Risk assessment tools for bleeding in patients with unprovoked venous thromboembolism: an analysis of the PLATO-VTE study.

BACKGROUND: Guidelines suggest indefinite anticoagulation after unprovoked venous thromboembolism (VTE) unless the bleeding risk is high, yet there is no consistent guidance on assessing bleeding risk. This study aimed to evaluate the performance of five bleeding risk tools (RIETE, VTE-BLEED, CHAP, VTE-PREDICT, and ABC-bleeding). METHODS: PLATO-VTE, a prospective cohort study, included patients aged ≥40 years with a first unprovoked VTE. Risk estimates were calculated at VTE diagnosis and after 3 months of treatment. Primary outcome was clinically relevant bleeding, as per ISTH criteria, during 24-month follow-up. Discrimination was assessed by the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC). Patients were classified as having a 'high-risk' and 'non-high-risk' of bleeding according to predefined thresholds; bleeding risk in both groups was compared by hazard ratios. RESULTS: Of 514 patients, 38 (7.4%) had an on-treatment bleeding. AUROCs were 0.58 (95%CI, 0.48-0.68) for ABC-bleeding, 0.56 (95%CI, 0.46-0.66) for RIETE, 0.53 (95%CI, 0.43-0.64) for CHAP, 0.50 (95%CI, 0.41-0.59) for VTE-BLEED, and 0.50 (95%CI, 0.40-0.60) for VTE-PREDICT. The proportion of high-risk patients ranged from 1.4% with RIETE to 36.9% with VTE-BLEED. The bleeding incidence in the high-risk groups ranged from 0% with RIETE to 13.0% with ABC-bleeding, and in the non-high-risk groups from 7.7% with ABC-bleeding to 9.6% with RIETE. Hazard ratios ranged from 0.93 (95%CI, 0.46-1.9) for VTE-BLEED to 1.67 (95%CI, 0.86-3.2) for ABC-bleeding. Recalibration at 3-month follow-up did not alter the results. CONCLUSIONS: In this cohort, discrimination of currently available bleeding risk tools was poor. These data do not support their use in patients with unprovoked VTE.

Treatment Patterns of Cancer-associated Thrombosis in the Netherlands: The Four Cities Study.

Background Current guidelines recommend either low-molecular weight heparin (LMWH) or direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) as first-line treatment in cancer-associated venous thromboembolism (VTE). Aim This study aimed to investigate treatment regimens for cancer-associated VTE over the past 5 years, explore predictors for initial treatment (LMWH vs. DOAC), and to assess the risks of recurrent VTE and bleeding. Methods This was a Dutch, multicenter, retrospective cohort study including consecutive patients with cancer-associated VTE between 2017 and 2021. Treatment predictors were assessed with multivariable logistic regression models. Six-month cumulative incidences for recurrent VTE and major bleeding (MB) were estimated with death as competing risk. Results In total, 1,215 patients were included. The majority (1,134/1,192; 95%) started VTE treatment with anticoagulation: 561 LMWH (47%), 510 DOACs (43%), 27 vitamin K antagonist (2.3%), and 36 other/unknown type (3.0%). The proportion of patients primarily treated with DOACs increased from 18% (95% confidence interval [CI] 12-25) in 2017 to 70% (95% CI 62-78) in 2021. Poor performance status (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 0.72, 95% CI 0.53-0.99) and distant metastases (aOR 0.61, 95% CI 0.45-0.82) were associated with primary treatment with LMWH. Total 6-month cumulative incidences were 6.0% (95% CI 4.8-7.5) for recurrent VTE and 7.0% (95% CI 5.7-8.6) for MB. During follow-up, 182 patients (15%) switched from LMWH to a DOAC, and 54 patients (4.4%) vice versa, for various reasons, including patient preference, recurrent thrombosis, and/or bleeding. Conclusion DOAC use in cancer-associated VTE has increased rapidly over the past years. Changes in anticoagulation regimen were frequent over time, and were often related to recurrent thrombotic and bleeding complications, illustrating the complexity and challenges of managing cancer-associated VTE.

RNA-sequencing to discover genes and signaling pathways associated with venous thromboembolism in glioblastoma patients: A case-control study.

BACKGROUND: Glioblastoma patients are at high risk of developing venous thromboembolism (VTE). Tumor-intrinsic features are considered to play a role, but the underlying pathophysiological mechanisms remain incompletely understood. OBJECTIVES: To identify tumor-expressed genes and signaling pathways that associate with glioblastoma-related VTE by using next generation RNA-sequencing (RNA-Seq). METHODS: The tumor gene expression profile of 23 glioblastoma patients with VTE and 23 glioblastoma patients without VTE was compared using an unpaired analysis. Ingenuity Pathway Analysis (IPA) core analysis was performed on the top 50 differentially expressed genes to explore associated functions and pathways. Based on full RNA-Seq data, molecular glioblastoma subtypes were determined by performing cluster analysis. RESULTS: Of the 19,327 genes, 1246 (6.4 %) were differentially expressed between glioblastoma patients with and without VTE (unadjusted P < 0.05). The most highly overexpressed gene was GLI1, a classical target gene in the Sonic Hedgehog (Shh) signaling pathway (log2 fold change: 3.7; unadjusted P < 0.0001, adjusted P = 0.219). In line, Shh signaling was among the top canonical pathways and processes associated with VTE. The proportion of patients with the proneural/neural glioblastoma subtype was higher among those with VTE than controls. CONCLUSION: Shh signaling may be involved in the development of glioblastoma-related VTE.

Polygenic risk scores for prediction of cancer-associated venous thromboembolism in the UK Biobank cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Guidelines recommend thromboprophylaxis for patients with cancer at high risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE). Polygenic risk scores may improve VTE prediction but have not yet been evaluated in patients with cancer. OBJECTIVES: We assessed the performance of the 5-, 37-, 297-, extended 297- (additionally including factor V Leiden and prothrombin G20210A), and 100-single-nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) scores in predicting cancer-associated VTE in the UK Biobank, a population-based, prospective cohort study. METHODS: The primary outcome was VTE during 12 months after cancer diagnosis. Cancer and VTE diagnosis were based on ICD-10 codes. Discrimination was evaluated by c-indices and subdistribution hazard ratios in the upper vs 3 lower quartiles of the scores in a competing risk model. As a comparison, the c-index was calculated for the Khorana cancer type risk classification. RESULTS: Of 36 150 patients with cancer (median age, 66 years; 48.7% females), 1018 (2.8%) developed VTE. C-indices at 12 months ranged from 0.56 (95% CI, 0.54-0.58) for the 5-SNP to 0.60 (95% CI, 0.58-0.62) for the extended 297-SNP scores. The subdistribution hazard ratios ranged from 1.36 (95% CI, 1.19-1.56) for the 5-SNP to 1.90 (95% CI, 1.68-2.16) for the extended 297-SNP scores and were consistent after adjusting for cancer type. For the Khorana cancer type classification, the c-index was 0.60 (95% CI, 0.58-0.61), which increased to 0.65 (95% CI, 0.63-0.67, +0.05; 95% CI, 0.04-0.07) when combined with the extended 297-SNP score. CONCLUSION: These findings demonstrate that polygenic VTE risk scores can identify patients with cancer with a 1.9-fold higher VTE risk independent of cancer type. Combined clinical-genetic scores to improve cancer-associated VTE prediction should be evaluated further.

Treatment and prevention of cancer-associated thrombosis in the Netherlands: A national survey.

Background: In the recent years, numerous studies on the optimal treatment and prevention of cancer-associated venous thromboembolism (VTE) have been published, leading to updated (inter)national guidelines. These include direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) as the first-line treatment agent in general and the recommendation of primary thromboprophylaxis in selected ambulatory patients. Objectives: The objective of this study was to evaluate the clinical practice regarding treatment and prevention of VTE in patients with cancer in the Netherlands and practice variation among different specialties. Methods: An online survey was conducted between December 2021, and June 2022, among Dutch physicians (oncologists, hematologists, vascular medicine specialists, acute internal medicine specialists, and pulmonologists) treating patients with cancer, in which we explored the treatment of choice for cancer-associated VTE, the use of VTE risk stratification tools, and primary thromboprophylaxis. Results: A total of 222 physicians participated, of whom the majority (81%) used DOACs as a first-line agent for treating cancer-associated VTE. The treatment varied between the following specialties: hematologists and acute internal medicine specialists more often prescribed low-molecular-weight heparin than physicians of the other specialties (OR, 0.32; 95% CI, 0.13-0.80). The minimum duration of anticoagulant treatment was usually 3 to 6 months (87%), and treatment was extended when the malignancy was still active (98%). Regarding the prevention of cancer-associated VTE, no risk stratification tool was used. Three quarters of respondents never prescribed thromboprophylaxis to ambulatory patients, mostly because the thrombosis risk was not perceived high enough to justify prophylaxis. Conclusion: Dutch physicians largely adhere to the updated guidelines regarding the treatment of cancer-associated VTE but less to the recommendations for its prevention.

Platelet RNA sequencing for cancer screening in patients with unprovoked venous thromboembolism: a prospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Platelet RNA sequencing has been shown to accurately detect cancer in previous studies. OBJECTIVES: To compare the diagnostic accuracy of platelet RNA sequencing with standard-of-care limited cancer screening in patients with unprovoked venous thromboembolism (VTE). METHODS: Patients aged ≥40 years with unprovoked VTE were recruited at 13 centers and followed for 12 months for cancer. Participants underwent standard-of-care limited cancer screening, and platelet RNA sequencing analysis was performed centrally at study end for cases and selected controls. Sensitivity and specificity were calculated, using the predefined primary positivity threshold of 0.54 for platelet RNA sequencing aiming at 86% test sensitivity, and an additional predefined threshold of 0.89 aiming at 99% test specificity. RESULTS: A total of 476 participants were enrolled, of whom 25 (5.3%) were diagnosed with cancer during 12-month follow-up. For each cancer patient, 3 cancer-free patients were randomly selected for the analysis. The sensitivity of limited screening was 72% (95% CI, 52-86) at a specificity of 91% (95% CI, 82-95). The area under the receiver operator characteristic for platelet RNA sequencing was 0.54 (95% CI, 0.41-0.66). At the primary positivity threshold, all patients had a positive test, for a sensitivity estimated at 100% (95% CI, 87-99) and a specificity of 8% (95% CI, 3.7-16.4). At the secondary threshold, sensitivity was 68% (95% CI, 48-83; p value compared with limited screening 0.71) at a specificity of 36% (95% CI, 26-47). CONCLUSION: Platelet RNA sequencing had poor diagnostic accuracy for detecting occult cancer in patients with unprovoked VTE with the current algorithm.

Risk of venous thromboembolism and bleeding after major surgery for ovarian cancer: standard in-hospital versus extended duration of thromboprophylaxis.

BACKGROUND: Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is a frequent complication in patients with ovarian cancer after major surgery. Based on limited data, international guidelines recommend extended thromboprophylaxis for up to 28 days. OBJECTIVES: To assess the incidence of VTE and bleeding within 30 days following major surgery in patients with ovarian cancer and to evaluate the association between VTE and thromboprophylaxis duration. METHODS: This was a single-center, retrospective, "before-after" cohort study in patients with ovarian cancer undergoing major surgery. Before July 2019, the local protocol mandated a standard course of thromboprophylaxis during hospital stay only. From July 2019 onward, patients received extended thromboprophylaxis for 28 days. The cumulative incidences of VTE and major bleeding within 30 days after surgery were estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method, with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Cox regression analysis was performed to evaluate the association between thromboprophylaxis duration and VTE incidence. RESULTS: Between January 2018 and December 2020, 250 women were included, of which 118 (47.2%) received extended and 132 (52.8%) standard thromboprophylaxis. During follow-up, 12 patients developed VTE (cumulative incidence, 4.8%; 95% CI, 2.1-7.4) and 2 major bleeding (cumulative incidence 0.8%; 95% CI, 0.0-1.9). Compared with standard thromboprophylaxis, VTE incidence was numerically lower with extended duration of thromboprophylaxis (5/118 [4.2%] vs 7/132 [5.3%]) but not significantly different (hazard ratio, 0.80; 95% CI, 0.25-2.52). The risk of major bleeding was similar in both groups (1/118 [0.8%] vs 1/132 [0.8%]; hazard ratio, 1.12; 95% CI, 0.07-17.89). CONCLUSIONS: The cumulative VTE incidence in patients with ovarian cancer following major surgery was considerable. Extended thromboprophylaxis was safe and associated with a numerically lower risk of VTE but not significantly different.

Evaluation of the Khorana, PROTECHT, and 5-SNP scores for prediction of venous thromboembolism in patients with cancer.

BACKGROUND: The Khorana score is a validated tool to identify cancer patients at higher risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE). OBJECTIVE: We compared its predictive performance to that of the clinical PROTECHT and the polygenic 5-SNP scores in patients who participated in the Dutch CPCT-02 study. PATIENTS/METHODS: Data on VTE and its risk factors were retrospectively collected for 2729 patients with advanced stage solid tumors planned for systemic cancer treatment. Patients were followed for 6 months. Overall discriminatory performance of the scores was evaluated by time-dependent c-indices. The scores were additionally evaluated dichotomously in competing risk models. RESULTS: A total of 160 (5.9%) patients developed VTE during follow-up. Time-dependent c-indices at 6 months for the Khorana, PROTECHT, and 5-SNP scores were 0.57 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.55-0.60), 0.60 (95% CI: 0.57-0.62), and 0.54 (95% CI: 0.51-0.57), respectively. The dichotomous scores classified 9.6%, 16.8%, and 9.5% as high-risk, respectively. VTE risk was about 2-fold higher among high-risk patients than low-risk patients for the Khorana (subdistribution hazard ratio [SHR] 1.9, 95% CI: 1.3-3.0), PROTECHT (SHR 2.1, 95% CI: 1.5-3.0), and 5-SNP scores (SHR 1.7, 95% CI: 1.03-2.8). The sensitivity at 6 months was 16.6% (95% CI: 10.5-22.7), 28.9% (95% CI: 21.5-36.3), and 14.9% (95% CI: 8.5-21.2), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Performance of the PROTECHT or 5-SNP score was not superior to that of the Khorana score. The majority of cancer patients who developed VTE during 6-month follow-up were not identified by these scores. Future directions for studies on cancer-associated VTE prediction may include combined clinical-genetic scores.

Risk Assessment Models for Thrombosis and Anticoagulant-Related Bleeding in Ambulatory Cancer Patients.

Cancer patients have a high risk of developing venous thromboembolism and arterial thrombosis, along with an increased risk of anticoagulant-related bleeding with primary and secondary prophylaxis of cancer-associated thrombosis. Decisions on initiation, dosing, and duration of anticoagulant therapy for prevention and treatment of cancer-associated thrombosis are challenging, as clinicians have to balance patients' individual risk of (recurrent) thrombosis against the risk of bleeding complications. For this purpose, several dedicated risk assessment models for venous thromboembolism in cancer patients have been suggested. However, most of these scores perform poorly and have received limited to no validation. For bleeding and arterial thrombosis, no risk scores have been developed specifically for cancer patients, and treatment decisions remain based on clinical gestalt and rough and unstructured estimation of the risks. The aims of this review are to summarize the characteristics and performance of risk assessment scores for (recurrent) venous thromboembolism and discuss available data on risk assessment for bleeding and arterial thrombosis in the cancer population. This summary can help clinicians in daily practice to make a balanced decision when considering the use of risk assessment models for cancer-associated venous thromboembolism. Future research attempts should aim at improving risk assessment for arterial thrombosis and anticoagulant-related bleeding in cancer patients.