A Clinical-Genetic Risk Score for Predicting Cancer-Associated Venous Thromboembolism: A Development and Validation Study Involving Two Independent Prospective Cohorts.

PURPOSE: Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is a leading cause of death among patients with cancer. The Khorana score was developed for assessing the risk of VTE in outpatients with cancer receiving chemotherapy, but its accuracy in identifying patients at high risk has been questioned. The aim of this study was to develop and validate a clinical-genetic score that improves the assessment of VTE risk in oncology outpatients within 6 months of diagnosis. METHODS: The new score was developed using the data of 364 outpatients belonging to the Spanish ONCOTHROMB 12-01 population. In this cohort, clinical data associated with the risk of VTE were collected at the time of diagnosis, including the Khorana score. These patients were also genotyped for the 51 genetic variants known to be associated with VTE. Multivariate logistic regression was performed to determine the weight of each genetic and clinical variable in relation to VTE risk, allowing a clinical-genetic risk score (the ONCOTHROMB score) to be developed. The Khorana and the ONCOTHROMB scores were then compared via the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC), calibration, and the number of patients needed to treat. The new score was then validated in a study of 263 patients in the Vienna Cancer and Thrombosis Study population. RESULTS: Nine genetic variants, tumor site, TNM stage, and a body mass index of > 25 kg/m2 were found to be associated with VTE and were used to build the ONCOTHROMB score, which better predicted the overall risk of VTE than did the Khorana score (AUC, 0.781 v 0.580; P < .001). Similar AUC results were recorded in the validation study the Vienna Cancer and Thrombosis Study cohort involving patients with the same type of tumor (AUC for the ONCOTHROMB score v the Khorana score: 0.686 v 0.577; P < .001) and with all type of tumors (AUC for the ONCOTHROMB score v the Khorana score: 0.720 v 0.561; P < .0001). CONCLUSION: The ONCOTHROMB score for VTE risk in outpatients with cancer, which takes into account both clinical and genetic variables, better identifies patients who might benefit from primary thromboprophylaxis than does the Khorana score.

Genes Involved in Immune Reinduction May Constitute Biomarkers of Response for Metastatic Melanoma Patients Treated with Targeted Therapy.

Targeted therapy in metastatic melanoma often achieves a major tumour regression response and significant long-term survival via the release of antigens that reinduce immunocompetence. The biomarkers thus activated may guide the prediction of response, but this association and its mechanism have yet to be established. Blood samples were collected from nineteen consecutive patients with metastatic melanoma before, during, and after treatment with targeted therapy. Differential gene expression analysis was performed, which identified the genes involved in the treatment, both in the first evaluation of response and during progression. Although clinical characteristics of the patients were poorer than those obtained in pivotal studies, radiological responses were similar to those reported previously (objective response rate: 73.7%). In the first tumour assessment, the expression of some genes increased (CXCL-10, SERPING1, PDL1, and PDL2), while that of others decreased (ARG1, IL18R1, IL18RAP, IL1R1, ILR2, FLT3, SLC11A1, CD163, and S100A12). The analysis of gene expression in blood shows that some are activated and others inhibited by targeted therapy. This response pattern may provide biomarkers of the immune reinduction response, which could be used to study potential combination treatments. Nevertheless, further studies are needed to validate these results.

Multivariable clinical-genetic risk model for predicting venous thromboembolic events in patients with cancer.

BACKGROUND: Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is a leading cause of death among patients with cancer. Outpatients with cancer should be periodically assessed for VTE risk, for which the Khorana score is commonly recommended. However, it has been questioned whether this tool is sufficiently accurate at identifying patients who should receive thromboprophylaxis. The present work proposes a new index, TiC-Onco risk score to be calculated at the time of diagnosis of cancer, that examines patients' clinical and genetic risk factors for thrombosis. METHODS: We included 391 outpatients with a recent diagnosis of cancer and candidates for systemic outpatient chemotherapy. All were treated according to standard guidelines. The study population was monitored for 6 months, and VTEs were recorded. The Khorana and the TiC-Onco scores were calculated for each patient and their VTE predictive accuracy VTEs was compared. RESULTS: We recorded 71 VTEs. The TiC-Onco risk score was significantly better at predicting VTE than the Khorana score (AUC 0.73 vs. 0.58, sensitivity 49 vs. 22%, specificity 81 vs. 82%, PPV 37 vs. 22%, and NPV 88 vs. 82%). CONCLUSIONS: TiC-Onco risk score performed significantly better than Khorana score at identifying cancer patients at high risk of VTE who would benefit from personalised thromboprophylaxis.