Thrombosis

DUBROVNIK, CROATIA – An updated scoring system can more accurately identify lymphoma patients who may require thromboprophylaxis, according to researchers.

The revised scoring system, ThroLy, proved more effective than other systems for predicting thromboembolic events in lymphoma patients, with a positive predictive value of 22%-25%, a negative predictive value of 96%, sensitivity of 56%-57%, and specificity of 85%-87%.

Darko Antic, MD, PhD, of the University of Belgrade in Serbia, presented these findings at Leukemia and Lymphoma, a meeting jointly sponsored by the University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center and the School of Medicine at the University of Zagreb, Croatia.

Dr. Antic said that he and his colleagues developed ThroLy because other systems used to predict venous thromboembolism (VTE) are not quite right for lymphoma. He noted that the Padua score is not designed for cancer patients and the Khorana score is predominantly used for solid tumor malignancies.

The ThroLy scoring system is based on variables used in the Padua and Khorana systems, as well as variables that are specific to lymphoma patients.

In a previous study, the researchers found several variables that were independently associated with risk for VTE in lymphoma, including previous VTE, previous acute MI or stroke, mediastinal involvement, high body mass index, reduced mobility, extranodal localization, neutropenia, and hemoglobin less than 100 g/L (Am J Hematol. 2016 Oct;91[10]:1014-9).

In an initial version of the ThroLy scoring system, previous VTE, previous acute MI/stroke, obesity, and mediastinal involvement were all worth two points, and the other factors were worth a single point in the ThroLy system.

Patients with scores of 0 to 1 were considered low risk, patients with scores of 2 to 3 were considered intermediate risk, and patients with scores of 4 or greater were considered high risk.

To validate and refine ThroLy, Dr. Antic and his colleagues used it to assess 1,723 lymphoma patients treated at eight institutions in Austria, Croatia, France, Jordan, Macedonia, Spain, Switzerland, and the United States.

Patients had indolent non-Hodgkin lymphoma, aggressive non-Hodgkin lymphoma, chronic lymphocytic leukemia/small lymphocytic lymphoma, and Hodgkin lymphoma. Most subjects (84%) were outpatients. A total of 9%of patients had thrombosis, with 7% having VTE.

ThroLy had a positive predictive value of 17%, compared with 11% with Khorana and 13% with Padua. The negative predictive value was 93%, 92%, and 95%, respectively. The sensitivity was 51% with ThroLy, 42% with Khorana, and 70% with Padua; specificity was 72%, 64%, and 52%, respectively.

“The positive predictive value was low [with ThroLy] but definitely higher than the positive predictive value of the other two [scoring systems],” Dr. Antic noted.

Updated models

To further improve ThroLy, the researchers updated the system, creating two new models. Model 1 included the type of lymphoma/clinical stage (1 point), previous VTE (5 points), reduced mobility (2 points), hemoglobin less than 100 g/L (1 point), and the presence of vascular devices (1 point). Model 2 included all of the variables in Model 1 plus the thrombophilic condition, which was worth 1 point.

Patients were considered low risk if they scored 2 points or lower and high risk if they scored more than 2 points.

For Model 1, the positive predictive value was 22%, the negative predictive value was 96%, the sensitivity was 56%, and the specificity was 85%. For Model 2, the positive predictive value was 25%, the negative predictive value was 96%, the sensitivity was 57%, and the specificity was 87%.

There were no major differences in model discrimination and calibration based on the country in which a patient was treated or whether the patient was treated in an inpatient or outpatient setting.

Dr. Antic did not report any conflicts of interest. The Leukemia and Lymphoma meeting is organized by Jonathan Wood & Association, which is owned by the parent company of this news organization.

[email protected]

DUBROVNIK, CROATIA – An updated scoring system can more accurately identify lymphoma patients who may require thromboprophylaxis, according to researchers.

The revised scoring system, ThroLy, proved more effective than other systems for predicting thromboembolic events in lymphoma patients, with a positive predictive value of 22%-25%, a negative predictive value of 96%, sensitivity of 56%-57%, and specificity of 85%-87%.

Darko Antic, MD, PhD, of the University of Belgrade in Serbia, presented these findings at Leukemia and Lymphoma, a meeting jointly sponsored by the University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center and the School of Medicine at the University of Zagreb, Croatia.

Dr. Antic said that he and his colleagues developed ThroLy because other systems used to predict venous thromboembolism (VTE) are not quite right for lymphoma. He noted that the Padua score is not designed for cancer patients and the Khorana score is predominantly used for solid tumor malignancies.

The ThroLy scoring system is based on variables used in the Padua and Khorana systems, as well as variables that are specific to lymphoma patients.

In a previous study, the researchers found several variables that were independently associated with risk for VTE in lymphoma, including previous VTE, previous acute MI or stroke, mediastinal involvement, high body mass index, reduced mobility, extranodal localization, neutropenia, and hemoglobin less than 100 g/L (Am J Hematol. 2016 Oct;91[10]:1014-9).

In an initial version of the ThroLy scoring system, previous VTE, previous acute MI/stroke, obesity, and mediastinal involvement were all worth two points, and the other factors were worth a single point in the ThroLy system.

Patients with scores of 0 to 1 were considered low risk, patients with scores of 2 to 3 were considered intermediate risk, and patients with scores of 4 or greater were considered high risk.

To validate and refine ThroLy, Dr. Antic and his colleagues used it to assess 1,723 lymphoma patients treated at eight institutions in Austria, Croatia, France, Jordan, Macedonia, Spain, Switzerland, and the United States.

Patients had indolent non-Hodgkin lymphoma, aggressive non-Hodgkin lymphoma, chronic lymphocytic leukemia/small lymphocytic lymphoma, and Hodgkin lymphoma. Most subjects (84%) were outpatients. A total of 9%of patients had thrombosis, with 7% having VTE.

ThroLy had a positive predictive value of 17%, compared with 11% with Khorana and 13% with Padua. The negative predictive value was 93%, 92%, and 95%, respectively. The sensitivity was 51% with ThroLy, 42% with Khorana, and 70% with Padua; specificity was 72%, 64%, and 52%, respectively.

“The positive predictive value was low [with ThroLy] but definitely higher than the positive predictive value of the other two [scoring systems],” Dr. Antic noted.

Updated models

To further improve ThroLy, the researchers updated the system, creating two new models. Model 1 included the type of lymphoma/clinical stage (1 point), previous VTE (5 points), reduced mobility (2 points), hemoglobin less than 100 g/L (1 point), and the presence of vascular devices (1 point). Model 2 included all of the variables in Model 1 plus the thrombophilic condition, which was worth 1 point.

Patients were considered low risk if they scored 2 points or lower and high risk if they scored more than 2 points.

For Model 1, the positive predictive value was 22%, the negative predictive value was 96%, the sensitivity was 56%, and the specificity was 85%. For Model 2, the positive predictive value was 25%, the negative predictive value was 96%, the sensitivity was 57%, and the specificity was 87%.

There were no major differences in model discrimination and calibration based on the country in which a patient was treated or whether the patient was treated in an inpatient or outpatient setting.

Dr. Antic did not report any conflicts of interest. The Leukemia and Lymphoma meeting is organized by Jonathan Wood & Association, which is owned by the parent company of this news organization.

[email protected]

DUBROVNIK, CROATIA – An updated scoring system can more accurately identify lymphoma patients who may require thromboprophylaxis, according to researchers.

The revised scoring system, ThroLy, proved more effective than other systems for predicting thromboembolic events in lymphoma patients, with a positive predictive value of 22%-25%, a negative predictive value of 96%, sensitivity of 56%-57%, and specificity of 85%-87%.

Darko Antic, MD, PhD, of the University of Belgrade in Serbia, presented these findings at Leukemia and Lymphoma, a meeting jointly sponsored by the University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center and the School of Medicine at the University of Zagreb, Croatia.

Dr. Antic said that he and his colleagues developed ThroLy because other systems used to predict venous thromboembolism (VTE) are not quite right for lymphoma. He noted that the Padua score is not designed for cancer patients and the Khorana score is predominantly used for solid tumor malignancies.

The ThroLy scoring system is based on variables used in the Padua and Khorana systems, as well as variables that are specific to lymphoma patients.

In a previous study, the researchers found several variables that were independently associated with risk for VTE in lymphoma, including previous VTE, previous acute MI or stroke, mediastinal involvement, high body mass index, reduced mobility, extranodal localization, neutropenia, and hemoglobin less than 100 g/L (Am J Hematol. 2016 Oct;91[10]:1014-9).

In an initial version of the ThroLy scoring system, previous VTE, previous acute MI/stroke, obesity, and mediastinal involvement were all worth two points, and the other factors were worth a single point in the ThroLy system.

Patients with scores of 0 to 1 were considered low risk, patients with scores of 2 to 3 were considered intermediate risk, and patients with scores of 4 or greater were considered high risk.

To validate and refine ThroLy, Dr. Antic and his colleagues used it to assess 1,723 lymphoma patients treated at eight institutions in Austria, Croatia, France, Jordan, Macedonia, Spain, Switzerland, and the United States.

Patients had indolent non-Hodgkin lymphoma, aggressive non-Hodgkin lymphoma, chronic lymphocytic leukemia/small lymphocytic lymphoma, and Hodgkin lymphoma. Most subjects (84%) were outpatients. A total of 9%of patients had thrombosis, with 7% having VTE.

ThroLy had a positive predictive value of 17%, compared with 11% with Khorana and 13% with Padua. The negative predictive value was 93%, 92%, and 95%, respectively. The sensitivity was 51% with ThroLy, 42% with Khorana, and 70% with Padua; specificity was 72%, 64%, and 52%, respectively.

“The positive predictive value was low [with ThroLy] but definitely higher than the positive predictive value of the other two [scoring systems],” Dr. Antic noted.

Updated models

To further improve ThroLy, the researchers updated the system, creating two new models. Model 1 included the type of lymphoma/clinical stage (1 point), previous VTE (5 points), reduced mobility (2 points), hemoglobin less than 100 g/L (1 point), and the presence of vascular devices (1 point). Model 2 included all of the variables in Model 1 plus the thrombophilic condition, which was worth 1 point.

Patients were considered low risk if they scored 2 points or lower and high risk if they scored more than 2 points.

For Model 1, the positive predictive value was 22%, the negative predictive value was 96%, the sensitivity was 56%, and the specificity was 85%. For Model 2, the positive predictive value was 25%, the negative predictive value was 96%, the sensitivity was 57%, and the specificity was 87%.

There were no major differences in model discrimination and calibration based on the country in which a patient was treated or whether the patient was treated in an inpatient or outpatient setting.

Dr. Antic did not report any conflicts of interest. The Leukemia and Lymphoma meeting is organized by Jonathan Wood & Association, which is owned by the parent company of this news organization.

[email protected]

Genomic characteristics of patients with myeloproliferative neoplasms (MPN) can predict clinical outcomes, a recent study found.

Gio_tto/Thinkstock

Eight genomic subgroups of MPN were recognized, each with distinct clinical features, including event-free survival, risk of leukemic transformation, and blood counts, according to Jacob Grinfeld, MD, of the Wellcome-MRC Cambridge (England) Stem Cell Institute and Cambridge Institute for Medical Research and his colleagues.

“Current classification schemes distinguish among the subtypes of myeloproliferative neoplasms according to clinical and laboratory features, but uncertainty clouds where and how to draw dividing lines among them,” the investigators wrote in the New England Journal of Medicine. “In blood cancers, a progressive shift is under way, from clinical and morphologic classification schemes to those that are based on genomics.”

MPNs are often driven by mutations in CALR, MPL, or JAK2 genes, but classification is not confined to just three genomic types; many patients have additional driver mutations throughout a variety of cancer genes, and it is these additional mutations that are responsible for the wide range of disease phenotypes and clinical outcomes.

This study included 2,035 patients with MPNs, including essential thrombocythemia, polycythemia vera, myelofibrosis, and other MPN diagnoses. The investigators performed targeted sequencing for the full coding sequence of 69 genes and genomewide copy-number information in 1,887 patients. Another 148 patients underwent whole-exome sequencing.

By sequencing coding exons from 69 myeloid cancer genes, the investigators were able to survey the diversity of mutations across a population of patients with MPNs and identify mutation-associated clinical outcomes.

The results showed that slightly less than half (45%) of the patients had a solitary abnormality in CALR, MPL, or JAK2, while the remaining patients had additional driver mutations. In some instances, additional mutations were numerous, particularly in older patients with advanced disease. In at least five cases, 33 genes had driver mutations.

Further analysis identified eight genomic subgroups that could predict clinical outcomes based on shared chromosomal abnormalities and mutations. For example, one subgroup included patients with TP53 mutations; these individuals had a “dismal prognosis” and were 15.5 times more likely to transform to acute myeloid leukemia (AML), compared with the JAK2-heterozygous subgroup (P less than .001).

Because prognosis is “a key determinant of the treatment of patients with MPNs,” genomic subgrouping may one day guide clinical decision making, the investigators concluded.

To further this cause, the investigators have made available an online calculator of individualized patient outcomes, which can be accessed at https://cancer.sanger.ac.uk/mpn-multistage/.

The study was funded by the Wellcome Trust, the National Institute for Health Research Cambridge Biomedical Research Centre, Cancer Research UK, and others. Some study authors reported fees from Celgene, Novartis, Gilead, Shire, and others outside of the study.

SOURCE: Grinfeld J et al. N Engl J Med. 2018;379:1416-30.

Genomic characteristics of patients with myeloproliferative neoplasms (MPN) can predict clinical outcomes, a recent study found.

Gio_tto/Thinkstock

Eight genomic subgroups of MPN were recognized, each with distinct clinical features, including event-free survival, risk of leukemic transformation, and blood counts, according to Jacob Grinfeld, MD, of the Wellcome-MRC Cambridge (England) Stem Cell Institute and Cambridge Institute for Medical Research and his colleagues.

“Current classification schemes distinguish among the subtypes of myeloproliferative neoplasms according to clinical and laboratory features, but uncertainty clouds where and how to draw dividing lines among them,” the investigators wrote in the New England Journal of Medicine. “In blood cancers, a progressive shift is under way, from clinical and morphologic classification schemes to those that are based on genomics.”

MPNs are often driven by mutations in CALR, MPL, or JAK2 genes, but classification is not confined to just three genomic types; many patients have additional driver mutations throughout a variety of cancer genes, and it is these additional mutations that are responsible for the wide range of disease phenotypes and clinical outcomes.

This study included 2,035 patients with MPNs, including essential thrombocythemia, polycythemia vera, myelofibrosis, and other MPN diagnoses. The investigators performed targeted sequencing for the full coding sequence of 69 genes and genomewide copy-number information in 1,887 patients. Another 148 patients underwent whole-exome sequencing.

By sequencing coding exons from 69 myeloid cancer genes, the investigators were able to survey the diversity of mutations across a population of patients with MPNs and identify mutation-associated clinical outcomes.

The results showed that slightly less than half (45%) of the patients had a solitary abnormality in CALR, MPL, or JAK2, while the remaining patients had additional driver mutations. In some instances, additional mutations were numerous, particularly in older patients with advanced disease. In at least five cases, 33 genes had driver mutations.

Further analysis identified eight genomic subgroups that could predict clinical outcomes based on shared chromosomal abnormalities and mutations. For example, one subgroup included patients with TP53 mutations; these individuals had a “dismal prognosis” and were 15.5 times more likely to transform to acute myeloid leukemia (AML), compared with the JAK2-heterozygous subgroup (P less than .001).

Because prognosis is “a key determinant of the treatment of patients with MPNs,” genomic subgrouping may one day guide clinical decision making, the investigators concluded.

To further this cause, the investigators have made available an online calculator of individualized patient outcomes, which can be accessed at https://cancer.sanger.ac.uk/mpn-multistage/.

The study was funded by the Wellcome Trust, the National Institute for Health Research Cambridge Biomedical Research Centre, Cancer Research UK, and others. Some study authors reported fees from Celgene, Novartis, Gilead, Shire, and others outside of the study.

SOURCE: Grinfeld J et al. N Engl J Med. 2018;379:1416-30.

Genomic characteristics of patients with myeloproliferative neoplasms (MPN) can predict clinical outcomes, a recent study found.

Gio_tto/Thinkstock

Eight genomic subgroups of MPN were recognized, each with distinct clinical features, including event-free survival, risk of leukemic transformation, and blood counts, according to Jacob Grinfeld, MD, of the Wellcome-MRC Cambridge (England) Stem Cell Institute and Cambridge Institute for Medical Research and his colleagues.

“Current classification schemes distinguish among the subtypes of myeloproliferative neoplasms according to clinical and laboratory features, but uncertainty clouds where and how to draw dividing lines among them,” the investigators wrote in the New England Journal of Medicine. “In blood cancers, a progressive shift is under way, from clinical and morphologic classification schemes to those that are based on genomics.”

MPNs are often driven by mutations in CALR, MPL, or JAK2 genes, but classification is not confined to just three genomic types; many patients have additional driver mutations throughout a variety of cancer genes, and it is these additional mutations that are responsible for the wide range of disease phenotypes and clinical outcomes.

This study included 2,035 patients with MPNs, including essential thrombocythemia, polycythemia vera, myelofibrosis, and other MPN diagnoses. The investigators performed targeted sequencing for the full coding sequence of 69 genes and genomewide copy-number information in 1,887 patients. Another 148 patients underwent whole-exome sequencing.

By sequencing coding exons from 69 myeloid cancer genes, the investigators were able to survey the diversity of mutations across a population of patients with MPNs and identify mutation-associated clinical outcomes.

The results showed that slightly less than half (45%) of the patients had a solitary abnormality in CALR, MPL, or JAK2, while the remaining patients had additional driver mutations. In some instances, additional mutations were numerous, particularly in older patients with advanced disease. In at least five cases, 33 genes had driver mutations.

Further analysis identified eight genomic subgroups that could predict clinical outcomes based on shared chromosomal abnormalities and mutations. For example, one subgroup included patients with TP53 mutations; these individuals had a “dismal prognosis” and were 15.5 times more likely to transform to acute myeloid leukemia (AML), compared with the JAK2-heterozygous subgroup (P less than .001).

Because prognosis is “a key determinant of the treatment of patients with MPNs,” genomic subgrouping may one day guide clinical decision making, the investigators concluded.

To further this cause, the investigators have made available an online calculator of individualized patient outcomes, which can be accessed at https://cancer.sanger.ac.uk/mpn-multistage/.

The study was funded by the Wellcome Trust, the National Institute for Health Research Cambridge Biomedical Research Centre, Cancer Research UK, and others. Some study authors reported fees from Celgene, Novartis, Gilead, Shire, and others outside of the study.

SOURCE: Grinfeld J et al. N Engl J Med. 2018;379:1416-30.

MUNICH – Treatment of real-world patients newly diagnosed with atrial fibrillation using a direct oral anticoagulant led to benefits that tracked the advantages previously seen in randomized, controlled trials of these drugs, based on findings from more than 26,000 patients enrolled in a global registry.

Mitchel L. Zoler/MDedge News

Atrial fibrillation patients enrolled in the GARFIELD-AF(Global Anticoagulant Registry in the Field) study who started treatment with a direct oral anticoagulant (DOAC) had a 19% relative risk reduction in all-cause mortality during 2 years of follow-up, compared with patients on an oral vitamin K antagonist (VKA) regimen (such as warfarin), a statistically significant difference after adjustment for 30 demographic, clinical, and registry variables, A. John Camm, MD, said at the annual congress of the European Society of Cardiology. The analysis also showed trends toward lower rates of stroke or systemic thrombosis as well as major bleeding events when patients received a DOAC, compared with those on VKA, but these differences were not statistically significant, reported Dr. Camm, a professor of clinical cardiology at St. George’s University of London.

The analyses run by Dr. Camm and his associates also confirmed the superiority of oral anticoagulation. There was an adjusted 17% relative risk reduction in all-cause mortality during 2-year follow-up in patients on any form of oral anticoagulation, compared with patients who did not receive anticoagulation, a statistically significant difference. The comparison of patients on any oral anticoagulant with those not on treatment also showed a significant lowering of stroke or systemic embolism, as well as a 36% relative increase in the risk for a major bleeding episode that was close to statistical significance.

These findings in a registry of patients undergoing routine care “suggest that the effectiveness of oral anticoagulants in randomized clinical trials can be translated to the broad cross section of patients treated in everyday practice,” Dr. Camm said. However, he highlighted two important qualifications to the findings.

First, the analysis focused on the type of anticoagulation patients received at the time they entered the GARFIELD-AF registry and did not account for possible changes in treatment after that. Second, the analysis did not adjust for additional potential confounding variables, which Dr. Camm was certain existed and affected the findings.

“I’m concerned that a confounder we have not been able to account for is the quality of medical care that patients received,” he noted. “The substantial reduction in mortality [using a DOAC, compared with a VKA] is not simply due to reductions in stroke or major bleeding. We must look at other explanations, such as differences in quality of care and access to care.”

The analyses have also not yet looked at outcomes based on the specific DOAC a patient received – apixaban, dabigatran, edoxaban, or rivaroxaban – something that Dr. Camm said is in the works.

GARFIELD-AF enrolled nearly 35,000 patients with newly diagnosed atrial fibrillation and at least one stroke risk factor in 35 countries from April 2013 to September 2016. The analysis winnowed this down to 26,742 patients who also had a CHA2DS2-VASc score of at least 2 (which identifies patients with a high thrombotic risk) and had complete enrollment and follow-up data.

GARFIELD-AF was funded in part by Bayer. Dr. Camm reported being an adviser to Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Daiichi Sankyo, and Pfizer/Bristol-Myers Squibb.

[email protected]

MUNICH – Treatment of real-world patients newly diagnosed with atrial fibrillation using a direct oral anticoagulant led to benefits that tracked the advantages previously seen in randomized, controlled trials of these drugs, based on findings from more than 26,000 patients enrolled in a global registry.

Mitchel L. Zoler/MDedge News

Atrial fibrillation patients enrolled in the GARFIELD-AF(Global Anticoagulant Registry in the Field) study who started treatment with a direct oral anticoagulant (DOAC) had a 19% relative risk reduction in all-cause mortality during 2 years of follow-up, compared with patients on an oral vitamin K antagonist (VKA) regimen (such as warfarin), a statistically significant difference after adjustment for 30 demographic, clinical, and registry variables, A. John Camm, MD, said at the annual congress of the European Society of Cardiology. The analysis also showed trends toward lower rates of stroke or systemic thrombosis as well as major bleeding events when patients received a DOAC, compared with those on VKA, but these differences were not statistically significant, reported Dr. Camm, a professor of clinical cardiology at St. George’s University of London.

The analyses run by Dr. Camm and his associates also confirmed the superiority of oral anticoagulation. There was an adjusted 17% relative risk reduction in all-cause mortality during 2-year follow-up in patients on any form of oral anticoagulation, compared with patients who did not receive anticoagulation, a statistically significant difference. The comparison of patients on any oral anticoagulant with those not on treatment also showed a significant lowering of stroke or systemic embolism, as well as a 36% relative increase in the risk for a major bleeding episode that was close to statistical significance.

These findings in a registry of patients undergoing routine care “suggest that the effectiveness of oral anticoagulants in randomized clinical trials can be translated to the broad cross section of patients treated in everyday practice,” Dr. Camm said. However, he highlighted two important qualifications to the findings.

First, the analysis focused on the type of anticoagulation patients received at the time they entered the GARFIELD-AF registry and did not account for possible changes in treatment after that. Second, the analysis did not adjust for additional potential confounding variables, which Dr. Camm was certain existed and affected the findings.

“I’m concerned that a confounder we have not been able to account for is the quality of medical care that patients received,” he noted. “The substantial reduction in mortality [using a DOAC, compared with a VKA] is not simply due to reductions in stroke or major bleeding. We must look at other explanations, such as differences in quality of care and access to care.”

The analyses have also not yet looked at outcomes based on the specific DOAC a patient received – apixaban, dabigatran, edoxaban, or rivaroxaban – something that Dr. Camm said is in the works.

GARFIELD-AF enrolled nearly 35,000 patients with newly diagnosed atrial fibrillation and at least one stroke risk factor in 35 countries from April 2013 to September 2016. The analysis winnowed this down to 26,742 patients who also had a CHA2DS2-VASc score of at least 2 (which identifies patients with a high thrombotic risk) and had complete enrollment and follow-up data.

GARFIELD-AF was funded in part by Bayer. Dr. Camm reported being an adviser to Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Daiichi Sankyo, and Pfizer/Bristol-Myers Squibb.

[email protected]

MUNICH – Treatment of real-world patients newly diagnosed with atrial fibrillation using a direct oral anticoagulant led to benefits that tracked the advantages previously seen in randomized, controlled trials of these drugs, based on findings from more than 26,000 patients enrolled in a global registry.

Mitchel L. Zoler/MDedge News

Atrial fibrillation patients enrolled in the GARFIELD-AF(Global Anticoagulant Registry in the Field) study who started treatment with a direct oral anticoagulant (DOAC) had a 19% relative risk reduction in all-cause mortality during 2 years of follow-up, compared with patients on an oral vitamin K antagonist (VKA) regimen (such as warfarin), a statistically significant difference after adjustment for 30 demographic, clinical, and registry variables, A. John Camm, MD, said at the annual congress of the European Society of Cardiology. The analysis also showed trends toward lower rates of stroke or systemic thrombosis as well as major bleeding events when patients received a DOAC, compared with those on VKA, but these differences were not statistically significant, reported Dr. Camm, a professor of clinical cardiology at St. George’s University of London.

The analyses run by Dr. Camm and his associates also confirmed the superiority of oral anticoagulation. There was an adjusted 17% relative risk reduction in all-cause mortality during 2-year follow-up in patients on any form of oral anticoagulation, compared with patients who did not receive anticoagulation, a statistically significant difference. The comparison of patients on any oral anticoagulant with those not on treatment also showed a significant lowering of stroke or systemic embolism, as well as a 36% relative increase in the risk for a major bleeding episode that was close to statistical significance.

These findings in a registry of patients undergoing routine care “suggest that the effectiveness of oral anticoagulants in randomized clinical trials can be translated to the broad cross section of patients treated in everyday practice,” Dr. Camm said. However, he highlighted two important qualifications to the findings.

First, the analysis focused on the type of anticoagulation patients received at the time they entered the GARFIELD-AF registry and did not account for possible changes in treatment after that. Second, the analysis did not adjust for additional potential confounding variables, which Dr. Camm was certain existed and affected the findings.

“I’m concerned that a confounder we have not been able to account for is the quality of medical care that patients received,” he noted. “The substantial reduction in mortality [using a DOAC, compared with a VKA] is not simply due to reductions in stroke or major bleeding. We must look at other explanations, such as differences in quality of care and access to care.”

The analyses have also not yet looked at outcomes based on the specific DOAC a patient received – apixaban, dabigatran, edoxaban, or rivaroxaban – something that Dr. Camm said is in the works.

GARFIELD-AF enrolled nearly 35,000 patients with newly diagnosed atrial fibrillation and at least one stroke risk factor in 35 countries from April 2013 to September 2016. The analysis winnowed this down to 26,742 patients who also had a CHA2DS2-VASc score of at least 2 (which identifies patients with a high thrombotic risk) and had complete enrollment and follow-up data.

GARFIELD-AF was funded in part by Bayer. Dr. Camm reported being an adviser to Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Daiichi Sankyo, and Pfizer/Bristol-Myers Squibb.

[email protected]

SAN ANTONIO – Patients with pulmonary embolism who were obese paradoxically had a lower mortality risk, compared with those who are not obese, according to results of a retrospective analysis covering 13 years and nearly 2 million PE discharges.

Andrew D. Bowser/MDedge News

The obese patients in the analysis had a lower mortality risk, despite receiving more thrombolytics and mechanical intubation, said investigator Zubair Khan, MD, an internal medicine resident at the University of Toledo (Ohio) Medical Center.

“Surprisingly, the mortality of PE was significantly less in obese patients,” Dr. Khan said in a podium presentation at the annual meeting of the American College of Chest Physicians. “When we initiated the study, we did not expect this result.”

The association between obesity and lower mortality, sometimes called the “obesity paradox,” has been observed in studies of other chronic health conditions including stable heart failure, coronary artery disease, unstable angina, MI, and also in some PE studies, Dr. Khan said.

The study by Dr. Khan and his colleagues, based on the National Inpatient Sample (NIS) database, included adults with a primary discharge diagnosis of PE between 2002 and 2014. They included 1,959,018 PE discharges, of which 312,770 (16%) had an underlying obesity diagnosis.

Obese PE patients had more risk factors and more severe disease but had an overall mortality of 2.2%, compared with 3.7% in PE patients without obesity (P less than .001), Dr. Khan reported.

Hypertension was significantly more prevalent in the obese PE patients (65% vs. 50.5%; P less than .001), as was chronic lung disease and chronic liver disease, he noted in his presentation.

Obese patients more often received thrombolytics (3.6% vs. 1.9%; P less than .001) and mechanical ventilation (5.8% vs. 4%; P less than .001), and more frequently had cardiogenic shock (0.65% vs. 0.45%; P less than .001), he said.

The obese PE patients were more often female, black, and younger than 65 years of age, it was reported.

Notably, the prevalence of obesity in PE patients more than doubled over the course of the study period, from 10.2% in 2002 to 22.6% in 2014, Dr. Khan added.

The paradoxically lower mortality in obese patients might be explained by increased levels of endocannabinoids, which have shown protective effects in rat and mouse studies, Dr. Khan told attendees at the meeting.

“I think it’s a rich area for more and further research, especially in basic science,” Dr. Khan said.

Dr. Khan and his coauthors disclosed that they had no relationships relevant to the study.
 

SOURCE: Khan Z et al. CHEST. 2018 Oct. doi: 10.1016/j.chest.2018.08.919.

SAN ANTONIO – Patients with pulmonary embolism who were obese paradoxically had a lower mortality risk, compared with those who are not obese, according to results of a retrospective analysis covering 13 years and nearly 2 million PE discharges.

Andrew D. Bowser/MDedge News

The obese patients in the analysis had a lower mortality risk, despite receiving more thrombolytics and mechanical intubation, said investigator Zubair Khan, MD, an internal medicine resident at the University of Toledo (Ohio) Medical Center.

“Surprisingly, the mortality of PE was significantly less in obese patients,” Dr. Khan said in a podium presentation at the annual meeting of the American College of Chest Physicians. “When we initiated the study, we did not expect this result.”

The association between obesity and lower mortality, sometimes called the “obesity paradox,” has been observed in studies of other chronic health conditions including stable heart failure, coronary artery disease, unstable angina, MI, and also in some PE studies, Dr. Khan said.

The study by Dr. Khan and his colleagues, based on the National Inpatient Sample (NIS) database, included adults with a primary discharge diagnosis of PE between 2002 and 2014. They included 1,959,018 PE discharges, of which 312,770 (16%) had an underlying obesity diagnosis.

Obese PE patients had more risk factors and more severe disease but had an overall mortality of 2.2%, compared with 3.7% in PE patients without obesity (P less than .001), Dr. Khan reported.

Hypertension was significantly more prevalent in the obese PE patients (65% vs. 50.5%; P less than .001), as was chronic lung disease and chronic liver disease, he noted in his presentation.

Obese patients more often received thrombolytics (3.6% vs. 1.9%; P less than .001) and mechanical ventilation (5.8% vs. 4%; P less than .001), and more frequently had cardiogenic shock (0.65% vs. 0.45%; P less than .001), he said.

The obese PE patients were more often female, black, and younger than 65 years of age, it was reported.

Notably, the prevalence of obesity in PE patients more than doubled over the course of the study period, from 10.2% in 2002 to 22.6% in 2014, Dr. Khan added.

The paradoxically lower mortality in obese patients might be explained by increased levels of endocannabinoids, which have shown protective effects in rat and mouse studies, Dr. Khan told attendees at the meeting.

“I think it’s a rich area for more and further research, especially in basic science,” Dr. Khan said.

Dr. Khan and his coauthors disclosed that they had no relationships relevant to the study.
 

SOURCE: Khan Z et al. CHEST. 2018 Oct. doi: 10.1016/j.chest.2018.08.919.

SAN ANTONIO – Patients with pulmonary embolism who were obese paradoxically had a lower mortality risk, compared with those who are not obese, according to results of a retrospective analysis covering 13 years and nearly 2 million PE discharges.

Andrew D. Bowser/MDedge News

The obese patients in the analysis had a lower mortality risk, despite receiving more thrombolytics and mechanical intubation, said investigator Zubair Khan, MD, an internal medicine resident at the University of Toledo (Ohio) Medical Center.

“Surprisingly, the mortality of PE was significantly less in obese patients,” Dr. Khan said in a podium presentation at the annual meeting of the American College of Chest Physicians. “When we initiated the study, we did not expect this result.”

The association between obesity and lower mortality, sometimes called the “obesity paradox,” has been observed in studies of other chronic health conditions including stable heart failure, coronary artery disease, unstable angina, MI, and also in some PE studies, Dr. Khan said.

The study by Dr. Khan and his colleagues, based on the National Inpatient Sample (NIS) database, included adults with a primary discharge diagnosis of PE between 2002 and 2014. They included 1,959,018 PE discharges, of which 312,770 (16%) had an underlying obesity diagnosis.

Obese PE patients had more risk factors and more severe disease but had an overall mortality of 2.2%, compared with 3.7% in PE patients without obesity (P less than .001), Dr. Khan reported.

Hypertension was significantly more prevalent in the obese PE patients (65% vs. 50.5%; P less than .001), as was chronic lung disease and chronic liver disease, he noted in his presentation.

Obese patients more often received thrombolytics (3.6% vs. 1.9%; P less than .001) and mechanical ventilation (5.8% vs. 4%; P less than .001), and more frequently had cardiogenic shock (0.65% vs. 0.45%; P less than .001), he said.

The obese PE patients were more often female, black, and younger than 65 years of age, it was reported.

Notably, the prevalence of obesity in PE patients more than doubled over the course of the study period, from 10.2% in 2002 to 22.6% in 2014, Dr. Khan added.

The paradoxically lower mortality in obese patients might be explained by increased levels of endocannabinoids, which have shown protective effects in rat and mouse studies, Dr. Khan told attendees at the meeting.

“I think it’s a rich area for more and further research, especially in basic science,” Dr. Khan said.

Dr. Khan and his coauthors disclosed that they had no relationships relevant to the study.
 

SOURCE: Khan Z et al. CHEST. 2018 Oct. doi: 10.1016/j.chest.2018.08.919.

Image by Spencer Phillips

DUBROVNIK, CROATIA—New research suggests there is no association between the PTPN22 R620W polymorphism and chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) or autoimmune hematologic disorders in patients from the Republic of Macedonia.

Past studies have shown an association between the PTPN22 R620W variant and both CLL¹ and autoimmune diseases² in patients from Northwest Europe.

However, a study of Macedonian patients suggests there is no association between the variant and CLL, autoimmune hemolytic anemia (AIHA), or idiopathic thrombocytopenic purpura (ITP) for patients from Southeast Europe.

Irina Panovska-Stavridis, PhD, of Ss. Cyril and Methodius University in Skopje, Republic of Macedonia, and her colleagues presented this finding at Leukemia and Lymphoma: Europe and the USA, Linking Knowledge and Practice.

“A lot of data from the literature suggests [the PTPN22 R620W variant ] has a role in developing multiple immune diseases, but it is validated just in patients from Northwest Europe,” Dr. Panovska-Stavridis noted.

Therefore, she and her colleagues decided to assess the frequency of the PTPN22 R620W variant (C1858T, rs2476601) in individuals from Southeast Europe, particularly the Republic of Macedonia.

The researchers evaluated 320 patients—168 with CLL, 66 with AIHA, and 86 with ITP—and 182 age- and sex-matched control subjects with no history of malignant or autoimmune disease.

The team found a similar frequency of the minor T allele and genotype distribution in control subjects and patients.

Dr. Panovska-Stavridis said these results suggest the PTPN22 R620W variant is not a risk factor for the development of CLL, AIHA, or ITP in patients from Southeast Europe.

She also said the results suggest the influence of the variant on lymphocytic homeostasis is affected by certain genetic and environmental factors, and the development of CLL and autoimmune diseases is influenced by race/ethnicity-based variations in the germline composition of the IGHV locus in correlation with environmental factors.

Dr. Panovska-Stavridis did not declare any conflicts of interest.

1. Hebbring S et al. Blood. 2013 121:237-238; doi: https://doi.org/10.1182/blood-2012-08-450221

2. Burb GL et al. FEBS Lett. 2011 Dec 1;585(23):3689-98. doi: 10.1016/j.febslet.2011.04.032

Image by Spencer Phillips

DUBROVNIK, CROATIA—New research suggests there is no association between the PTPN22 R620W polymorphism and chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) or autoimmune hematologic disorders in patients from the Republic of Macedonia.

Past studies have shown an association between the PTPN22 R620W variant and both CLL¹ and autoimmune diseases² in patients from Northwest Europe.

However, a study of Macedonian patients suggests there is no association between the variant and CLL, autoimmune hemolytic anemia (AIHA), or idiopathic thrombocytopenic purpura (ITP) for patients from Southeast Europe.

Irina Panovska-Stavridis, PhD, of Ss. Cyril and Methodius University in Skopje, Republic of Macedonia, and her colleagues presented this finding at Leukemia and Lymphoma: Europe and the USA, Linking Knowledge and Practice.

“A lot of data from the literature suggests [the PTPN22 R620W variant ] has a role in developing multiple immune diseases, but it is validated just in patients from Northwest Europe,” Dr. Panovska-Stavridis noted.

Therefore, she and her colleagues decided to assess the frequency of the PTPN22 R620W variant (C1858T, rs2476601) in individuals from Southeast Europe, particularly the Republic of Macedonia.

The researchers evaluated 320 patients—168 with CLL, 66 with AIHA, and 86 with ITP—and 182 age- and sex-matched control subjects with no history of malignant or autoimmune disease.

The team found a similar frequency of the minor T allele and genotype distribution in control subjects and patients.

Dr. Panovska-Stavridis said these results suggest the PTPN22 R620W variant is not a risk factor for the development of CLL, AIHA, or ITP in patients from Southeast Europe.

She also said the results suggest the influence of the variant on lymphocytic homeostasis is affected by certain genetic and environmental factors, and the development of CLL and autoimmune diseases is influenced by race/ethnicity-based variations in the germline composition of the IGHV locus in correlation with environmental factors.

Dr. Panovska-Stavridis did not declare any conflicts of interest.

1. Hebbring S et al. Blood. 2013 121:237-238; doi: https://doi.org/10.1182/blood-2012-08-450221

2. Burb GL et al. FEBS Lett. 2011 Dec 1;585(23):3689-98. doi: 10.1016/j.febslet.2011.04.032

Image by Spencer Phillips

DUBROVNIK, CROATIA—New research suggests there is no association between the PTPN22 R620W polymorphism and chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) or autoimmune hematologic disorders in patients from the Republic of Macedonia.

Past studies have shown an association between the PTPN22 R620W variant and both CLL¹ and autoimmune diseases² in patients from Northwest Europe.

However, a study of Macedonian patients suggests there is no association between the variant and CLL, autoimmune hemolytic anemia (AIHA), or idiopathic thrombocytopenic purpura (ITP) for patients from Southeast Europe.

Irina Panovska-Stavridis, PhD, of Ss. Cyril and Methodius University in Skopje, Republic of Macedonia, and her colleagues presented this finding at Leukemia and Lymphoma: Europe and the USA, Linking Knowledge and Practice.

“A lot of data from the literature suggests [the PTPN22 R620W variant ] has a role in developing multiple immune diseases, but it is validated just in patients from Northwest Europe,” Dr. Panovska-Stavridis noted.

Therefore, she and her colleagues decided to assess the frequency of the PTPN22 R620W variant (C1858T, rs2476601) in individuals from Southeast Europe, particularly the Republic of Macedonia.

The researchers evaluated 320 patients—168 with CLL, 66 with AIHA, and 86 with ITP—and 182 age- and sex-matched control subjects with no history of malignant or autoimmune disease.

The team found a similar frequency of the minor T allele and genotype distribution in control subjects and patients.

Dr. Panovska-Stavridis said these results suggest the PTPN22 R620W variant is not a risk factor for the development of CLL, AIHA, or ITP in patients from Southeast Europe.

She also said the results suggest the influence of the variant on lymphocytic homeostasis is affected by certain genetic and environmental factors, and the development of CLL and autoimmune diseases is influenced by race/ethnicity-based variations in the germline composition of the IGHV locus in correlation with environmental factors.

Dr. Panovska-Stavridis did not declare any conflicts of interest.

1. Hebbring S et al. Blood. 2013 121:237-238; doi: https://doi.org/10.1182/blood-2012-08-450221

2. Burb GL et al. FEBS Lett. 2011 Dec 1;585(23):3689-98. doi: 10.1016/j.febslet.2011.04.032

Audience at Leukemia and Lymphoma: Europe and the USA, Linking Knowledge and Practice

DUBROVNIK, CROATIA—An updated scoring system can more accurately identify lymphoma patients who may require thromboprophylaxis, according to researchers.

The revised scoring system, ThroLy, proved more effective than other systems for predicting thromboembolic events in lymphoma patients.

Researchers found the updated ThroLy had a positive predictive value of 22% to 25%, a negative predictive value of 96%, sensitivity of 56% to 57%, and specificity of 85% to 87%.

Darko Antić, MD, PhD, of the University of Belgrade in Serbia, presented these findings at Leukemia and Lymphoma: Europe and the USA, Linking Knowledge and Practice.

Dr. Antić said he and his colleagues developed ThroLy because other systems used to predict venous thromboembolism (VTE) are not quite right for lymphoma. He noted that the Padua score is not designed for cancer patients, and the Khorana score is predominantly for solid tumor malignancies.

“It’s good . . . , but it’s not specific for lymphoma patients,” Dr. Antić said.

With this in mind, he and his colleagues developed ThroLy. They based the scoring system on variables used in the Padua and Khorana systems as well as variables that are specific to lymphoma patients.

In a past study*, the researchers found several variables that were independently associated with risk for VTE in lymphoma:

• Previous VTE
• Previous acute myocardial infarction/stroke
• Mediastinal involvement
• Body mass index > 30 kg/m²
• Reduced mobility
• Extranodal localization
• Development of neutropenia
• Hemoglobin level < 100g/L.

Previous VTE, previous acute myocardial infarction/stroke, obesity, and mediastinal involvement were all worth 2 points, and the other factors were worth a single point.

Patients with scores of 0 to 1 were considered low-risk, patients with scores of 2 to 3 were considered intermediate-risk, and patients with scores of 4 or greater were considered high-risk.

Prospective validation

To validate and refine ThroLy, Dr. Antić and his colleagues used it to assess 1723 lymphoma patients treated at 8 institutions in Austria, Croatia, France, Jordan, Macedonia, Spain, Switzerland, and the United States.

Patients had indolent non-Hodgkin lymphoma (n=467), aggressive non-Hodgkin lymphoma (n=647), chronic lymphocytic leukemia/small lymphocytic lymphoma (n=235), and Hodgkin lymphoma (n=366). Most subjects (84%) were outpatients.

Nine percent of patients had thrombosis (n=142), with 7% having VTE (n=121).

ThroLy had a positive predictive value of 17%, compared to 11% with Khorana and 13% with Padua. The negative predictive value was 93%, 92%, and 95%, respectively.

The sensitivity was 51% with ThroLy, 42% with Khorana, and 70% with Padua. The specificity was 72%, 64%, and 52%, respectively.

“The positive predictive value was low [with ThroLy] but definitely higher than the positive predictive value of the other two [scoring systems],” Dr. Antić noted.

Updated models

To further improve ThroLy, the researchers updated the system, creating two new models.

Model 1 included the following variables:

• Type of lymphoma/clinical stage (aggressive/advanced)—1 point
• Previous VTE—5 points
• Reduced mobility—2 points
• Hemoglobin level < 100 g/L—1 point
• Presence of vascular devices—1 point.

Model 2 included all of the aforementioned variables as well as thrombophilic condition, which was worth 1 point.

With these models, patients were divided into two risk groups—low-risk (≤ 2 points) and high-risk (>2 points).

For Model 1, the positive predictive value was 22%, the negative predictive value was 96%, the sensitivity was 56%, and the specificity was 85%.

For Model 2, the positive predictive value was 25%, the negative predictive value was 96%, the sensitivity was 57%, and the specificity was 87%.

Dr. Antić said there were no major differences in model discrimination and calibration according to the country in which a patient was treated or whether patients were treated in inpatient or outpatient settings.

Dr. Antić did not report any conflicts of interest.

*Antić D et al. Am J Hematol. 2016 Oct;91(10):1014-9. doi: 10.1002/ajh.24466.

Audience at Leukemia and Lymphoma: Europe and the USA, Linking Knowledge and Practice

DUBROVNIK, CROATIA—An updated scoring system can more accurately identify lymphoma patients who may require thromboprophylaxis, according to researchers.

The revised scoring system, ThroLy, proved more effective than other systems for predicting thromboembolic events in lymphoma patients.

Researchers found the updated ThroLy had a positive predictive value of 22% to 25%, a negative predictive value of 96%, sensitivity of 56% to 57%, and specificity of 85% to 87%.

Darko Antić, MD, PhD, of the University of Belgrade in Serbia, presented these findings at Leukemia and Lymphoma: Europe and the USA, Linking Knowledge and Practice.

Dr. Antić said he and his colleagues developed ThroLy because other systems used to predict venous thromboembolism (VTE) are not quite right for lymphoma. He noted that the Padua score is not designed for cancer patients, and the Khorana score is predominantly for solid tumor malignancies.

“It’s good . . . , but it’s not specific for lymphoma patients,” Dr. Antić said.

With this in mind, he and his colleagues developed ThroLy. They based the scoring system on variables used in the Padua and Khorana systems as well as variables that are specific to lymphoma patients.

In a past study*, the researchers found several variables that were independently associated with risk for VTE in lymphoma:

• Previous VTE
• Previous acute myocardial infarction/stroke
• Mediastinal involvement
• Body mass index > 30 kg/m²
• Reduced mobility
• Extranodal localization
• Development of neutropenia
• Hemoglobin level < 100g/L.

Previous VTE, previous acute myocardial infarction/stroke, obesity, and mediastinal involvement were all worth 2 points, and the other factors were worth a single point.

Patients with scores of 0 to 1 were considered low-risk, patients with scores of 2 to 3 were considered intermediate-risk, and patients with scores of 4 or greater were considered high-risk.

Prospective validation

To validate and refine ThroLy, Dr. Antić and his colleagues used it to assess 1723 lymphoma patients treated at 8 institutions in Austria, Croatia, France, Jordan, Macedonia, Spain, Switzerland, and the United States.

Patients had indolent non-Hodgkin lymphoma (n=467), aggressive non-Hodgkin lymphoma (n=647), chronic lymphocytic leukemia/small lymphocytic lymphoma (n=235), and Hodgkin lymphoma (n=366). Most subjects (84%) were outpatients.

Nine percent of patients had thrombosis (n=142), with 7% having VTE (n=121).

ThroLy had a positive predictive value of 17%, compared to 11% with Khorana and 13% with Padua. The negative predictive value was 93%, 92%, and 95%, respectively.

The sensitivity was 51% with ThroLy, 42% with Khorana, and 70% with Padua. The specificity was 72%, 64%, and 52%, respectively.

“The positive predictive value was low [with ThroLy] but definitely higher than the positive predictive value of the other two [scoring systems],” Dr. Antić noted.

Updated models

To further improve ThroLy, the researchers updated the system, creating two new models.

Model 1 included the following variables:

• Type of lymphoma/clinical stage (aggressive/advanced)—1 point
• Previous VTE—5 points
• Reduced mobility—2 points
• Hemoglobin level < 100 g/L—1 point
• Presence of vascular devices—1 point.

Model 2 included all of the aforementioned variables as well as thrombophilic condition, which was worth 1 point.

With these models, patients were divided into two risk groups—low-risk (≤ 2 points) and high-risk (>2 points).

For Model 1, the positive predictive value was 22%, the negative predictive value was 96%, the sensitivity was 56%, and the specificity was 85%.

For Model 2, the positive predictive value was 25%, the negative predictive value was 96%, the sensitivity was 57%, and the specificity was 87%.

Dr. Antić said there were no major differences in model discrimination and calibration according to the country in which a patient was treated or whether patients were treated in inpatient or outpatient settings.

Dr. Antić did not report any conflicts of interest.

*Antić D et al. Am J Hematol. 2016 Oct;91(10):1014-9. doi: 10.1002/ajh.24466.

Audience at Leukemia and Lymphoma: Europe and the USA, Linking Knowledge and Practice

DUBROVNIK, CROATIA—An updated scoring system can more accurately identify lymphoma patients who may require thromboprophylaxis, according to researchers.

The revised scoring system, ThroLy, proved more effective than other systems for predicting thromboembolic events in lymphoma patients.

Researchers found the updated ThroLy had a positive predictive value of 22% to 25%, a negative predictive value of 96%, sensitivity of 56% to 57%, and specificity of 85% to 87%.

Darko Antić, MD, PhD, of the University of Belgrade in Serbia, presented these findings at Leukemia and Lymphoma: Europe and the USA, Linking Knowledge and Practice.

Dr. Antić said he and his colleagues developed ThroLy because other systems used to predict venous thromboembolism (VTE) are not quite right for lymphoma. He noted that the Padua score is not designed for cancer patients, and the Khorana score is predominantly for solid tumor malignancies.

“It’s good . . . , but it’s not specific for lymphoma patients,” Dr. Antić said.

With this in mind, he and his colleagues developed ThroLy. They based the scoring system on variables used in the Padua and Khorana systems as well as variables that are specific to lymphoma patients.

In a past study*, the researchers found several variables that were independently associated with risk for VTE in lymphoma:

• Previous VTE
• Previous acute myocardial infarction/stroke
• Mediastinal involvement
• Body mass index > 30 kg/m²
• Reduced mobility
• Extranodal localization
• Development of neutropenia
• Hemoglobin level < 100g/L.

Previous VTE, previous acute myocardial infarction/stroke, obesity, and mediastinal involvement were all worth 2 points, and the other factors were worth a single point.

Patients with scores of 0 to 1 were considered low-risk, patients with scores of 2 to 3 were considered intermediate-risk, and patients with scores of 4 or greater were considered high-risk.

Prospective validation

To validate and refine ThroLy, Dr. Antić and his colleagues used it to assess 1723 lymphoma patients treated at 8 institutions in Austria, Croatia, France, Jordan, Macedonia, Spain, Switzerland, and the United States.

Patients had indolent non-Hodgkin lymphoma (n=467), aggressive non-Hodgkin lymphoma (n=647), chronic lymphocytic leukemia/small lymphocytic lymphoma (n=235), and Hodgkin lymphoma (n=366). Most subjects (84%) were outpatients.

Nine percent of patients had thrombosis (n=142), with 7% having VTE (n=121).

ThroLy had a positive predictive value of 17%, compared to 11% with Khorana and 13% with Padua. The negative predictive value was 93%, 92%, and 95%, respectively.

The sensitivity was 51% with ThroLy, 42% with Khorana, and 70% with Padua. The specificity was 72%, 64%, and 52%, respectively.

“The positive predictive value was low [with ThroLy] but definitely higher than the positive predictive value of the other two [scoring systems],” Dr. Antić noted.

Updated models

To further improve ThroLy, the researchers updated the system, creating two new models.

Model 1 included the following variables:

• Type of lymphoma/clinical stage (aggressive/advanced)—1 point
• Previous VTE—5 points
• Reduced mobility—2 points
• Hemoglobin level < 100 g/L—1 point
• Presence of vascular devices—1 point.

Model 2 included all of the aforementioned variables as well as thrombophilic condition, which was worth 1 point.

With these models, patients were divided into two risk groups—low-risk (≤ 2 points) and high-risk (>2 points).

For Model 1, the positive predictive value was 22%, the negative predictive value was 96%, the sensitivity was 56%, and the specificity was 85%.

For Model 2, the positive predictive value was 25%, the negative predictive value was 96%, the sensitivity was 57%, and the specificity was 87%.

Dr. Antić said there were no major differences in model discrimination and calibration according to the country in which a patient was treated or whether patients were treated in inpatient or outpatient settings.

Dr. Antić did not report any conflicts of interest.

*Antić D et al. Am J Hematol. 2016 Oct;91(10):1014-9. doi: 10.1002/ajh.24466.

Image by Kevin MacKenzie

Danish researchers conducted a large, 16-year study of patients with venous thromboembolism (VTE) and found a high recurrence risk in all types of VTE.

At 6 months of follow-up, patients with unprovoked and provoked VTE had similar risk of recurrence, lower than that for patients with cancer-related VTE.

But at a 10-year follow-up, patients with unprovoked VTE had a recurrence risk similar to cancer-related VTE.

Based on these findings, the investigators concluded that risk stratification for these patients needs to be optimized.

“Our findings indicate that we may need to rethink arbitrary categorization, considering the heterogeneity of patients with venous thromboembolism,” they wrote.

They published their findings in The American Journal of Medicine.

The investigators used data from 3 nationwide Danish registries to analyze the risk of recurrent VTE in 73,993 patients with incident VTE. They stratified the patients according to whether the VTE was unprovoked, provoked, or cancer-related.

Provoked VTE occurs in patients without cancer but with other contributing factors such as surgery or trauma, and unprovoked VTE occurs without well-known provoking risk factors. Investigators did not include non-melanoma skin cancer in the cancer-related VTE classification.

Median age of the study population was 62.3 years and 54.1% were women.

During a median follow-up of 3.7 years, 9,205 patients experienced a recurrent event.

At the 6-month follow-up, the recurrence rates per 100 person-years were 6.92 for provoked, 6.80 for unprovoked, and 9.06 for cancer-related VTE.

And at the 10-year follow-up, recurrence rates were 2.22 (provoked), 2.84 (unprovoked), and 3.70 (cancer-related). This corresponded to an 18% higher adjusted relative risk of recurrence for patients with unprovoked VTE than patients with provoked VTE.

The investigators observed that at 10 years, the recurrence risk following an unprovoked VTE resembled the risk of patients with cancer-related VTE.

They suggested the mechanism for this could be a “rebound thrombosis” caused by a discontinuation of oral anticoagulants after an unprovoked VTE.

The investigators noted that the findings persisted through various sensitivity analyses “conducted to challenge the robustness of our finding.”

Two areas of concern, they wrote, arise from these findings: how long to anticoagulate patients and which patients to treat.

"Optimal duration of anticoagulation is a pivotal and an ongoing scientific and clinical concern," explained lead investigator Ida Ehlers Albertsen, MD, of Aalborg University in Denmark.

"The emergence of the non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants has changed the landscape for prevention of thrombosis, and contemporary risk stratification approaches may need to be adjusted according to these effective and safer agents." 

Image by Kevin MacKenzie

Danish researchers conducted a large, 16-year study of patients with venous thromboembolism (VTE) and found a high recurrence risk in all types of VTE.

At 6 months of follow-up, patients with unprovoked and provoked VTE had similar risk of recurrence, lower than that for patients with cancer-related VTE.

But at a 10-year follow-up, patients with unprovoked VTE had a recurrence risk similar to cancer-related VTE.

Based on these findings, the investigators concluded that risk stratification for these patients needs to be optimized.

“Our findings indicate that we may need to rethink arbitrary categorization, considering the heterogeneity of patients with venous thromboembolism,” they wrote.

They published their findings in The American Journal of Medicine.

The investigators used data from 3 nationwide Danish registries to analyze the risk of recurrent VTE in 73,993 patients with incident VTE. They stratified the patients according to whether the VTE was unprovoked, provoked, or cancer-related.

Provoked VTE occurs in patients without cancer but with other contributing factors such as surgery or trauma, and unprovoked VTE occurs without well-known provoking risk factors. Investigators did not include non-melanoma skin cancer in the cancer-related VTE classification.

Median age of the study population was 62.3 years and 54.1% were women.

During a median follow-up of 3.7 years, 9,205 patients experienced a recurrent event.

At the 6-month follow-up, the recurrence rates per 100 person-years were 6.92 for provoked, 6.80 for unprovoked, and 9.06 for cancer-related VTE.

And at the 10-year follow-up, recurrence rates were 2.22 (provoked), 2.84 (unprovoked), and 3.70 (cancer-related). This corresponded to an 18% higher adjusted relative risk of recurrence for patients with unprovoked VTE than patients with provoked VTE.

The investigators observed that at 10 years, the recurrence risk following an unprovoked VTE resembled the risk of patients with cancer-related VTE.

They suggested the mechanism for this could be a “rebound thrombosis” caused by a discontinuation of oral anticoagulants after an unprovoked VTE.

The investigators noted that the findings persisted through various sensitivity analyses “conducted to challenge the robustness of our finding.”

Two areas of concern, they wrote, arise from these findings: how long to anticoagulate patients and which patients to treat.

"Optimal duration of anticoagulation is a pivotal and an ongoing scientific and clinical concern," explained lead investigator Ida Ehlers Albertsen, MD, of Aalborg University in Denmark.

"The emergence of the non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants has changed the landscape for prevention of thrombosis, and contemporary risk stratification approaches may need to be adjusted according to these effective and safer agents." 

Image by Kevin MacKenzie

Danish researchers conducted a large, 16-year study of patients with venous thromboembolism (VTE) and found a high recurrence risk in all types of VTE.

At 6 months of follow-up, patients with unprovoked and provoked VTE had similar risk of recurrence, lower than that for patients with cancer-related VTE.

But at a 10-year follow-up, patients with unprovoked VTE had a recurrence risk similar to cancer-related VTE.

Based on these findings, the investigators concluded that risk stratification for these patients needs to be optimized.

“Our findings indicate that we may need to rethink arbitrary categorization, considering the heterogeneity of patients with venous thromboembolism,” they wrote.

They published their findings in The American Journal of Medicine.

The investigators used data from 3 nationwide Danish registries to analyze the risk of recurrent VTE in 73,993 patients with incident VTE. They stratified the patients according to whether the VTE was unprovoked, provoked, or cancer-related.

Provoked VTE occurs in patients without cancer but with other contributing factors such as surgery or trauma, and unprovoked VTE occurs without well-known provoking risk factors. Investigators did not include non-melanoma skin cancer in the cancer-related VTE classification.

Median age of the study population was 62.3 years and 54.1% were women.

During a median follow-up of 3.7 years, 9,205 patients experienced a recurrent event.

At the 6-month follow-up, the recurrence rates per 100 person-years were 6.92 for provoked, 6.80 for unprovoked, and 9.06 for cancer-related VTE.

And at the 10-year follow-up, recurrence rates were 2.22 (provoked), 2.84 (unprovoked), and 3.70 (cancer-related). This corresponded to an 18% higher adjusted relative risk of recurrence for patients with unprovoked VTE than patients with provoked VTE.

The investigators observed that at 10 years, the recurrence risk following an unprovoked VTE resembled the risk of patients with cancer-related VTE.

They suggested the mechanism for this could be a “rebound thrombosis” caused by a discontinuation of oral anticoagulants after an unprovoked VTE.

The investigators noted that the findings persisted through various sensitivity analyses “conducted to challenge the robustness of our finding.”

Two areas of concern, they wrote, arise from these findings: how long to anticoagulate patients and which patients to treat.

"Optimal duration of anticoagulation is a pivotal and an ongoing scientific and clinical concern," explained lead investigator Ida Ehlers Albertsen, MD, of Aalborg University in Denmark.

"The emergence of the non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants has changed the landscape for prevention of thrombosis, and contemporary risk stratification approaches may need to be adjusted according to these effective and safer agents." 

Photo from Business Wire

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved emicizumab-kxwh (Hemlibra) for prophylaxis to prevent or reduce the frequency of bleeding episodes in adult and pediatric patients, including newborns, with hemophilia A with or without factor VIII (FVIII) inhibitors.

Emicizumab is a humanized bispecific factor IXa- and factor X-directed antibody for patients with congenital FVIII deficiency.

It was first approved in 2017 for hemophilia A patients with FVIII inhibitors.

The current approval expands the indication to include patients without FVIII inhibitors and provides new dosing regimens.

The FDA based the current approval on the HAVEN 3 and HAVEN 4 trials.

HAVEN 3 (NCT02847637)

This multicenter trial randomized 89 patients with severe hemophilia A without FVIII inhibitors to receive emicizumab prophylaxis at one of 3 dose levels: 1.5 mg/kg once weekly (ARM A), 3 mg/kg once every two weeks (Arm B), or no prophylaxis (Arm C). Patients had previously received on-demand treatment with FVIII.

Before the start of the trial, investigators stratified patients by 24-week bleed rate—fewer than 9 bleeds and 9 or more bleeds.

Patients were treated with emicizumab for a minimum of 24 weeks.

Patients in Arm A experienced a 96% reduction in annualized bleed rate (ABR) compared to patients with no prophylaxis (ABR ratio=0.04; P<0.0001).

Patients in Arm B had a 97% reduction in ABR compared to patients with no prophylaxis (ABR ratio=0.03; P<0.0001).

The trial met all bleed-related secondary endpoints, such as all bleeds, treated spontaneous bleeds, treated joint bleeds, and treated target joint bleeds.

HAVEN 4 (NCT03020160)

This was a single-arm multicenter trial in 48 adult and adolescent males with hemophilia A with or without FVIII inhibitors. The patients had previously received on-demand or prophylactic treatment with FVIII or bypassing agents.

The study was conducted in two parts: a run-in of 7 patients to determine the pharmacokinetics after a single 6 mg/kg dose in four weeks. This was followed by the same dose once every four weeks for at least 24 weeks.

The second part was an expansion cohort of 41 patients who received emicizumab at 3 mg/kg once weekly for the first four weeks followed by 6 mg/kg once every four weeks for at least 24 weeks.

The ABR for treated bleeds was 2.4 (95% CI: 1.38, 4.28) and the median ABR was 0.0 (interquartile range: 0.00, 2.08).

The recommended loading dose is 3 mg/kg once weekly for the first four weeks for all prophylactic regimens.

Safety

The prescribing information for emicizumab includes a warning about thrombotic microangiopathy and thromboembolism.

These events were reported on average when a cumulative amount of >100 U/kg/24 hours of activated prothrombin complex concentrate (aPCC) was administered for 24 hours or more to patients receiving emicizumab prophylaxis.

According to the warning box, patients should be monitored for these events if aPCC is administered. If symptoms occur, aPCC should be discontinued and emicizumab dosing suspended.

The most common adverse reactions reported for emicizumab with an incidence ≥10% were injection site reactions (22%), headache (15%), and arthralgia (15%).

Emicizumab is manufactured by Genentech, Inc., a member of the Roche Group.

Additional data on emicizumab can be found in an earlier Roche media release. 

Photo from Business Wire

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved emicizumab-kxwh (Hemlibra) for prophylaxis to prevent or reduce the frequency of bleeding episodes in adult and pediatric patients, including newborns, with hemophilia A with or without factor VIII (FVIII) inhibitors.

Emicizumab is a humanized bispecific factor IXa- and factor X-directed antibody for patients with congenital FVIII deficiency.

It was first approved in 2017 for hemophilia A patients with FVIII inhibitors.

The current approval expands the indication to include patients without FVIII inhibitors and provides new dosing regimens.

The FDA based the current approval on the HAVEN 3 and HAVEN 4 trials.

HAVEN 3 (NCT02847637)

This multicenter trial randomized 89 patients with severe hemophilia A without FVIII inhibitors to receive emicizumab prophylaxis at one of 3 dose levels: 1.5 mg/kg once weekly (ARM A), 3 mg/kg once every two weeks (Arm B), or no prophylaxis (Arm C). Patients had previously received on-demand treatment with FVIII.

Before the start of the trial, investigators stratified patients by 24-week bleed rate—fewer than 9 bleeds and 9 or more bleeds.

Patients were treated with emicizumab for a minimum of 24 weeks.

Patients in Arm A experienced a 96% reduction in annualized bleed rate (ABR) compared to patients with no prophylaxis (ABR ratio=0.04; P<0.0001).

Patients in Arm B had a 97% reduction in ABR compared to patients with no prophylaxis (ABR ratio=0.03; P<0.0001).

The trial met all bleed-related secondary endpoints, such as all bleeds, treated spontaneous bleeds, treated joint bleeds, and treated target joint bleeds.

HAVEN 4 (NCT03020160)

This was a single-arm multicenter trial in 48 adult and adolescent males with hemophilia A with or without FVIII inhibitors. The patients had previously received on-demand or prophylactic treatment with FVIII or bypassing agents.

The study was conducted in two parts: a run-in of 7 patients to determine the pharmacokinetics after a single 6 mg/kg dose in four weeks. This was followed by the same dose once every four weeks for at least 24 weeks.

The second part was an expansion cohort of 41 patients who received emicizumab at 3 mg/kg once weekly for the first four weeks followed by 6 mg/kg once every four weeks for at least 24 weeks.

The ABR for treated bleeds was 2.4 (95% CI: 1.38, 4.28) and the median ABR was 0.0 (interquartile range: 0.00, 2.08).

The recommended loading dose is 3 mg/kg once weekly for the first four weeks for all prophylactic regimens.

Safety

The prescribing information for emicizumab includes a warning about thrombotic microangiopathy and thromboembolism.

These events were reported on average when a cumulative amount of >100 U/kg/24 hours of activated prothrombin complex concentrate (aPCC) was administered for 24 hours or more to patients receiving emicizumab prophylaxis.

According to the warning box, patients should be monitored for these events if aPCC is administered. If symptoms occur, aPCC should be discontinued and emicizumab dosing suspended.

The most common adverse reactions reported for emicizumab with an incidence ≥10% were injection site reactions (22%), headache (15%), and arthralgia (15%).

Emicizumab is manufactured by Genentech, Inc., a member of the Roche Group.

Additional data on emicizumab can be found in an earlier Roche media release. 

Photo from Business Wire

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved emicizumab-kxwh (Hemlibra) for prophylaxis to prevent or reduce the frequency of bleeding episodes in adult and pediatric patients, including newborns, with hemophilia A with or without factor VIII (FVIII) inhibitors.

Emicizumab is a humanized bispecific factor IXa- and factor X-directed antibody for patients with congenital FVIII deficiency.

It was first approved in 2017 for hemophilia A patients with FVIII inhibitors.

The current approval expands the indication to include patients without FVIII inhibitors and provides new dosing regimens.

The FDA based the current approval on the HAVEN 3 and HAVEN 4 trials.

HAVEN 3 (NCT02847637)

This multicenter trial randomized 89 patients with severe hemophilia A without FVIII inhibitors to receive emicizumab prophylaxis at one of 3 dose levels: 1.5 mg/kg once weekly (ARM A), 3 mg/kg once every two weeks (Arm B), or no prophylaxis (Arm C). Patients had previously received on-demand treatment with FVIII.

Before the start of the trial, investigators stratified patients by 24-week bleed rate—fewer than 9 bleeds and 9 or more bleeds.

Patients were treated with emicizumab for a minimum of 24 weeks.

Patients in Arm A experienced a 96% reduction in annualized bleed rate (ABR) compared to patients with no prophylaxis (ABR ratio=0.04; P<0.0001).

Patients in Arm B had a 97% reduction in ABR compared to patients with no prophylaxis (ABR ratio=0.03; P<0.0001).

The trial met all bleed-related secondary endpoints, such as all bleeds, treated spontaneous bleeds, treated joint bleeds, and treated target joint bleeds.

HAVEN 4 (NCT03020160)

This was a single-arm multicenter trial in 48 adult and adolescent males with hemophilia A with or without FVIII inhibitors. The patients had previously received on-demand or prophylactic treatment with FVIII or bypassing agents.

The study was conducted in two parts: a run-in of 7 patients to determine the pharmacokinetics after a single 6 mg/kg dose in four weeks. This was followed by the same dose once every four weeks for at least 24 weeks.

The second part was an expansion cohort of 41 patients who received emicizumab at 3 mg/kg once weekly for the first four weeks followed by 6 mg/kg once every four weeks for at least 24 weeks.

The ABR for treated bleeds was 2.4 (95% CI: 1.38, 4.28) and the median ABR was 0.0 (interquartile range: 0.00, 2.08).

The recommended loading dose is 3 mg/kg once weekly for the first four weeks for all prophylactic regimens.

Safety

The prescribing information for emicizumab includes a warning about thrombotic microangiopathy and thromboembolism.

These events were reported on average when a cumulative amount of >100 U/kg/24 hours of activated prothrombin complex concentrate (aPCC) was administered for 24 hours or more to patients receiving emicizumab prophylaxis.

According to the warning box, patients should be monitored for these events if aPCC is administered. If symptoms occur, aPCC should be discontinued and emicizumab dosing suspended.

The most common adverse reactions reported for emicizumab with an incidence ≥10% were injection site reactions (22%), headache (15%), and arthralgia (15%).

Emicizumab is manufactured by Genentech, Inc., a member of the Roche Group.

Additional data on emicizumab can be found in an earlier Roche media release. 

Women who use combined oral contraceptives (COC) without hormone-free or low-dose hormone intervals have a slightly elevated, but not statistically significant, risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE), compared with women who use cyclic COCs, according to research published in JAMA Internal Medicine.

areeya_ann/Thinkstock

Jie Li, PhD, from the Center for Drug Evaluation and Research, and colleagues performed a retrospective cohort study of 733,007 women aged 18-50 years in the Sentinel Distributed Database from 2007 to 2015 who received low-dose extended and continuous cycle (210,691 women; mean age, 30 years) COCs or cyclic COCs (522,316 women; mean age, 29 years). Continuous cycle COCs were defined as an 84/7 cycle or a 365/0 cycle, while cyclic COCs were 21/7 cycles.

The researchers noted some baseline differences between the two groups, with gynecologic conditions occurring in 40% of the noncyclic group, compared with 32% in the cyclic group; cardiovascular and metabolic conditions occurring in 7% of noncyclic women, compared with 5% of cyclic women; inflammatory disease occurring in 3% of noncyclic women, compared with 2% of cyclic women; and a slightly higher rate of health care services use in the noncyclic group, compared with the cyclic group.

Dr. Li and associates found 228 cases of VTE in the noncyclic group and 297 cases in the cyclic group, with an incidence rate of 1.54 (95% confidence interval, 1.34-1.74) per 1,000 person-years for noncyclic users and 0.83 (95% CI, 0.74-0.93) per 1,000 person-years for cyclic users (crude hazard ratio, 1.84; 95% CI, 1.53-2.21).

However, propensity score matching lowered the incidence rate to 1.44 (95% CI, 1.24-1.64) per 1,000 person-years for the noncyclic group and raised it to 1.09 (95% CI, 0.92-1.27) per 1,000 person-years for the cyclic group, for an adjusted hazard ratio of 1.32 (95% CI, 1.07-1.64), which does not show “strong evidence” of VTE risk based on a small absolute risk difference of 0.27 cases per 1,000 persons, the researchers said. They added that there might be residual or unmeasured confounding, perhaps for potential concurrent medication use or incompletely measured covariates.

“Accordingly, we do not recommend selective prescribing of COCs based on the cyclic and continuous/extended type,” Dr. Li and colleagues wrote. “Clinicians should prescribe COCs based on patients’ individual risk factors and preferences.”

The Sentinel Initiative is funded by a contract from the Department of Health and Human Services. The authors reported no relevant conflicts of interest.

SOURCE: Li J et al. JAMA Intern Med. 2018 Oct 1. doi: 10.1001/jamainternmed.2018.4251.

Women who use combined oral contraceptives (COC) without hormone-free or low-dose hormone intervals have a slightly elevated, but not statistically significant, risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE), compared with women who use cyclic COCs, according to research published in JAMA Internal Medicine.

areeya_ann/Thinkstock

Jie Li, PhD, from the Center for Drug Evaluation and Research, and colleagues performed a retrospective cohort study of 733,007 women aged 18-50 years in the Sentinel Distributed Database from 2007 to 2015 who received low-dose extended and continuous cycle (210,691 women; mean age, 30 years) COCs or cyclic COCs (522,316 women; mean age, 29 years). Continuous cycle COCs were defined as an 84/7 cycle or a 365/0 cycle, while cyclic COCs were 21/7 cycles.

The researchers noted some baseline differences between the two groups, with gynecologic conditions occurring in 40% of the noncyclic group, compared with 32% in the cyclic group; cardiovascular and metabolic conditions occurring in 7% of noncyclic women, compared with 5% of cyclic women; inflammatory disease occurring in 3% of noncyclic women, compared with 2% of cyclic women; and a slightly higher rate of health care services use in the noncyclic group, compared with the cyclic group.

Dr. Li and associates found 228 cases of VTE in the noncyclic group and 297 cases in the cyclic group, with an incidence rate of 1.54 (95% confidence interval, 1.34-1.74) per 1,000 person-years for noncyclic users and 0.83 (95% CI, 0.74-0.93) per 1,000 person-years for cyclic users (crude hazard ratio, 1.84; 95% CI, 1.53-2.21).

However, propensity score matching lowered the incidence rate to 1.44 (95% CI, 1.24-1.64) per 1,000 person-years for the noncyclic group and raised it to 1.09 (95% CI, 0.92-1.27) per 1,000 person-years for the cyclic group, for an adjusted hazard ratio of 1.32 (95% CI, 1.07-1.64), which does not show “strong evidence” of VTE risk based on a small absolute risk difference of 0.27 cases per 1,000 persons, the researchers said. They added that there might be residual or unmeasured confounding, perhaps for potential concurrent medication use or incompletely measured covariates.

“Accordingly, we do not recommend selective prescribing of COCs based on the cyclic and continuous/extended type,” Dr. Li and colleagues wrote. “Clinicians should prescribe COCs based on patients’ individual risk factors and preferences.”

The Sentinel Initiative is funded by a contract from the Department of Health and Human Services. The authors reported no relevant conflicts of interest.

SOURCE: Li J et al. JAMA Intern Med. 2018 Oct 1. doi: 10.1001/jamainternmed.2018.4251.

Women who use combined oral contraceptives (COC) without hormone-free or low-dose hormone intervals have a slightly elevated, but not statistically significant, risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE), compared with women who use cyclic COCs, according to research published in JAMA Internal Medicine.

areeya_ann/Thinkstock

Jie Li, PhD, from the Center for Drug Evaluation and Research, and colleagues performed a retrospective cohort study of 733,007 women aged 18-50 years in the Sentinel Distributed Database from 2007 to 2015 who received low-dose extended and continuous cycle (210,691 women; mean age, 30 years) COCs or cyclic COCs (522,316 women; mean age, 29 years). Continuous cycle COCs were defined as an 84/7 cycle or a 365/0 cycle, while cyclic COCs were 21/7 cycles.

The researchers noted some baseline differences between the two groups, with gynecologic conditions occurring in 40% of the noncyclic group, compared with 32% in the cyclic group; cardiovascular and metabolic conditions occurring in 7% of noncyclic women, compared with 5% of cyclic women; inflammatory disease occurring in 3% of noncyclic women, compared with 2% of cyclic women; and a slightly higher rate of health care services use in the noncyclic group, compared with the cyclic group.

Dr. Li and associates found 228 cases of VTE in the noncyclic group and 297 cases in the cyclic group, with an incidence rate of 1.54 (95% confidence interval, 1.34-1.74) per 1,000 person-years for noncyclic users and 0.83 (95% CI, 0.74-0.93) per 1,000 person-years for cyclic users (crude hazard ratio, 1.84; 95% CI, 1.53-2.21).

However, propensity score matching lowered the incidence rate to 1.44 (95% CI, 1.24-1.64) per 1,000 person-years for the noncyclic group and raised it to 1.09 (95% CI, 0.92-1.27) per 1,000 person-years for the cyclic group, for an adjusted hazard ratio of 1.32 (95% CI, 1.07-1.64), which does not show “strong evidence” of VTE risk based on a small absolute risk difference of 0.27 cases per 1,000 persons, the researchers said. They added that there might be residual or unmeasured confounding, perhaps for potential concurrent medication use or incompletely measured covariates.

“Accordingly, we do not recommend selective prescribing of COCs based on the cyclic and continuous/extended type,” Dr. Li and colleagues wrote. “Clinicians should prescribe COCs based on patients’ individual risk factors and preferences.”

The Sentinel Initiative is funded by a contract from the Department of Health and Human Services. The authors reported no relevant conflicts of interest.

SOURCE: Li J et al. JAMA Intern Med. 2018 Oct 1. doi: 10.1001/jamainternmed.2018.4251.

SAN DIEGO – In patients with atrial fibrillation and stable coronary artery disease, a randomized trial of oral anticoagulation alone versus an anticoagulant plus a single antiplatelet agent failed to establish noninferiority of the single-agent approach. The trial could not demonstrate its primary endpoint of all-cause death, myocardial infarction, stroke, or systemic embolism.

But a secondary endpoint that included major bleeding did demonstrate equivalence, leading the researchers to suggest that oral anticoagulation (OAC) alone may be sufficient in most patients.

“Combined OAC and single antiplatelet therapy is unlikely to provide net clinical benefit over OAC alone. Thus, OAC alone might be reasonable for AF [atrial fibrillation] patients beyond 1 year after coronary stenting,” Yukiko Nakano, MD, of Kyoto (Japan) University Graduate School of Medicine, said during a press conference at the Transcatheter Cardiovascular Therapeutics annual meeting, sponsored by the Cardiovascular Research Foundation. The report was simultaneously published Sept. 24 in Circulation (doi: 10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.118.036768).

Jim Kling/MDedge News

The study was stopped prematurely because of insufficient recruitment, which may have contributed to the failed primary endpoint. It’s a shortcoming that befalls many such studies, perhaps because cardiologists tend to be set in their ways when it comes to treatment of patients after a stent implant. “Cardiologists just think they know the answer, and they don’t want to expose their patients (to a clinical trial). They say, ‘I have my patients on whatever regimen. It seems to be working, and they’re not bleeding, so I don’t want to change it.’ This study suggests that we probably can stop one of the two (antiplatelet drugs) and get by with a single agent, and in this case they got by with no agent (in the monotherapy arm),” said C. Michael Gibson, MD, chief of clinical research in the division of cardiology at Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Boston, who was a discussant at the press conference.

The study recruited 696 patients who were receiving OAC plus single antiplatelet therapy (SAPT) 1 year after receiving a stent. They were randomized 1:1 to continue combined therapy or to stop SAPT and then followed for a median of 2.5 years. A total of 74% of patients who received OAC alone were taking warfarin, while 26% were taking a direct oral anticoagulant. The SAPT group took aspirin or clopidogrel.

Overall, 15.7% of OAC patients experienced the primary endpoint, compared with 13.6% of the combined group (noninferiority P = .20). None of the individual components of the primary endpoint were statistically significantly different between the groups. International Society on Thrombosis and Haemostasis major bleeding and Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction major bleeding trended in favor of OAC alone. The secondary endpoint (primary endpoint plus major bleeding) achieved noninferiority, occurring in 19.5% of the OAC group and 19.4% of the combined therapy group (noninferiority P = .016; superiority P = .96).

Daiichi-Sankyo funded the trial. Dr. Nakano had no conflicts of interest. Dr. Gibson reported numerous financial ties to pharmaceutical companies, including Daiichi-Sankyo.

SAN DIEGO – In patients with atrial fibrillation and stable coronary artery disease, a randomized trial of oral anticoagulation alone versus an anticoagulant plus a single antiplatelet agent failed to establish noninferiority of the single-agent approach. The trial could not demonstrate its primary endpoint of all-cause death, myocardial infarction, stroke, or systemic embolism.

But a secondary endpoint that included major bleeding did demonstrate equivalence, leading the researchers to suggest that oral anticoagulation (OAC) alone may be sufficient in most patients.

“Combined OAC and single antiplatelet therapy is unlikely to provide net clinical benefit over OAC alone. Thus, OAC alone might be reasonable for AF [atrial fibrillation] patients beyond 1 year after coronary stenting,” Yukiko Nakano, MD, of Kyoto (Japan) University Graduate School of Medicine, said during a press conference at the Transcatheter Cardiovascular Therapeutics annual meeting, sponsored by the Cardiovascular Research Foundation. The report was simultaneously published Sept. 24 in Circulation (doi: 10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.118.036768).

Jim Kling/MDedge News

The study was stopped prematurely because of insufficient recruitment, which may have contributed to the failed primary endpoint. It’s a shortcoming that befalls many such studies, perhaps because cardiologists tend to be set in their ways when it comes to treatment of patients after a stent implant. “Cardiologists just think they know the answer, and they don’t want to expose their patients (to a clinical trial). They say, ‘I have my patients on whatever regimen. It seems to be working, and they’re not bleeding, so I don’t want to change it.’ This study suggests that we probably can stop one of the two (antiplatelet drugs) and get by with a single agent, and in this case they got by with no agent (in the monotherapy arm),” said C. Michael Gibson, MD, chief of clinical research in the division of cardiology at Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Boston, who was a discussant at the press conference.

The study recruited 696 patients who were receiving OAC plus single antiplatelet therapy (SAPT) 1 year after receiving a stent. They were randomized 1:1 to continue combined therapy or to stop SAPT and then followed for a median of 2.5 years. A total of 74% of patients who received OAC alone were taking warfarin, while 26% were taking a direct oral anticoagulant. The SAPT group took aspirin or clopidogrel.

Overall, 15.7% of OAC patients experienced the primary endpoint, compared with 13.6% of the combined group (noninferiority P = .20). None of the individual components of the primary endpoint were statistically significantly different between the groups. International Society on Thrombosis and Haemostasis major bleeding and Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction major bleeding trended in favor of OAC alone. The secondary endpoint (primary endpoint plus major bleeding) achieved noninferiority, occurring in 19.5% of the OAC group and 19.4% of the combined therapy group (noninferiority P = .016; superiority P = .96).

Daiichi-Sankyo funded the trial. Dr. Nakano had no conflicts of interest. Dr. Gibson reported numerous financial ties to pharmaceutical companies, including Daiichi-Sankyo.

SAN DIEGO – In patients with atrial fibrillation and stable coronary artery disease, a randomized trial of oral anticoagulation alone versus an anticoagulant plus a single antiplatelet agent failed to establish noninferiority of the single-agent approach. The trial could not demonstrate its primary endpoint of all-cause death, myocardial infarction, stroke, or systemic embolism.

But a secondary endpoint that included major bleeding did demonstrate equivalence, leading the researchers to suggest that oral anticoagulation (OAC) alone may be sufficient in most patients.

“Combined OAC and single antiplatelet therapy is unlikely to provide net clinical benefit over OAC alone. Thus, OAC alone might be reasonable for AF [atrial fibrillation] patients beyond 1 year after coronary stenting,” Yukiko Nakano, MD, of Kyoto (Japan) University Graduate School of Medicine, said during a press conference at the Transcatheter Cardiovascular Therapeutics annual meeting, sponsored by the Cardiovascular Research Foundation. The report was simultaneously published Sept. 24 in Circulation (doi: 10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.118.036768).

Jim Kling/MDedge News

The study was stopped prematurely because of insufficient recruitment, which may have contributed to the failed primary endpoint. It’s a shortcoming that befalls many such studies, perhaps because cardiologists tend to be set in their ways when it comes to treatment of patients after a stent implant. “Cardiologists just think they know the answer, and they don’t want to expose their patients (to a clinical trial). They say, ‘I have my patients on whatever regimen. It seems to be working, and they’re not bleeding, so I don’t want to change it.’ This study suggests that we probably can stop one of the two (antiplatelet drugs) and get by with a single agent, and in this case they got by with no agent (in the monotherapy arm),” said C. Michael Gibson, MD, chief of clinical research in the division of cardiology at Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Boston, who was a discussant at the press conference.

The study recruited 696 patients who were receiving OAC plus single antiplatelet therapy (SAPT) 1 year after receiving a stent. They were randomized 1:1 to continue combined therapy or to stop SAPT and then followed for a median of 2.5 years. A total of 74% of patients who received OAC alone were taking warfarin, while 26% were taking a direct oral anticoagulant. The SAPT group took aspirin or clopidogrel.

Overall, 15.7% of OAC patients experienced the primary endpoint, compared with 13.6% of the combined group (noninferiority P = .20). None of the individual components of the primary endpoint were statistically significantly different between the groups. International Society on Thrombosis and Haemostasis major bleeding and Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction major bleeding trended in favor of OAC alone. The secondary endpoint (primary endpoint plus major bleeding) achieved noninferiority, occurring in 19.5% of the OAC group and 19.4% of the combined therapy group (noninferiority P = .016; superiority P = .96).

Daiichi-Sankyo funded the trial. Dr. Nakano had no conflicts of interest. Dr. Gibson reported numerous financial ties to pharmaceutical companies, including Daiichi-Sankyo.