Direct Oral Anticoagulants Versus Warfarin for Venous Thromboembolism Prophylaxis in Patients With Nephrotic Syndrome: A Retrospective Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: Evidence supporting venous thromboembolism (VTE) prophylaxis with direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) in patients with nephrotic syndrome (NS) is limited to case reports. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to compare bleeding and thromboembolic events in this population. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study was conducted in adults with NS initiated on a DOAC or warfarin for VTE prophylaxis between January 2013 and July 2021 within the Ochsner Health System. Patients with study drug exposure within the preceding 7 days, acute VTE within the preceding 6 months, or ≤7 days of study drug exposure were excluded. The primary outcome was the composite rate of major bleeding and clinically relevant nonmajor bleeding. Secondary outcomes included time to major bleeding and rate of new thromboembolic events. This study was approved by the Ochsner Health System Institutional Review Board. RESULTS: Twenty-five DOAC and 19 warfarin patients were included. The primary outcome occurred in 8% vs 26.3% (P = 0.21) of patients treated with a DOAC or warfarin, respectively, and was driven by major bleeding (4% vs 21%, P = 0.25). Other secondary outcomes were similar between cohorts. The study was limited by a small sample size. CONCLUSION AND RELEVANCE: Use of DOACs for VTE prophylaxis resulted in a nonstatistically significant, but clinically relevant lower rate of major bleeding compared to warfarin. This study provides comparative data showing safe and effective use of DOACs in patients with NS. Prospective, randomized studies are needed to confirm results.

Timing of steroid initiation and response rates to immune checkpoint inhibitors in metastatic cancer.

BACKGROUND: Corticosteroids (CS) are the mainstay of immune-related adverse effect (irAE) management, as well as for other indications in cancer treatment. Previous studies evaluating whether CS affect immune checkpoint inhibitor (CPI) efficacy compared patients receiving CS versus no CS. However, there is a paucity of clinical data evaluating the timing of concomitant CS and CPI efficacy. METHODS: We retrospectively collected data from patients who received CS during CPI treatment at a single institution. Patients were in two cohorts based on timing of initiation of CS (≥2 months vs <2 months after initiating CPI). Patient characteristics, irAEs, cancer type, treatment type, treatment response/progression per RECIST V.1.1, and survival data were collected. Kaplan-Meier and Cox proportional hazard regression methods estimated HRs for the primary endpoint of progression-free survival (PFS) along with overall survival (OS). RESULTS: We identified 247 patients with metastatic cancer who received CS concurrently with CPIs. The median time on CS was 1.8 months. After adjusting for treatment type, tumor type, brain metastases, and irAEs, those treated with CS ≥2 months after starting CPI had a statistically significant longer PFS (HR=0.30, p<0.001), and OS (HR 0.34, p<0.0001) than those who received CS <2 months after starting CPI. Objective response rate (ORR) for patients on CS ≥2 months was 39.8%, versus ORR for patients <2 months was 14.7% (p value =<0.001) CONCLUSION: Our results suggest that early use of CS during CPI treatment significantly hinders CPI efficacy. This data needs to be validated prospectively. Future studies should focus on the immune mechanisms by which CSs affect T-cell function early in the CPI treatment course.