TJ et al. ISC 2019, Abstract LB7.

HONOLULU – Andexanet alfa rapidly reverses factor Xa inhibition and effectively establishes hemostasis in patients with acute major bleeding, according to a study presented at the International Stroke Conference sponsored by the American Heart Association. The medication is associated with a low rate of mortality resulting from intracerebral hemorrhage (ICH), compared with the general population of patients with ICH receiving anticoagulation.

Factor Xa inhibitors such as apixaban and rivaroxaban effectively prevent thromboembolic events but may cause or exacerbate acute major bleeding. Andexanet alfa, a modified, recombinant, inactive form of human factor Xa, was developed and approved as a reversal agent for factor Xa inhibitors. In a 2015 study, andexanet rapidly and safely reversed anti–factor Xa activity in large cohorts of patients without bleeding.
 

A single-cohort study

Truman John Milling Jr., MD, an emergency medicine physician at Dell Seton Medical Center at the University of Texas in Austin, and his colleagues conducted the Andexanet Alfa, a Novel Antidote to the Anticoagulation Effects of Factor Xa Inhibitors (ANNEXA-4) study to evaluate the drug’s safety and efficacy in patients with acute major bleeding associated with treatment with a factor Xa inhibitor. For participants to be eligible, their bleeding had to be life threatening with signs of hemodynamic compromise, be associated with a decrease in hemoglobin level of at least 2 g/dL, or occur in a critical organ such as the brain. An independent academic committee determined whether patients met these criteria.

The trial’s primary efficacy outcomes were change from baseline in anti–factor Xa activity and the percentage of patients with excellent or good hemostatic efficacy at 12 hours. The primary safety endpoints were death, thrombotic events, and the development of neutralizing antibodies to andexanet or to native factor X and factor Xa. The efficacy population included patients with major bleeding and baseline anti–factor Xa activity of at least 75 ng/mL. The safety population included all patients who received a dose of andexanet. The independent committee adjudicated the efficacy and safety outcomes.
 

Hemostasis was sustained for 12 hours

The investigators enrolled 352 participants into the study, all of whom received andexanet and were followed for at least 30 days or until death. The population’s mean age was 77 years. “These were older and sicker patients with a significant amount of comorbid disease,” said Dr. Milling. The primary indication for anticoagulation was atrial fibrillation in 80% of patients. The primary site of bleeding was intracranial in 64% of patients and gastrointestinal in 26% of patients. The remaining 10% of patients had bleeding affecting other areas (such as pericardial or intramuscular bleeding).

The investigators included 254 patients in the efficacy population. At the end of the administration of the andexanet bolus, the median value for anti–factor Xa activity decreased by 92% among participants receiving apixaban, 92% among participants receiving rivaroxaban, and 75% among patients receiving enoxaparin. Among patients receiving apixaban, the median value for anti–factor Xa activity was decreased by 32% at 4 hours, 34% at 8 hours, and 38% at 12 hours. Among patients receiving rivaroxaban, the median value for anti–factor Xa activity was decreased by 42% at 4 hours, 48% at 8 hours, and 62% at 12 hours.

Dr. Milling and his colleagues assessed hemostatic efficacy in 249 patients. Of this group, 82% achieved good or excellent hemostasis. Among participants with good or excellent hemostasis, 84% had excellent results, and 16% had good results. Subanalysis by factor Xa inhibitor, type of bleed, age, and dose of andexanet did not alter the findings significantly.

To determine whether hemostasis had been sustained sufficiently to prevent clinical deterioration, the investigators examined 71 patients with ICH and a single-compartment bleed. From 1 hour to 12 hours, one patient’s outcome changed from excellent/good to poor/none, and one patient’s outcome changed from excellent to good. For the majority of these patients, however, good hemostasis was sustained from 1 to 12 hours.

The rate of thromboembolic events was 9.7%, which is in the expected range for this population, said Dr. Milling. These events were distributed evenly among the 4 weeks of the study. Stroke and deep vein thrombosis accounted for most of these events, and pulmonary emboli and heart attacks occurred as well. “Once we restarted oral anticoagulation ... there were no more thrombotic events,” said Dr. Milling. No patient developed neutralizing antibodies to factor X or factor Xa, nor did any patient develop neutralizing antibodies to andexanet.

The overall mortality rate was 13.9%. The rate of mortality resulting from ICH was 15%, and the rate of mortality resulting from gastrointestinal bleeding was 11%. These results are impressive, considering that patients had received anticoagulants, said Dr. Milling.

Portola Pharmaceuticals, the maker of andexanet alfa, funded the study. Dr. Milling reported receiving funding and honoraria from the Population Health Research Institute at McMasters University, Janssen, CSL Behring, and Octapharma. He also received a small research payment from Portola Pharmaceuticals. Several of the investigators reported receiving funding from Portola Pharmaceuticals.

[email protected]

SOURCE: Milling TJ et al. ISC 2019, Abstract LB7.

HONOLULU – Andexanet alfa rapidly reverses factor Xa inhibition and effectively establishes hemostasis in patients with acute major bleeding, according to a study presented at the International Stroke Conference sponsored by the American Heart Association. The medication is associated with a low rate of mortality resulting from intracerebral hemorrhage (ICH), compared with the general population of patients with ICH receiving anticoagulation.

Factor Xa inhibitors such as apixaban and rivaroxaban effectively prevent thromboembolic events but may cause or exacerbate acute major bleeding. Andexanet alfa, a modified, recombinant, inactive form of human factor Xa, was developed and approved as a reversal agent for factor Xa inhibitors. In a 2015 study, andexanet rapidly and safely reversed anti–factor Xa activity in large cohorts of patients without bleeding.
 

A single-cohort study

Truman John Milling Jr., MD, an emergency medicine physician at Dell Seton Medical Center at the University of Texas in Austin, and his colleagues conducted the Andexanet Alfa, a Novel Antidote to the Anticoagulation Effects of Factor Xa Inhibitors (ANNEXA-4) study to evaluate the drug’s safety and efficacy in patients with acute major bleeding associated with treatment with a factor Xa inhibitor. For participants to be eligible, their bleeding had to be life threatening with signs of hemodynamic compromise, be associated with a decrease in hemoglobin level of at least 2 g/dL, or occur in a critical organ such as the brain. An independent academic committee determined whether patients met these criteria.

The trial’s primary efficacy outcomes were change from baseline in anti–factor Xa activity and the percentage of patients with excellent or good hemostatic efficacy at 12 hours. The primary safety endpoints were death, thrombotic events, and the development of neutralizing antibodies to andexanet or to native factor X and factor Xa. The efficacy population included patients with major bleeding and baseline anti–factor Xa activity of at least 75 ng/mL. The safety population included all patients who received a dose of andexanet. The independent committee adjudicated the efficacy and safety outcomes.
 

Hemostasis was sustained for 12 hours

The investigators enrolled 352 participants into the study, all of whom received andexanet and were followed for at least 30 days or until death. The population’s mean age was 77 years. “These were older and sicker patients with a significant amount of comorbid disease,” said Dr. Milling. The primary indication for anticoagulation was atrial fibrillation in 80% of patients. The primary site of bleeding was intracranial in 64% of patients and gastrointestinal in 26% of patients. The remaining 10% of patients had bleeding affecting other areas (such as pericardial or intramuscular bleeding).

The investigators included 254 patients in the efficacy population. At the end of the administration of the andexanet bolus, the median value for anti–factor Xa activity decreased by 92% among participants receiving apixaban, 92% among participants receiving rivaroxaban, and 75% among patients receiving enoxaparin. Among patients receiving apixaban, the median value for anti–factor Xa activity was decreased by 32% at 4 hours, 34% at 8 hours, and 38% at 12 hours. Among patients receiving rivaroxaban, the median value for anti–factor Xa activity was decreased by 42% at 4 hours, 48% at 8 hours, and 62% at 12 hours.

Dr. Milling and his colleagues assessed hemostatic efficacy in 249 patients. Of this group, 82% achieved good or excellent hemostasis. Among participants with good or excellent hemostasis, 84% had excellent results, and 16% had good results. Subanalysis by factor Xa inhibitor, type of bleed, age, and dose of andexanet did not alter the findings significantly.

To determine whether hemostasis had been sustained sufficiently to prevent clinical deterioration, the investigators examined 71 patients with ICH and a single-compartment bleed. From 1 hour to 12 hours, one patient’s outcome changed from excellent/good to poor/none, and one patient’s outcome changed from excellent to good. For the majority of these patients, however, good hemostasis was sustained from 1 to 12 hours.

The rate of thromboembolic events was 9.7%, which is in the expected range for this population, said Dr. Milling. These events were distributed evenly among the 4 weeks of the study. Stroke and deep vein thrombosis accounted for most of these events, and pulmonary emboli and heart attacks occurred as well. “Once we restarted oral anticoagulation ... there were no more thrombotic events,” said Dr. Milling. No patient developed neutralizing antibodies to factor X or factor Xa, nor did any patient develop neutralizing antibodies to andexanet.

The overall mortality rate was 13.9%. The rate of mortality resulting from ICH was 15%, and the rate of mortality resulting from gastrointestinal bleeding was 11%. These results are impressive, considering that patients had received anticoagulants, said Dr. Milling.

Portola Pharmaceuticals, the maker of andexanet alfa, funded the study. Dr. Milling reported receiving funding and honoraria from the Population Health Research Institute at McMasters University, Janssen, CSL Behring, and Octapharma. He also received a small research payment from Portola Pharmaceuticals. Several of the investigators reported receiving funding from Portola Pharmaceuticals.

[email protected]

SOURCE: Milling TJ et al. ISC 2019, Abstract LB7.

Earlier this year, the Food and Drug Administration approved Cablivi (caplacizumab-yhdp) (Sanofi Genzyme, Cambridge, Mass.) for the treatment of acquired thrombotic thrombocytopenic purpura (TTP), making it the first medication specifically indicated for the treatment of TTP.

The approval of caplacizumab and the clinical trial results that approval is based on are the most promising developments in the treatment of TTP since the introduction of plasma exchange (PE) therapy. However, many questions remain about how to best administer caplacizumab, specifically, which patients should receive it? Should all TTP patients start on caplacizumab therapy or should it be limited to patients with histories of TTP or those slow to respond to standard therapy with PE and immunosuppression?

TTP is a rare thrombotic microangiopathy characterized by thrombocytopenia and microangiopathic hemolytic anemia caused by the inhibition of ADAMTS13, a metalloproteinase, which cleaves large-molecular-weight von Willebrand factor (vWF) multimers. Caplacizumab is a humanized bivalent, variable domain-only immunoglobulin fragment. The drug targets the A1 domain of vWF and inhibits the binding between vWF and the platelet glycoprotein Ib-IX-V receptor, preventing the formation of the microvascular thrombi and platelet loss associated with TTP.

FDA approval of caplacizumab came shortly after the publication of the results of the HERCULES trial in the New England Journal of Medicine by Marie Scully, MD, and her colleagues (N Engl J Med. 2019; 380[4]: 335-46).

HERCULES was an international phase 3, double blinded, placebo-controlled, randomized study designed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of caplacizumab. In total, 145 patients participated in the trial. Caplacizumab or placebo were given in addition to standard therapy of plasma exchange (PE) and immunosuppression. Caplacizumab or placebo were administered as an intravenous loading dose prior to the first PE after randomization and subcutaneously once daily until 30 days after the last PE. All patients received daily PE until 2 days after platelet count normalization.

The primary measure of the study was the time to platelet count response of greater than 150 x 10⁹/L following the cessation of daily PE. Secondary measures included TTP-related death; TTP relapse; major thromboembolic events; proportion of subjects with refractory TTP; normalization of organ damage markers including lactate dehydrogenase, cardiac troponin I, and serum creatinine; and other adverse events.

The authors found that the median time of normalization of the platelet count was shorter in the caplacizumab group, compared with placebo, with the caplacizumab group being 1.55 times more likely to have a normalized platelet count at any given time point in the study. While statistically significant differences were identified in the rate of platelet normalization, the median number of days of PE until normalization was only 2 days less in the caplacizumab group (five treatments) than in the placebo group (seven treatments), which may not be clinically significant for the treating physician.

In fact, the secondary endpoints of the study seem much more clinically promising in the treatment of TTP. The composite rate of TTP-related death, TTP recurrence, or major thromboembolic events during the treatment period was significantly lower in the caplacizumab group (12%) versus placebo (49%). No TTP-related deaths occurred in the caplacizumab group. The caplacizumab group was also statistically less likely to have a TTP exacerbation, defined as disease recurrence within 30 days from the last PE, than the placebo group.

End organ damage serum markers also improved faster in the caplacizumab group, although there was no significant difference between groups. Overall hospitalization (median of 9 vs. 12 days) and ICU stays (median of 3 vs. 5 days) were shorter in the caplacizumab group, compared with the placebo group.

While several relapses, defined as disease recurrence after 30 days from the last PE, occurred in the caplacizumab group, the relapses were only found in patients with ADAMTS13 activity of less than 10% at the end of the treatment period. Mild side effects, such as mucocutaneous bleeding were more frequent in the caplacizumab group. No major bleeding complications were observed.

The HERCULES trial generates more questions about the role of ADAMTS13 activity testing to monitor treatment response and to make therapy decisions. Extremely low ADAMTS13 activity levels at the cessation of therapy may be a sign of treatment inadequacy and may warrant closer follow-up of at-risk patients on caplacizumab.

Sanofi Genzyme estimates that the U.S. list price will be approximately $270,000 for a standard treatment course, according to a news release from the company. Whether payers will add it to formularies remains uncertain, but the high drug cost may be countered by potential savings in the reduction of hospital and ICU days with caplacizumab therapy. Sanofi Genzyme will also have a patient support program for eligible patients.

Caplacizumab has been approved in Europe since August 2018, but is not readily available in the United States. Given the dearth of clinical experience with the drug outside of the TITAN and HERCULES trials, strong recommendations for when and how to initiate therapy remain elusive.

As caplacizumab is further introduced into clinical practice, more studies are needed to identify which patient groups will benefit most from therapy. The current data for caplacizumab shows that it will be used as an adjunct to standard PE therapy, rather than as a replacement. How the drug is used in combination with current TTP treatments – such as corticosteroids, rituximab, bortezomib, vincristine, N-acetylcysteine, and splenectomy – should be evaluated to identify which treatment combinations not only improve platelet counts, but also reduce mortality and morbidity while remaining cost effective.

Dr. Ricci is a staff physician and Apheresis Director at the Taussig Cancer Institute at the Cleveland Clinic. She reported having no conflicts of interest.

Earlier this year, the Food and Drug Administration approved Cablivi (caplacizumab-yhdp) (Sanofi Genzyme, Cambridge, Mass.) for the treatment of acquired thrombotic thrombocytopenic purpura (TTP), making it the first medication specifically indicated for the treatment of TTP.

The approval of caplacizumab and the clinical trial results that approval is based on are the most promising developments in the treatment of TTP since the introduction of plasma exchange (PE) therapy. However, many questions remain about how to best administer caplacizumab, specifically, which patients should receive it? Should all TTP patients start on caplacizumab therapy or should it be limited to patients with histories of TTP or those slow to respond to standard therapy with PE and immunosuppression?

TTP is a rare thrombotic microangiopathy characterized by thrombocytopenia and microangiopathic hemolytic anemia caused by the inhibition of ADAMTS13, a metalloproteinase, which cleaves large-molecular-weight von Willebrand factor (vWF) multimers. Caplacizumab is a humanized bivalent, variable domain-only immunoglobulin fragment. The drug targets the A1 domain of vWF and inhibits the binding between vWF and the platelet glycoprotein Ib-IX-V receptor, preventing the formation of the microvascular thrombi and platelet loss associated with TTP.

FDA approval of caplacizumab came shortly after the publication of the results of the HERCULES trial in the New England Journal of Medicine by Marie Scully, MD, and her colleagues (N Engl J Med. 2019; 380[4]: 335-46).

HERCULES was an international phase 3, double blinded, placebo-controlled, randomized study designed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of caplacizumab. In total, 145 patients participated in the trial. Caplacizumab or placebo were given in addition to standard therapy of plasma exchange (PE) and immunosuppression. Caplacizumab or placebo were administered as an intravenous loading dose prior to the first PE after randomization and subcutaneously once daily until 30 days after the last PE. All patients received daily PE until 2 days after platelet count normalization.

The primary measure of the study was the time to platelet count response of greater than 150 x 10⁹/L following the cessation of daily PE. Secondary measures included TTP-related death; TTP relapse; major thromboembolic events; proportion of subjects with refractory TTP; normalization of organ damage markers including lactate dehydrogenase, cardiac troponin I, and serum creatinine; and other adverse events.

The authors found that the median time of normalization of the platelet count was shorter in the caplacizumab group, compared with placebo, with the caplacizumab group being 1.55 times more likely to have a normalized platelet count at any given time point in the study. While statistically significant differences were identified in the rate of platelet normalization, the median number of days of PE until normalization was only 2 days less in the caplacizumab group (five treatments) than in the placebo group (seven treatments), which may not be clinically significant for the treating physician.

In fact, the secondary endpoints of the study seem much more clinically promising in the treatment of TTP. The composite rate of TTP-related death, TTP recurrence, or major thromboembolic events during the treatment period was significantly lower in the caplacizumab group (12%) versus placebo (49%). No TTP-related deaths occurred in the caplacizumab group. The caplacizumab group was also statistically less likely to have a TTP exacerbation, defined as disease recurrence within 30 days from the last PE, than the placebo group.

End organ damage serum markers also improved faster in the caplacizumab group, although there was no significant difference between groups. Overall hospitalization (median of 9 vs. 12 days) and ICU stays (median of 3 vs. 5 days) were shorter in the caplacizumab group, compared with the placebo group.

While several relapses, defined as disease recurrence after 30 days from the last PE, occurred in the caplacizumab group, the relapses were only found in patients with ADAMTS13 activity of less than 10% at the end of the treatment period. Mild side effects, such as mucocutaneous bleeding were more frequent in the caplacizumab group. No major bleeding complications were observed.

The HERCULES trial generates more questions about the role of ADAMTS13 activity testing to monitor treatment response and to make therapy decisions. Extremely low ADAMTS13 activity levels at the cessation of therapy may be a sign of treatment inadequacy and may warrant closer follow-up of at-risk patients on caplacizumab.

Sanofi Genzyme estimates that the U.S. list price will be approximately $270,000 for a standard treatment course, according to a news release from the company. Whether payers will add it to formularies remains uncertain, but the high drug cost may be countered by potential savings in the reduction of hospital and ICU days with caplacizumab therapy. Sanofi Genzyme will also have a patient support program for eligible patients.

Caplacizumab has been approved in Europe since August 2018, but is not readily available in the United States. Given the dearth of clinical experience with the drug outside of the TITAN and HERCULES trials, strong recommendations for when and how to initiate therapy remain elusive.

As caplacizumab is further introduced into clinical practice, more studies are needed to identify which patient groups will benefit most from therapy. The current data for caplacizumab shows that it will be used as an adjunct to standard PE therapy, rather than as a replacement. How the drug is used in combination with current TTP treatments – such as corticosteroids, rituximab, bortezomib, vincristine, N-acetylcysteine, and splenectomy – should be evaluated to identify which treatment combinations not only improve platelet counts, but also reduce mortality and morbidity while remaining cost effective.

Dr. Ricci is a staff physician and Apheresis Director at the Taussig Cancer Institute at the Cleveland Clinic. She reported having no conflicts of interest.

Earlier this year, the Food and Drug Administration approved Cablivi (caplacizumab-yhdp) (Sanofi Genzyme, Cambridge, Mass.) for the treatment of acquired thrombotic thrombocytopenic purpura (TTP), making it the first medication specifically indicated for the treatment of TTP.

The approval of caplacizumab and the clinical trial results that approval is based on are the most promising developments in the treatment of TTP since the introduction of plasma exchange (PE) therapy. However, many questions remain about how to best administer caplacizumab, specifically, which patients should receive it? Should all TTP patients start on caplacizumab therapy or should it be limited to patients with histories of TTP or those slow to respond to standard therapy with PE and immunosuppression?

TTP is a rare thrombotic microangiopathy characterized by thrombocytopenia and microangiopathic hemolytic anemia caused by the inhibition of ADAMTS13, a metalloproteinase, which cleaves large-molecular-weight von Willebrand factor (vWF) multimers. Caplacizumab is a humanized bivalent, variable domain-only immunoglobulin fragment. The drug targets the A1 domain of vWF and inhibits the binding between vWF and the platelet glycoprotein Ib-IX-V receptor, preventing the formation of the microvascular thrombi and platelet loss associated with TTP.

FDA approval of caplacizumab came shortly after the publication of the results of the HERCULES trial in the New England Journal of Medicine by Marie Scully, MD, and her colleagues (N Engl J Med. 2019; 380[4]: 335-46).

HERCULES was an international phase 3, double blinded, placebo-controlled, randomized study designed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of caplacizumab. In total, 145 patients participated in the trial. Caplacizumab or placebo were given in addition to standard therapy of plasma exchange (PE) and immunosuppression. Caplacizumab or placebo were administered as an intravenous loading dose prior to the first PE after randomization and subcutaneously once daily until 30 days after the last PE. All patients received daily PE until 2 days after platelet count normalization.

The primary measure of the study was the time to platelet count response of greater than 150 x 10⁹/L following the cessation of daily PE. Secondary measures included TTP-related death; TTP relapse; major thromboembolic events; proportion of subjects with refractory TTP; normalization of organ damage markers including lactate dehydrogenase, cardiac troponin I, and serum creatinine; and other adverse events.

The authors found that the median time of normalization of the platelet count was shorter in the caplacizumab group, compared with placebo, with the caplacizumab group being 1.55 times more likely to have a normalized platelet count at any given time point in the study. While statistically significant differences were identified in the rate of platelet normalization, the median number of days of PE until normalization was only 2 days less in the caplacizumab group (five treatments) than in the placebo group (seven treatments), which may not be clinically significant for the treating physician.

In fact, the secondary endpoints of the study seem much more clinically promising in the treatment of TTP. The composite rate of TTP-related death, TTP recurrence, or major thromboembolic events during the treatment period was significantly lower in the caplacizumab group (12%) versus placebo (49%). No TTP-related deaths occurred in the caplacizumab group. The caplacizumab group was also statistically less likely to have a TTP exacerbation, defined as disease recurrence within 30 days from the last PE, than the placebo group.

End organ damage serum markers also improved faster in the caplacizumab group, although there was no significant difference between groups. Overall hospitalization (median of 9 vs. 12 days) and ICU stays (median of 3 vs. 5 days) were shorter in the caplacizumab group, compared with the placebo group.

While several relapses, defined as disease recurrence after 30 days from the last PE, occurred in the caplacizumab group, the relapses were only found in patients with ADAMTS13 activity of less than 10% at the end of the treatment period. Mild side effects, such as mucocutaneous bleeding were more frequent in the caplacizumab group. No major bleeding complications were observed.

The HERCULES trial generates more questions about the role of ADAMTS13 activity testing to monitor treatment response and to make therapy decisions. Extremely low ADAMTS13 activity levels at the cessation of therapy may be a sign of treatment inadequacy and may warrant closer follow-up of at-risk patients on caplacizumab.

Sanofi Genzyme estimates that the U.S. list price will be approximately $270,000 for a standard treatment course, according to a news release from the company. Whether payers will add it to formularies remains uncertain, but the high drug cost may be countered by potential savings in the reduction of hospital and ICU days with caplacizumab therapy. Sanofi Genzyme will also have a patient support program for eligible patients.

Caplacizumab has been approved in Europe since August 2018, but is not readily available in the United States. Given the dearth of clinical experience with the drug outside of the TITAN and HERCULES trials, strong recommendations for when and how to initiate therapy remain elusive.

As caplacizumab is further introduced into clinical practice, more studies are needed to identify which patient groups will benefit most from therapy. The current data for caplacizumab shows that it will be used as an adjunct to standard PE therapy, rather than as a replacement. How the drug is used in combination with current TTP treatments – such as corticosteroids, rituximab, bortezomib, vincristine, N-acetylcysteine, and splenectomy – should be evaluated to identify which treatment combinations not only improve platelet counts, but also reduce mortality and morbidity while remaining cost effective.

Dr. Ricci is a staff physician and Apheresis Director at the Taussig Cancer Institute at the Cleveland Clinic. She reported having no conflicts of interest.

SEATTLE – HIV infection is associated with increased risk of recurrent venous thromboembolism, especially within 1 year of the initial episode. The finding, presented during a poster session at the Conference on Retroviruses & Opportunistic Infections, follows up on an earlier study that found that first-time VTE risk also is higher among HIV-positive individuals than in the general population.

Jim Kling/MDedge News

The conclusion about first-time VTE risk, published earlier this year in Lancet HIV, came from a comparison between the ATHENA (AIDS Therapy Evaluation in the Netherlands) cohort and European population-level of studies of VTE. It found a crude incidence of 2.33 VTE events per 1,000 person-years In HIV patients, with heightened odds when CD4 cell counts were below 200 cells/mcL (adjusted hazard ratio, 3.40).

The new work represents a follow-up and compared results from ATHENA (153 patients with HIV and first VTE) and the Dutch MEGA cohort (4,005 patients without HIV, with first VTE), which includes the general population. Overall, 26% of patients in the ATHENA cohort experienced a second VTE event, compared with 16% of the general population. At 1 year after anticoagulation withdrawal, HIV-positive individuals were at 67% increased risk (HR, 1.67). At 6-years after withdrawal, the relationship was not statistically significant (HR, 1.22).

Researchers also found that CD4 cell-count recovery was associated with lowered risk, with every 100 cell-count increase between initial VTE diagnosis and anticoagulant withdrawal linked to a 20% reduction in risk (HR, 0.80).

“The clinical question is: If it’s true you have an increased risk of recurrence, should you be continuing anticoagulant therapy longer in people with HIV? This poster doesn’t answer that question and you probably need a randomized, controlled trial to look at that,” Peter Reiss, MD, professor of medicine at Amsterdam University Medical Center, said in an interview during the conference.

In the absence of a clear answer, it’s sensible for clinicians to be aware of the potential increased risk, much as clinicians have internalized the increased risk of atherosclerotic vascular disease in HIV patients. “I think the publication [in Lancet HIV] as well as this poster suggest that on the venous side of things there may also be an accentuated risk,” said Dr. Reiss.

Heidi Crane, MD, a professor of medicine at the University of Washington, Seattle, presented a poster examining the underlying factors that may predispose HIV patients to first-time VTE events. Her team performed an adjudicated review of VTE cases among HIV patients at six institutions and found that the risk factors appeared to be distinct from those seen in the general population.

The traditional long plane ride was less common in this population, while factors such as injected drug use and pneumonia were more common. The VTE events occurred at a median age of 49 years; 30% of the patients had a detectable viral load. “We’re seeing a little more (VTE) than you might expect, and in a younger population than you might have guessed,” said Dr. Crane in an interview.

The most frequent predisposing risk factors were recent hospitalization (40%), infection (40%), or immobilization/bed rest (24%) within the past 90 days, and injectable drug use (22%). “It’s not just the traditional risk factors. Some HIV-specific risk factors are driving this,” said Dr. Crane.

She also aims to learn more about the specifics of risk factors, such as catheter-associated thromboses. The team is working to increase the sample size in order to parse out the relationships with specific outcomes.

In the meantime, the data further characterize the health challenges facing people living with HIV. “This is another example demonstrating that comorbid conditions among patients with HIV that are often considered age related occur at much younger ages in our population,” said Dr. Crane.

SOURCE: Rokx C et al. CROI 2019, Abstract 636; and Tenforde MW et al. CROI 2019, Abstract 637.

.

SEATTLE – HIV infection is associated with increased risk of recurrent venous thromboembolism, especially within 1 year of the initial episode. The finding, presented during a poster session at the Conference on Retroviruses & Opportunistic Infections, follows up on an earlier study that found that first-time VTE risk also is higher among HIV-positive individuals than in the general population.

Jim Kling/MDedge News

The conclusion about first-time VTE risk, published earlier this year in Lancet HIV, came from a comparison between the ATHENA (AIDS Therapy Evaluation in the Netherlands) cohort and European population-level of studies of VTE. It found a crude incidence of 2.33 VTE events per 1,000 person-years In HIV patients, with heightened odds when CD4 cell counts were below 200 cells/mcL (adjusted hazard ratio, 3.40).

The new work represents a follow-up and compared results from ATHENA (153 patients with HIV and first VTE) and the Dutch MEGA cohort (4,005 patients without HIV, with first VTE), which includes the general population. Overall, 26% of patients in the ATHENA cohort experienced a second VTE event, compared with 16% of the general population. At 1 year after anticoagulation withdrawal, HIV-positive individuals were at 67% increased risk (HR, 1.67). At 6-years after withdrawal, the relationship was not statistically significant (HR, 1.22).

Researchers also found that CD4 cell-count recovery was associated with lowered risk, with every 100 cell-count increase between initial VTE diagnosis and anticoagulant withdrawal linked to a 20% reduction in risk (HR, 0.80).

“The clinical question is: If it’s true you have an increased risk of recurrence, should you be continuing anticoagulant therapy longer in people with HIV? This poster doesn’t answer that question and you probably need a randomized, controlled trial to look at that,” Peter Reiss, MD, professor of medicine at Amsterdam University Medical Center, said in an interview during the conference.

In the absence of a clear answer, it’s sensible for clinicians to be aware of the potential increased risk, much as clinicians have internalized the increased risk of atherosclerotic vascular disease in HIV patients. “I think the publication [in Lancet HIV] as well as this poster suggest that on the venous side of things there may also be an accentuated risk,” said Dr. Reiss.

Heidi Crane, MD, a professor of medicine at the University of Washington, Seattle, presented a poster examining the underlying factors that may predispose HIV patients to first-time VTE events. Her team performed an adjudicated review of VTE cases among HIV patients at six institutions and found that the risk factors appeared to be distinct from those seen in the general population.

The traditional long plane ride was less common in this population, while factors such as injected drug use and pneumonia were more common. The VTE events occurred at a median age of 49 years; 30% of the patients had a detectable viral load. “We’re seeing a little more (VTE) than you might expect, and in a younger population than you might have guessed,” said Dr. Crane in an interview.

The most frequent predisposing risk factors were recent hospitalization (40%), infection (40%), or immobilization/bed rest (24%) within the past 90 days, and injectable drug use (22%). “It’s not just the traditional risk factors. Some HIV-specific risk factors are driving this,” said Dr. Crane.

She also aims to learn more about the specifics of risk factors, such as catheter-associated thromboses. The team is working to increase the sample size in order to parse out the relationships with specific outcomes.

In the meantime, the data further characterize the health challenges facing people living with HIV. “This is another example demonstrating that comorbid conditions among patients with HIV that are often considered age related occur at much younger ages in our population,” said Dr. Crane.

SOURCE: Rokx C et al. CROI 2019, Abstract 636; and Tenforde MW et al. CROI 2019, Abstract 637.

.

SEATTLE – HIV infection is associated with increased risk of recurrent venous thromboembolism, especially within 1 year of the initial episode. The finding, presented during a poster session at the Conference on Retroviruses & Opportunistic Infections, follows up on an earlier study that found that first-time VTE risk also is higher among HIV-positive individuals than in the general population.

Jim Kling/MDedge News

The conclusion about first-time VTE risk, published earlier this year in Lancet HIV, came from a comparison between the ATHENA (AIDS Therapy Evaluation in the Netherlands) cohort and European population-level of studies of VTE. It found a crude incidence of 2.33 VTE events per 1,000 person-years In HIV patients, with heightened odds when CD4 cell counts were below 200 cells/mcL (adjusted hazard ratio, 3.40).

The new work represents a follow-up and compared results from ATHENA (153 patients with HIV and first VTE) and the Dutch MEGA cohort (4,005 patients without HIV, with first VTE), which includes the general population. Overall, 26% of patients in the ATHENA cohort experienced a second VTE event, compared with 16% of the general population. At 1 year after anticoagulation withdrawal, HIV-positive individuals were at 67% increased risk (HR, 1.67). At 6-years after withdrawal, the relationship was not statistically significant (HR, 1.22).

Researchers also found that CD4 cell-count recovery was associated with lowered risk, with every 100 cell-count increase between initial VTE diagnosis and anticoagulant withdrawal linked to a 20% reduction in risk (HR, 0.80).

“The clinical question is: If it’s true you have an increased risk of recurrence, should you be continuing anticoagulant therapy longer in people with HIV? This poster doesn’t answer that question and you probably need a randomized, controlled trial to look at that,” Peter Reiss, MD, professor of medicine at Amsterdam University Medical Center, said in an interview during the conference.

In the absence of a clear answer, it’s sensible for clinicians to be aware of the potential increased risk, much as clinicians have internalized the increased risk of atherosclerotic vascular disease in HIV patients. “I think the publication [in Lancet HIV] as well as this poster suggest that on the venous side of things there may also be an accentuated risk,” said Dr. Reiss.

Heidi Crane, MD, a professor of medicine at the University of Washington, Seattle, presented a poster examining the underlying factors that may predispose HIV patients to first-time VTE events. Her team performed an adjudicated review of VTE cases among HIV patients at six institutions and found that the risk factors appeared to be distinct from those seen in the general population.

The traditional long plane ride was less common in this population, while factors such as injected drug use and pneumonia were more common. The VTE events occurred at a median age of 49 years; 30% of the patients had a detectable viral load. “We’re seeing a little more (VTE) than you might expect, and in a younger population than you might have guessed,” said Dr. Crane in an interview.

The most frequent predisposing risk factors were recent hospitalization (40%), infection (40%), or immobilization/bed rest (24%) within the past 90 days, and injectable drug use (22%). “It’s not just the traditional risk factors. Some HIV-specific risk factors are driving this,” said Dr. Crane.

She also aims to learn more about the specifics of risk factors, such as catheter-associated thromboses. The team is working to increase the sample size in order to parse out the relationships with specific outcomes.

In the meantime, the data further characterize the health challenges facing people living with HIV. “This is another example demonstrating that comorbid conditions among patients with HIV that are often considered age related occur at much younger ages in our population,” said Dr. Crane.

SOURCE: Rokx C et al. CROI 2019, Abstract 636; and Tenforde MW et al. CROI 2019, Abstract 637.

.

SNOWMASS, COLO. – Interventions that are simple and straightforward for other patients – such as therapeutic phlebotomy, bronchoscopy, anticoagulation, administration of IV antibiotics – can quickly have catastrophic results in patients with Eisenmenger syndrome, Carole A. Warnes, MD, cautioned at the Annual Cardiovascular Conference at Snowmass sponsored by the American College of Cardiology.

Bruce Jancin/MDedge News

This is why the 2018 ACC/American Heart Association guidelines on the management of patients with adult congenital heart disease recommend as a Class I indication that most patients with ACHD, including all those with Eisenmenger syndrome, be managed in collaboration with a cardiologist at a specialized ACHD center (Circulation. 2018 Aug 16. doi: 10.1161/CIR.0000000000000603), noted Dr. Warnes, professor of medicine at the Mayo Clinic in Rochester, Minn., and director of the Snowmass conference.

“There are lots of mistakes in diagnosis and management because so many physicians are unfamiliar with the kinds of problems these patients face,” the cardiologist said.

She cited as a real-world example a patient with Eisenmenger syndrome admitted for pneumonia. Twenty minutes after being placed on intravenous antibiotics she had a stroke. Why?

“She didn’t have an air filter on her IV line. Any air going into a cyanotic’s blood stream will go to the head and give them a stroke. Something that is simple – routine for other patients – may kill a patient with cyanotic heart disease,” Dr. Warnes said.

Another illustrative case: a patient with Eisenmenger syndrome presents with hemoptysis, an infiltrate in her right lung, a hemoglobin of 19.8 g/dL, and anemia. Should she undergo therapeutic phlebotomy? How about urgent bronchoscopy?

No and no, Dr. Warnes emphasized.

“You do not phlebotomize cyanotic patients unless they have symptoms of hyperviscosity, meaning terrible headache or poor concentration, along with a hemoglobin greater than 20 g/dL. They need that high hemoglobin. They may be blue, and you need those red cells to carry the oxygen around. Otherwise you may make them worse. And if you give them iron for their anemia, you will increase their risk of stroke,” she explained.

Hemoptysis in patients with Eisenmenger syndrome is a life-threatening warning sign. By the time Eisenmenger syndrome patients reach age 40 years, nearly all of them have experienced episodes of hemoptysis. And more and more patients with the syndrome are moving well beyond that milestone and surviving into their 60s and beyond.

“Many Eisenmenger syndrome patients are not dying when they’re 20 or 30. We can get them to a good old age,” according to Dr. Warnes, who founded the ACHD center at the Mayo Clinic.

Most of the time the cause of hemoptysis in patients with Eisenmenger syndrome is an intrapulmonary hemorrhage. Anticoagulation can turn that hemorrhage catastrophic. So can bronchoscopy. Indeed, the cause of death in roughly 30% of patients with this form of congenital heart disease is catastrophic hemoptysis.

“You bar the door from your friendly pulmonologist who wants to bronchoscope these patients. Bronchoscopy never does any good unless the patient is so hypoxic that you need to suck the blood out of their lungs,” Dr. Warnes emphasized.

Anticoagulation is ordinarily to be avoided in patients with Eisenmenger syndrome because of their bleeding risk, even when pulmonary thrombosis is suspected, she added.

So, to summarize: These patients basically need stabilizing, with no anticoagulation, no bronchoscopy, and no phlebotomy, she said.

Another danger zone for patients with Eisenmenger syndrome is pregnancy. The condition is associated with a 30% maternal mortality rate.

Dr. Warnes noted that, even at the Mayo Clinic, which has had a pioneering ACHD center for decades, awareness of key elements of management of affected patients is low among nonspecialists.

“As I’ve done my hospital services in the last couple of months, I sort of felt I was on patrol, snatching these patients from problems,” she recalled.

Dr. Warnes reported having no financial conflicts regarding her presentation.
 

[email protected]

SNOWMASS, COLO. – Interventions that are simple and straightforward for other patients – such as therapeutic phlebotomy, bronchoscopy, anticoagulation, administration of IV antibiotics – can quickly have catastrophic results in patients with Eisenmenger syndrome, Carole A. Warnes, MD, cautioned at the Annual Cardiovascular Conference at Snowmass sponsored by the American College of Cardiology.

Bruce Jancin/MDedge News

This is why the 2018 ACC/American Heart Association guidelines on the management of patients with adult congenital heart disease recommend as a Class I indication that most patients with ACHD, including all those with Eisenmenger syndrome, be managed in collaboration with a cardiologist at a specialized ACHD center (Circulation. 2018 Aug 16. doi: 10.1161/CIR.0000000000000603), noted Dr. Warnes, professor of medicine at the Mayo Clinic in Rochester, Minn., and director of the Snowmass conference.

“There are lots of mistakes in diagnosis and management because so many physicians are unfamiliar with the kinds of problems these patients face,” the cardiologist said.

She cited as a real-world example a patient with Eisenmenger syndrome admitted for pneumonia. Twenty minutes after being placed on intravenous antibiotics she had a stroke. Why?

“She didn’t have an air filter on her IV line. Any air going into a cyanotic’s blood stream will go to the head and give them a stroke. Something that is simple – routine for other patients – may kill a patient with cyanotic heart disease,” Dr. Warnes said.

Another illustrative case: a patient with Eisenmenger syndrome presents with hemoptysis, an infiltrate in her right lung, a hemoglobin of 19.8 g/dL, and anemia. Should she undergo therapeutic phlebotomy? How about urgent bronchoscopy?

No and no, Dr. Warnes emphasized.

“You do not phlebotomize cyanotic patients unless they have symptoms of hyperviscosity, meaning terrible headache or poor concentration, along with a hemoglobin greater than 20 g/dL. They need that high hemoglobin. They may be blue, and you need those red cells to carry the oxygen around. Otherwise you may make them worse. And if you give them iron for their anemia, you will increase their risk of stroke,” she explained.

Hemoptysis in patients with Eisenmenger syndrome is a life-threatening warning sign. By the time Eisenmenger syndrome patients reach age 40 years, nearly all of them have experienced episodes of hemoptysis. And more and more patients with the syndrome are moving well beyond that milestone and surviving into their 60s and beyond.

“Many Eisenmenger syndrome patients are not dying when they’re 20 or 30. We can get them to a good old age,” according to Dr. Warnes, who founded the ACHD center at the Mayo Clinic.

Most of the time the cause of hemoptysis in patients with Eisenmenger syndrome is an intrapulmonary hemorrhage. Anticoagulation can turn that hemorrhage catastrophic. So can bronchoscopy. Indeed, the cause of death in roughly 30% of patients with this form of congenital heart disease is catastrophic hemoptysis.

“You bar the door from your friendly pulmonologist who wants to bronchoscope these patients. Bronchoscopy never does any good unless the patient is so hypoxic that you need to suck the blood out of their lungs,” Dr. Warnes emphasized.

Anticoagulation is ordinarily to be avoided in patients with Eisenmenger syndrome because of their bleeding risk, even when pulmonary thrombosis is suspected, she added.

So, to summarize: These patients basically need stabilizing, with no anticoagulation, no bronchoscopy, and no phlebotomy, she said.

Another danger zone for patients with Eisenmenger syndrome is pregnancy. The condition is associated with a 30% maternal mortality rate.

Dr. Warnes noted that, even at the Mayo Clinic, which has had a pioneering ACHD center for decades, awareness of key elements of management of affected patients is low among nonspecialists.

“As I’ve done my hospital services in the last couple of months, I sort of felt I was on patrol, snatching these patients from problems,” she recalled.

Dr. Warnes reported having no financial conflicts regarding her presentation.
 

[email protected]

SNOWMASS, COLO. – Interventions that are simple and straightforward for other patients – such as therapeutic phlebotomy, bronchoscopy, anticoagulation, administration of IV antibiotics – can quickly have catastrophic results in patients with Eisenmenger syndrome, Carole A. Warnes, MD, cautioned at the Annual Cardiovascular Conference at Snowmass sponsored by the American College of Cardiology.

Bruce Jancin/MDedge News

This is why the 2018 ACC/American Heart Association guidelines on the management of patients with adult congenital heart disease recommend as a Class I indication that most patients with ACHD, including all those with Eisenmenger syndrome, be managed in collaboration with a cardiologist at a specialized ACHD center (Circulation. 2018 Aug 16. doi: 10.1161/CIR.0000000000000603), noted Dr. Warnes, professor of medicine at the Mayo Clinic in Rochester, Minn., and director of the Snowmass conference.

“There are lots of mistakes in diagnosis and management because so many physicians are unfamiliar with the kinds of problems these patients face,” the cardiologist said.

She cited as a real-world example a patient with Eisenmenger syndrome admitted for pneumonia. Twenty minutes after being placed on intravenous antibiotics she had a stroke. Why?

“She didn’t have an air filter on her IV line. Any air going into a cyanotic’s blood stream will go to the head and give them a stroke. Something that is simple – routine for other patients – may kill a patient with cyanotic heart disease,” Dr. Warnes said.

Another illustrative case: a patient with Eisenmenger syndrome presents with hemoptysis, an infiltrate in her right lung, a hemoglobin of 19.8 g/dL, and anemia. Should she undergo therapeutic phlebotomy? How about urgent bronchoscopy?

No and no, Dr. Warnes emphasized.

“You do not phlebotomize cyanotic patients unless they have symptoms of hyperviscosity, meaning terrible headache or poor concentration, along with a hemoglobin greater than 20 g/dL. They need that high hemoglobin. They may be blue, and you need those red cells to carry the oxygen around. Otherwise you may make them worse. And if you give them iron for their anemia, you will increase their risk of stroke,” she explained.

Hemoptysis in patients with Eisenmenger syndrome is a life-threatening warning sign. By the time Eisenmenger syndrome patients reach age 40 years, nearly all of them have experienced episodes of hemoptysis. And more and more patients with the syndrome are moving well beyond that milestone and surviving into their 60s and beyond.

“Many Eisenmenger syndrome patients are not dying when they’re 20 or 30. We can get them to a good old age,” according to Dr. Warnes, who founded the ACHD center at the Mayo Clinic.

Most of the time the cause of hemoptysis in patients with Eisenmenger syndrome is an intrapulmonary hemorrhage. Anticoagulation can turn that hemorrhage catastrophic. So can bronchoscopy. Indeed, the cause of death in roughly 30% of patients with this form of congenital heart disease is catastrophic hemoptysis.

“You bar the door from your friendly pulmonologist who wants to bronchoscope these patients. Bronchoscopy never does any good unless the patient is so hypoxic that you need to suck the blood out of their lungs,” Dr. Warnes emphasized.

Anticoagulation is ordinarily to be avoided in patients with Eisenmenger syndrome because of their bleeding risk, even when pulmonary thrombosis is suspected, she added.

So, to summarize: These patients basically need stabilizing, with no anticoagulation, no bronchoscopy, and no phlebotomy, she said.

Another danger zone for patients with Eisenmenger syndrome is pregnancy. The condition is associated with a 30% maternal mortality rate.

Dr. Warnes noted that, even at the Mayo Clinic, which has had a pioneering ACHD center for decades, awareness of key elements of management of affected patients is low among nonspecialists.

“As I’ve done my hospital services in the last couple of months, I sort of felt I was on patrol, snatching these patients from problems,” she recalled.

Dr. Warnes reported having no financial conflicts regarding her presentation.
 

[email protected]