Intracranial hemorrhage with direct oral anticoagulants in patients with brain tumors.

Essentials Intracranial hemorrhage (ICH) is common in patients with brain tumors. We compared rates of ICH with DOACs and low molecular weight heparin. DOACs were associated with a lower incidence of ICH in primary brain tumors. DOACs appear safe to administer to patients with brain tumors. SUMMARY: Background Direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) are efficacious in the treatment of cancer-associated thrombosis but are associated with an increased risk of hemorrhage compared with low-molecular-weight heparin in certain malignancies. Whether the DOACs increase the incidence of intracranial hemorrhage (ICH) in patients with brain tumors is not established. Objectives To determine the cumulative incidence of ICH in DOACs compared with Low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) in patients with brain tumors and venous thromboembolism. Patients and methods A retrospective comparative cohort study was performed. Radiographic images for all ICH events were reviewed and the primary endpoint was cumulative incidence of ICH at 12 months following initiation of anticoagulation. Results and conclusions A total of 172 patients with brain tumors were evaluated (42 DOAC and 131 LMWH). In the primary brain tumor cohort (n = 67), the cumulative incidence of any ICH was 0% in patients receiving DOACs vs. 36.8% (95% confidence interval [CI], 22.3-51.3%) in those treated with LMWH, with a major ICH incidence of 18.2% (95% CI, 8.4-31.0). In the brain metastases cohort (n = 105), DOACs did not increase the risk of any ICH relative to enoxaparin, with an incidence of 27.8% (95% CI, 5.5-56.7%) compared with 52.9% (95% CI, 37.4-66.2%). Similarly, DOAC did not increase the incidence of major ICH in brain metastases, with a cumulative incidence 11.1% (95% CI, 0.5-40.6%) vs. 17.8% (95% CI, 10.2-27.2%). We conclude that DOACs are not associated with an increased incidence of ICH relative to LMWH in patients with brain metastases or primary brain tumors.

A meta-analysis of intracranial hemorrhage in patients with brain tumors receiving therapeutic anticoagulation.

UNLABELLED: Essentials Clinicians may be hesitant to administer anticoagulation in the setting of brain metastases or glioma. In this meta-analysis, we identified nine retrospective cohort studies that met inclusion criteria. Anticoagulation did not increase the risk of intracranial hemorrhage in brain metastasis. In the setting of glioma, anticoagulation resulted in 3.8-fold increase in intracranial hemorrhage. SUMMARY: Background Venous thromboembolism commonly occurs in patients with brain tumors. Because of the high rate of spontaneous intracranial hemorrhage (ICH), the safety of therapeutic anticoagulation is commonly questioned. Objective We performed a meta-analysis to evaluate whether therapeutic anticoagulation is associated with an increased risk of intracranial hemorrhage in patients with brain tumors. Patients/Methods A systematic literature search strategy was conducted. Summary statistics for ICH were obtained by calculating the odds ratio using a random effects model and heterogeneity across studies was estimated by the I(2) statistic. Results A total of nine retrospective cohort studies met the criteria for inclusion. The odds ratio (OR) for ICH in patients receiving therapeutic anticoagulation versus those who did not receive anticoagulation was 2.13 (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.00-4.56; I(2) = 46%). In studies evaluating anticoagulation in patients with brain metastases, there was no apparent increased risk of ICH (OR, 1.07; 95% CI, 0.61-1.88; I(2) = 0%). However, in patients with glioma there was an increase in risk of ICH associated with the administration of anticoagulation (OR, 3.75; 95% CI, 1.42-9.95; I(2) = 33%). Conclusions The risk of ICH in patients with brain tumors receiving therapeutic anticoagulation depends on the diagnosis of primary or metastatic brain tumors. Although anticoagulation was not associated with an increased risk of ICH in the setting of brain metastasis, its use resulted in a greater than 3-fold increased risk of ICH in patients with glioma.

Thrombosis and ELISA optical density values in hospitalized patients with heparin-induced thrombocytopenia.

The natural history of heparin-induced thrombocytopenia (HIT) in the absence of thrombosis was previously established using functional assays for confirmation of diagnosis (e.g. 14C serotonin release assay). An enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) that detects the presence of antibodies directed against the heparin-platelet factor-4 (PF4) complex has largely replaced functional assays in many medical centers. Although the ELISA is highly sensitive for detecting HIT antibodies, its usefulness for predicting thrombotic outcomes has not been clearly established. We performed a retrospective chart review of all hospitalized patients at a university hospital who tested seropositive for HIT by a commercial ELISA during 2001 and 2002. A total of 63 inpatients were identified as HIT positive by ELISA. Forty-eight patients had no apparent HIT-associated thrombosis at the time of HIT seropositivity (i.e. isolated HIT) and only one was treated prophylactically with a direct thrombin inhibitor. The 30-day thrombosis rate for patients with isolated HIT was 17% (eight of 48). Higher ELISA optical density (OD) measurements correlated significantly with thrombosis (1.41 +/- 0.87 vs. 0.79 +/- 0.46, P <0.001). Patients with isolated HIT and an OD measurement of > or = 1.0 demonstrated nearly a 6-fold increased risk of thrombosis compared with those with OD values between 0.4 and 0.99 (odds ratio 5.74, 95% confidence interval 1.73, 19.0; absolute rate of thrombosis, 36% vs. 9%, respectively, P=0.07). We conclude that in hospitalized patients with isolated HIT, the presence of heparin-PF4 antibodies detected by ELISA was associated with a significant risk of subsequent thrombosis and higher ELISA values were observed among patients suffering thrombotic events.

A microcomputer program for calculating cell population doubling time in vitro and in vivo.

Determination of the doubling time for a population of cells can involve tedious calculations. We have developed computer software for MS-DOS microcomputers to expedite the analysis of tumor cell growth in vitro and in vivo. This program, DOUBLE-TIME, assists in the collection of cell numbers into a database and calculates the doubling time for a population of cells from the plot of cell growth over time. For experiments where tumor mass is measured in vivo, the software collects measurements of tumor size, calculates tumor volume (mass), generates growth curves for tumor volume change over time, and determines the doubling time of the tumor and the mean for multiple tumors. DOUBLE-TIME plots both total and viable cell numbers over time, calculates standard error of the doubling time, and the doubling time for a selected portion of a growth curve. This software also automates the cell counting process with a software-generated cell counter that allows cell counts to be tallied directly into the computer via a mouse.

Assessing the risk of venous thromboembolic events in women taking progestin-only contraception: a meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the risk of venous thromboembolic events associated with the use of progestin-only contraception and whether that risk differs with the mode of drug delivery (oral, intrauterine, or depot injection). DESIGN: Systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials and observational studies. DATA SOURCES: Pubmed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and reference lists of relevant reviews. STUDY SELECTION: Randomised controlled trials and case-control, cohort, and cross sectional studies with venous thromboembolic outcome for progestin-only contraception reported relative to a non-hormone comparator group. DATA EXTRACTION: Data were extracted by two independent investigators, and consensus for inclusion was reached after assessment by additional investigators. RESULTS: Among the 2022 unique references identified by all searches, eight observational studies fulfilled inclusion criteria. A total of 147 women across all studies were diagnosed with a venous thromboembolic event while taking progestin-only contraception, and the summary measure for the adjusted relative risk of a venous thromboembolic episode for users versus non-users of a progestin-only contraceptive was, based on the random effects model, 1.03 (95% CI 0.76 to 1.39). Subgroup analysis confirmed there was no association between venous thromboembolic risk and progestin-only pills (relative risk 0.90 (0.57 to 1.45)) or a progestin intrauterine device (0.61 (0.24 to 1.53)). The relative risk of a venous thromboembolic event for users of an injectable progestin versus non-users was 2.67 (1.29 to 5.53). CONCLUSIONS: Published data assessing the risk of venous thromboembolism in women prescribed progestin-only contraception are limited. In this meta-analysis of eight observational studies, the use of progestin-only contraception was not associated with an increased risk of venous thromboembolism compared with non-users of hormonal contraception. The potential association between injectable progestins and thrombosis requires further study.

Low molecular weight heparin to achieve live birth following unexplained pregnancy loss: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: The management of recurrent pregnancy loss is uncertain. Some cohort studies have identified an association between inherited thrombophilias and recurrent or late non-recurrent pregnancy loss, which has prompted investigators to evaluate the benefit of low molecular weight heparin (LWMH) to achieve live birth. A similar benefit for LMWH has also been proposed independent of thrombophilia status. OBJECTIVE AND METHODS: We conducted a systematic review of randomized controlled trials to assess the benefit of LMWH in achieving live birth for women with a history of recurrent or late non-recurrent pregnancy loss in the absence of antiphospholipid antibodies. RESULTS: For the five studies that satisfied the eligibility criteria, the risk ratio of live birth for women with a history of pregnancy loss treated with LWMH compared with control ranged from 0.95 to 3.00. There was considerable heterogeneity among studies in terms of treatment effect (Q-value was 41.7, P=0.000, and I2=90.4%) independent of thrombophilia status. There was also a wide variation among all studies in terms of definition of early or late pregnancy loss, thrombophilic risk factors, and number of prior pregnancy losses. CONCLUSION: There is a trend for increased live births when using LWMH for the prevention of recurrent pregnancy loss. Currently, there is insufficient evidence to support the routine use of LWMH to improve pregnancy outcomes in women with a history of pregnancy loss. Not only are additional studies necessary but standardized criteria for trials evaluating the benefit of an intervention in recurrent pregnancy loss should be established.