Prothrombin complex concentrate for emergency surgery in patients on oral Xa-inhibitors.

BACKGROUND: It is uncertain whether prothrombin complex concentrate (PCC) improves hemostasis in patients on treatment with oral factor Xa-inhibitors (XaI) who require emergency surgery. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate whether, in patients with therapeutic levels of oral XaI, preoperative PCC prevents excessive bleeding during and after emergency surgery and is not associated with thrombotic complications. METHODS: We conducted a prospective cohort study wherein a fixed 2000 IU dose of 4-factor PCC was given to patients taking oral XaI with plasma XaI levels of at least 75 ng/mL before the emergency surgery with an expected blood loss of at least 50 mL. Patients were followed for 30 days. The primary efficacy outcome was the incidence of normal or mildly abnormal surgical hemostasis, as assessed by the surgeon; primary safety outcome was the incidence of thromboembolic events within 7 days. RESULTS: We included 20 patients, of which 50% were female, on apixaban (75%) or rivaroxaban (25%) with median XaI level of 128 ng/mL (range, 77-497 ng/mL). The median duration of surgery was 2 hours 42 minutes (range, 15 minutes to 8 hours 17 minutes). Normal or mildly abnormal hemostasis was observed in 16 patients (80%); 2 patients had moderately abnormal and 2 had severely abnormal hemostasis, 1 each of those was considered due to local or technical factors. There were 4 deaths (20%) secondary to underlying disease and 1 incidental pulmonary embolism in a patient with cancer. CONCLUSION: A fixed dose of PCC appears to control hemostasis in patients with therapeutic plasma levels of apixaban or rivaroxaban requiring emergency surgery.

Inhibitors in hemophilia: association with surgery plans and outcomes in a retrospective cohort study.

Background: The development of antibodies (inhibitors) to clotting factors compromises the management of hemophilia A and B, resulting in resistance to clotting factor replacement and, in many cases, the need for bypassing agents to achieve hemostasis. Objectives: To evaluate the association between the presence of inhibitors and achievement of perioperative hemostasis, development of complications, and presurgical plan deviations. Methods: We conducted a retrospective study using data from the Indiana Hemophilia and Thrombosis Center surgical database (1998-2019). Associations between perioperative outcomes and inhibitor status were assessed while controlling for patient and procedural characteristics. Results: A total of 1492 surgeries were performed in 539 persons with hemophilia, with 72 procedures performed in 20 patients with inhibitors (15 with hemophilia A; 5 with hemophilia B). High-responding inhibitors (>5 BU/mL) were present in 27 procedures, low-responding inhibitors (≤5 BU/mL) were present in in 13 procedures, and 32 procedures were performed in patients with historically persistent inhibitors. Adjusting for age, diagnosis, surgery setting, hemostatic agent, data collection period, and surgery type (major/minor), inhibitors were associated with a higher risk of inadequate perioperative hemostasis (33.4% vs 8.6%; adjusted relative risk [adjRR], 3.78; 95% CI, 1.89-7.56; P < .001). Reported complications include hemorrhage, fever, pain, thrombosis, and infections. Complications were not statistically different based on inhibitor status (31.7% vs 14.6%; adjRR, 1.25; 95% CI, 0.63-2.49; P = .526). Presurgical plan deviations (eg, hemostatic medication dose adjustments, procedure rescheduling, and changes in the length of postoperative hospitalization) occurred more frequently in surgeries involving inhibitors (70.8 vs 39.5%; adjRR, 1.47; 95% CI, 1.12-1.93; P = .005). Conclusion: Inhibitors are associated with higher risks of adverse perioperative outcomes. Strategies to address inhibitor development should be prioritized to avoid undesirable perioperative outcomes.

American Society of Hematology 2023 guidelines for management of venous thromboembolism: thrombophilia testing.

Hereditary and acquired thrombophilia are risk factors for venous thromboembolism (VTE). Whether testing helps guide management decisions is controversial. These evidence-based guidelines from the American Society of Hematology (ASH) intend to support decision making about thrombophilia testing. ASH formed a multidisciplinary guideline panel covering clinical and methodological expertise and minimizing bias from conflicts of interest. The McMaster University GRADE Centre provided logistical support, performed systematic reviews, and created evidence profiles and evidence-to-decision tables. The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation approach (GRADE) was used. Recommendations were subject to public comment. The panel agreed on 23 recommendations regarding thrombophilia testing and associated management. Nearly all recommendations are based on very low certainty in the evidence due to modeling assumptions. The panel issued a strong recommendation against testing the general population before starting combined oral contraceptives (COCs) and conditional recommendations for thrombophilia testing in the following scenarios: (a) patients with VTE associated with nonsurgical major transient or hormonal risk factors; (b) patients with cerebral or splanchnic venous thrombosis, in settings where anticoagulation would otherwise be discontinued; (c) individuals with a family history of antithrombin, protein C, or protein S deficiency when considering thromboprophylaxis for minor provoking risk factors and for guidance to avoid COCs/hormone replacement therapy; (d) pregnant women with a family history of high-risk thrombophilia types; and (e) patients with cancer at low or intermediate risk of thrombosis and with a family history of VTE. For all other questions, the panel provided conditional recommendations against testing for thrombophilia.

Utilization of a surgical database to provide care and assess perioperative treatment and outcomes in patients with bleeding disorders.

OBJECTIVES: To describe the Indiana Hemophilia and Thrombosis Center (IHTC) surgical database, its key components, and exploratory analyses of surgeries conducted between 1998 and 2019. METHODS: Surgical data across bleeding disorders collected retrospectively (1998-2006) and prospectively (2006-2019) were analyzed. Perioperative hemostasis, complications, and surgical plan deviations were compared by bleeding disorder diagnosis and data collection period. RESULTS: Within the 21-year period, 3246 procedures were conducted in 1413 patients with a diagnosis of von Willebrand disease (vWD), hemophilia A (HA), hemophilia B (HB), and other bleeding disorders. Majority of the procedures were minor (63.3%), and median number of surgeries per patient was 1 (range: 1-22). Adequate perioperative hemostasis was achieved in 90.9%, complications occurred in 13.6%, and surgical plan deviations occurred in 31.3% of procedures. Inadequate perioperative hemostasis and surgical plan deviations occurred more frequently in procedures involving HB compared with other bleeding disorders. Complications were not significantly different across bleeding disorders (p = .164). The prospective data collection period was associated with higher rates of hemostatic efficacy (92.4% vs. 88.3%; p < .001), complications (14.3% vs. 12.3%; p < .001), and plan deviations (34.2% vs. 25.1%; p < .001). CONCLUSION: The surgical database is an important resource in surgical management in patients with bleeding disorders. Further evaluation will facilitate use for the development of predictive models and principles of care.

Clotting factor concentrates for preventing bleeding and bleeding-related complications in previously treated individuals with haemophilia A or B.

BACKGROUND: The hallmark of severe hemophilia (A or B) is recurrent bleeding into joints and soft tissues with progressive joint damage, despite on-demand treatment. Prophylaxis has long been used, but not universally adopted, because of medical, psychosocial, and cost controversies. OBJECTIVES: To determine the effectiveness of clotting factor concentrate prophylaxis in managing previously-treated individuals with hemophilia A or B. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Cystic Fibrosis and Genetic Disorders Group's Coagulopathies Trials Register, compiled from electronic database searches and handsearching of journals and conference abstract books. In addition, we searched MEDLINE and Embase and online trial registries. Most recent search of Group's Coagulopathies Trials Register: 24 February 2021. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-RCTs evaluating people with hemophilia A or hemophilia B, who were previously treated with clotting factor concentrates to manage their hemophilia. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two authors independently reviewed trials for eligibility, assessed risk of bias and extracted data. The authors used the GRADE criteria to assess the certainty of the evidence. MAIN RESULTS: Ten trials (including 608 participants) were eligible for inclusion. Eight of the trials (477 participants) had arms comparing two or more prophylactic regimens to one another and four of the trials (n = 258) compared prophylaxis to on-demand treatment (two trials had multiple arms and were included in both comparisons). Comparison of two or more prophylactic regimens For trials comparing one prophylaxis regimen to another, given the heterogeneity of the data, none of the data were pooled for this comparison. Considering the individual trials, three trials reported the primary outcome of joint bleeding, and none showed a dfference between dosing regimens (low-certainty evidence). For the secondary outcome of total bleeding events, prophylaxis with a twice-weekly regimen of FIX likely results in reduced total bleeds compared to a once-a-week regimen of the same dose, mean difference (MD) 11.2 (5.81 to 16.59) (one trial, 10 participants, low-certainty evidence). Transient low-titer anti-FVIII inhibitors were reported in one of the trials. Blood-transmitted infections were not identified. Other adverse events reported include hypersensitivity, oedema, and weight gain. These were, however, rare and unrelated to study drugs (very low-certainty evidence). Comparison of prophylactic and on-demand regimens Four of the trials (258 participants) had arms that compared prophylaxis to on-demand treatment. Prophylaxis may result in a large decrease in the number of joint bleeds compared to on-demand treatment, MD -30.34 (95% CI -46.95 to -13.73) (two trials, 164 participants, low-certainty evidence). One of these trials (84 participants) also reported the long-term effects of prophylaxis versus on-demand therapy showing improved joint function, quality of life, and pain; but no differences between groups in joint structure when assessed by magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). In one trial (84 participants) validated measures for joint health and pain assessment showed that prophylaxis likely improves joint health compared to an on-demand regimen with an estimated change difference of 0.94 points (95% CI 0.23 to 1.65) and improves total pain scores, MD -17.20 (95% CI -27.48 to -6.92 (moderate-certainty evidence). Two trials (131 participants) reported that prophylaxis likely results in a slight increase in adverse events, risk ratio 1.71 (1.24 to 2.37) (moderate-certainty evidence). No inhibitor development and blood-transmitted infections were identified. Overall, the certainty of the body of evidence was judged to be low because of different types of bias that could have altered the effect.   AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: There is evidence from RCTs that prophylaxis, as compared to on-demand treatment, may reduce bleeding frequency in previously-treated people with hemophilia. Prophylaxis may also improve joint function, pain and quality of life, even though this does not translate into a detectable improvement of articular damage when assessed by MRI.  When comparing two different prophylaxis regimens, no significant differences in terms of protection from bleeding were found. Dose optimization could, however, result in improved efficacy. Given the heterogeneity of the data, pooled estimates were not obtained for most comparisons.  Well-designed RCTs and prospective observational controlled studies with standardised definitions and measurements are needed to establish the optimal and most cost-effective treatment regimens.

Recommended primary outcomes for clinical trials evaluating hemostatic blood products and agents in patients with bleeding: Proceedings of a National Heart Lung and Blood Institute and US Department of Defense Consensus Conference.

ABSTRACT: High-quality evidence guiding optimal transfusion and other supportive therapies to reduce bleeding is needed to improve outcomes for patients with either severe bleeding or hemostatic disorders that are associated with poor outcomes. Alongside challenges in performing high-quality clinical trials in patient populations who are at risk of bleeding or who are actively bleeding, the interpretation of research evaluating hemostatic agents has been limited by inconsistency in the choice of primary trial outcomes. This lack of standardization of primary endpoints or outcomes decreases the ability of clinicians to assess the validity of endpoints and compare research results across studies, impairs meta-analytic efforts, and, ultimately, delays the translation of research results into clinical practice. To address this challenge, an international panel of experts was convened by the National Heart Lung and Blood Institute and the US Department of Defense on September 23 and 24, 2019, to develop expert opinion, consensus-based recommendations for primary clinical trial outcomes for pivotal trials in pediatric and adult patients with six categories in various clinical settings. This publication documents the conference proceedings from the workshop funded by the National Heart Lung and Blood Institute and the US Department of Defense that consolidated expert opinion regarding clinically meaningful outcomes across a wide range of disciplines to provide guidance for outcomes of future trials of hemostatic products and agents for patients with active bleeding.

Extended half-life factor VIII concentrates in adults with hemophilia A: Comparative pharmacokinetics of two products.

BACKGROUND: The use of pharmacokinetic (PK) studies to help design personalized prophylaxis regimens for factor VIII (FVIII) concentrate in individuals with hemophilia A has been recognized for many years but only became practical for routine clinical use with the availability of web-accessible population PK applications based on Bayesian analysis. OBJECTIVE: To compare PK variables using population PK studies done on 2 extended half-life recombinant FVIII concentrates in 23 individuals with hemophilia A after switching from one product to the other. METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed PK parameters derived from the Web-Accessible Population Pharmacokinetic Service-Hemophilia (WAPPS-HEMO) application on 23 individuals with severe or moderately severe hemophilia A who were required to switch from recombinant FVIII Fc (Eloctate; Biogen, Cambridge, MA, USA) to recombinant antihemophilic factor PEGylated (Adynovate; Takeda Pharmaceutical Company, Osaka, Japan) between 2016 and 2017. RESULTS: There were minor PK differences between Eloctate and Adynovate, but some parameters did reach statistical significance, namely in vivo recovery (mean, 2.73 IU/dL per IU/kg vs 2.41 IU/dL per IU/kg), clearance (mean, 0.163 mL/h vs 0.194 mL/h), and volume of distribution at steady state (mean, 42.5 ml/kg vs 49.8 mL/kg). Smaller nonsignificant trends toward higher values for Adynovate were seen in terminal half-life, area under the curve, and predicted times to 5% and 1% residual FVIII after infusion. CONCLUSION: Population PK analysis revealed differences between the two extended half-life FVIII concentrates, reaching significance for in vivo recovery, clearance, and volume of distribution.

Age-sex specific pulmonary embolism-related mortality in the USA and Canada, 2000-18: an analysis of the WHO Mortality Database and of the CDC Multiple Cause of Death database.

BACKGROUND: Pulmonary embolism (PE)-related mortality is decreasing in Europe. However, time trends in the USA and Canada remain uncertain because the most recent analyses of PE-related mortality were published in the early 2000s. METHODS: For this retrospective epidemiological study, we accessed medically certified vital registration data from the WHO Mortality Database (USA and Canada, 2000-17) and the Multiple Cause of Death database produced by the Division of Vital Statistics of the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC; US, 2000-18). We investigated contemporary time trends in PE-related mortality in the USA and Canada and the prevalence of conditions contributing to PE-related mortality reported on the death certificates. We also estimated PE-related mortality by age group and sex. A subgroup analysis by race was performed for the USA. FINDINGS: In the USA, the age-standardised annual mortality rate (PE as the underlying cause) decreased from 6·0 deaths per 100 000 population (95% CI 5·9-6·1) in 2000 to 4·4 deaths per 100 000 population (4·3-4·5) in 2006. Thereafter, it continued to decrease to 4·1 deaths per 100 000 population (4·0-4·2) in women in 2017 and plateaued at 4·5 deaths per 100 000 population (4·4-4·7) in men in 2017. Among adults aged 25-64 years, it increased after 2006. The median age at death from PE decreased from 73 years to 68 years (2000-18). The prevalence of cancer, respiratory diseases, and infections as a contributing cause of PE-related death increased in all age categories from 2000 to 2018. The annual age-standardised PE-related mortality was consistently higher by up to 50% in Black individuals than in White individuals; these rates were approximately 50% higher in White individuals than in those of other races. In Canada, the annual age-standardised mortality rate from PE as the underlying cause of death decreased from 4·7 deaths per 100 000 population (4·4-5·0) in 2000 to 2·6 deaths per 100 000 population (2·4-2·8) in 2017; this decline slowed after 2006 across age groups and sexes. INTERPRETATION: After 2006, the initially decreasing PE-related mortality rates in North America progressively reached a plateau in Canada, while a rebound increase was observed among young and middle-aged adults in the USA. These findings parallel recent upward trends in mortality from other cardiovascular diseases and might reflect increasing inequalities in the exposure to risk factors and access to health care. FUNDING: None.

Evaluating prophylactic heparin in ambulatory patients with solid tumours: a systematic review and individual participant data meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Study-level meta-analyses provide high-certainty evidence that heparin reduces the risk of symptomatic venous thromboembolism for patients with cancer; however, whether the benefits and harms associated with heparin differ by cancer type is unclear. This individual participant data meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials examines the effect of heparin on survival, venous thromboembolism, and bleeding in patients with cancer in general and by type. METHODS: In this systematic review and meta-analysis we searched MEDLINE, Embase, and The Cochrane Library for randomised controlled trials comparing parenteral anticoagulants with placebo or standard care in ambulatory patients with solid tumours and no indication for anticoagulation published from the inception of each database to January 14, 2017, and updated it on May 14, 2020, without language restrictions. We calculated the effect of parenteral anticoagulant administration on all-cause mortality, venous thromboembolism occurrence, and bleeding related outcomes through multivariable hierarchical models with patient-level variables as fixed effects and a categorical trial variable as a random effect, adjusting for age, cancer type, and metastatic status. Interaction terms were tested to investigate effects in predefined subgroups. This study is registered with PROSPERO, CRD42013003526. FINDINGS: We obtained individual participant data from 14 of 20 eligible randomised controlled trials (8278 [79%] of 10 431 participants; 4139 included in the low-molecular-weight heparin group and 4139 in the control group). Meta-analysis showed an adjusted relative risk (RR) of mortality at 1 year of 0·99 (95% CI 0·93-1·06) and a hazard ratio of 1·01 (95% CI 0·96-1·07). The number of patients with venous thromboembolic events was 158 (4·0%) of 3958 with available data in the low-molecular-weight heparin group compared with 279 (7·1%) of 3957 in the control group. Major bleeding events occurred in 71 (1·7%) of 4139 patients in the control population and 88 (2·1%) in the low-molecular-weight heparin group, and minor bleeding events in 478 (12·1%) of 3945 patients with available data in the control group and 652 (16·6%) of 3937 patients in the low-molecular-weight heparin group. The adjusted RR was 0·58 (95% CI 0·47-0·71) for venous thromboembolism, 1·27 (0·92-1·74) for major bleeding, and 1·34 (1·19-1·51) for minor bleeding. Prespecified subgroup analysis of venous thromboembolism occurrence by cancer type identified the most certain benefit from heparin treatment in patients with lung cancer (RR 0·59 [95% CI 0·42-0·81]), which dominated the overall reduction in venous thromboembolism. Certainty of the evidence for the outcomes ranged from moderate to high. INTERPRETATION: Low-molecular-weight heparin reduces risk of venous thromboembolism without increasing risk of major bleeding compared with placebo or standard care in patients with solid tumours, but it does not improve survival. FUNDING: Canadian Institutes of Health Research.

Risk models for VTE and bleeding in medical inpatients: systematic identification and expert assessment.

Risk assessment models (RAMs) for venous thromboembolism (VTE) and bleeding in hospitalized medical patients inform appropriate use of thromboprophylaxis. Our aim was to use a novel approach for selecting risk factors for VTE and bleeding to be included in RAMs. First, we used the results of a systematic review of all candidate factors. Second, we used the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) approach to assess the certainty of the evidence for the identified factors. Third, we using a structured approach to select factors to develop the RAMs, by building on clinical and methodological expertise. The expert panel made judgments on whether to include, potentially include, or exclude risk factors, according to domains of the GRADE approach and the Delphi method. The VTE RAM included age >60 years, previous VTE, acute infections, immobility, acute paresis, active malignancy, critical illness, and known thrombophilia. The bleeding RAM included age ≥65 years, renal failure, thrombocytopenia, active gastroduodenal ulcers, hepatic disease, recent bleeding, and critical illness. We identified acute infection as a factor that was not considered in widely used RAMs. Also, we identified factors that require further research to confirm or refute their importance in a VTE RAM (eg, D-dimer). We excluded autoimmune disease which is included in the IMPROVE (International Medical Prevention Registry on Venous Thromboembolism) bleeding RAM. Our results also suggest that sex, malignancy, and use of central venous catheters (factors in the IMPROVE bleeding RAM) require further research. In conclusion, our study presents a novel approach to systematically identifying and assessing risk factors to be included or further explored during RAM development.

The Khorana score for prediction of venous thromboembolism in cancer patients: An individual patient data meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Oncology guidelines suggest using the Khorana score to select ambulatory cancer patients receiving chemotherapy for primary venous thromboembolism (VTE) prevention, but its performance in different cancers remains uncertain. OBJECTIVE: To examine the performance of the Khorana score in assessing 6-month VTE risk, and the efficacy and safety of low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) among high-risk Khorana score patients. METHODS: This individual patient data meta-analysis evaluated (ultra)-LMWH in patients with solid cancer using data from seven randomized controlled trials. RESULTS: A total of 3293 patients from the control groups with an available Khorana score had lung (n = 1913; 58%), colorectal (n = 452; 14%), pancreatic (n = 264; 8%), gastric (n = 201; 6%), ovarian (n = 184; 56%), breast (n = 164; 5%), brain (n = 84; 3%), or bladder cancer (n = 31; 1%). The 6-month VTE incidence was 9.8% among high-risk Khorana score patients and 6.4% among low-to-intermediate-risk patients (odds ratio [OR], 1.6; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.1-2.2). The dichotomous Khorana score performed differently in lung cancer patients (OR 1.1; 95% CI, 0.72-1.7) than in the group with other cancer types (OR 3.2; 95% CI, 1.8-5.6; Pinteraction  = .002). Among high-risk patients, LMWH decreased the risk of VTE by 64% compared with controls (OR 0.36; 95% CI, 0.22-0.58), without increasing the risk of major bleeding (OR 1.1; 95% CI, 0.59-2.1). CONCLUSION: The Khorana score was unable to stratify patients with lung cancer based on their VTE risk. Among those with other cancer types, a high-risk score was associated with a three-fold increased risk of VTE compared with a low-to-intermediate risk score. Thromboprophylaxis was effective and safe in patients with a high-risk Khorana score.

Psychological interventions for people with hemophilia.

BACKGROUND: Managing hemophilia is challenging both in terms of medical treatment and its broad impact on many aspects of the individual's life, including self-perception. Several psychosocial issues are potentially relevant in the clinical management of hemophilia, including it being a chronic and incurable condition; e.g. people with hemophilia must adapt to optimally interact with peers and to practice sports - even choosing a sport represents an issue for perceived limitations, expectations and cultural influences on the individual and their family. People with hemophilia can react by denying their condition and its manifestations and not adhering to treatment. Due to the complexity of relationships surrounding genetic diseases, parents and relatives may have their own issues that contribute to making life easier or more difficult for the person with hemophilia. Anxiety, sadness and depression resulting in mental health disorders are reported in this population and may influence quality of life (QoL) depending on cultural background, religious beliefs, family support and other variables. OBJECTIVES: Primarily to assess the effectiveness of psychological therapies for improving the ability of people with hemophilia to cope with their chronic condition. SEARCH METHODS: We aimed to identify trials from the Cochrane Cystic Fibrosis and Genetic Disorders Group's Coagulopathies Trials Register, Embase and PsycINFO, CINAHL, MEDLINE and trial registries. We searched reference lists of included publications. Most recent search of the Group's register: 13 June 2019. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-RCTs in people with hemophilia of any age or gender, type A or B, any severity, with or without inhibitors, with or without HIV or hepatitis C virus. All psychological interventions for promoting emotional, intellectual and spiritual wellness. Individual, group or family group therapy interventions were eligible. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We independently assessed trials, extracted data and assessed the risk of bias and assessed the quality of the evidence using GRADE. MAIN RESULTS: Seven trials were included (362 participants randomized, data from 264 participants available for analysis); six of parallel design and one a partial cross-over design. One multicenter trial was conducted in Canada; the remaining six were single centre undertaken in the UK, USA, Iran and in the Netherlands. All trials had a high risk of bias for participant blinding and use of patient-reported outcomes. Evidence was retrieved on four interventions: psycho-education (DVD plus information booklet versus information booklet alone; computerised learning versus no intervention); cognitive therapy (auto-hypnosis (self-hypnosis) versus control); and behavioural therapy (relaxation (progressive or self control) versus no treatment). We also aimed to assess psychodynamic therapy and systemic therapy, but no trials were identified. Heterogeneity of the outcome measures and measurements precluded meta-analyses. No trial reported the cost of the psychological intervention and family adjustment. DVD plus information booklet compared to information booklet alone One trial (108 participants) showed coping strategies may lower pre-contemplation scores and negative thoughts, mean difference (MD) -0.24 (95%CI -0.48 - 0.00, low-certainty evidence), however, other measures of coping strategies in the same trial suggest little or no difference between groups, e.g. contemplation, MD (-0.09, 95%CI -0.32 - 0.14, low-certainty evidence). The same trial measured QoL and showed little or no difference between treatment groups for the physical domain, MD 0.59 (95% CI -3.66 to 4.84, low-certainty evidence), but may improve scores in the mental health domain for those receiving the booklet plus DVD compared to booklet alone, MD (4.70, 95% CI 0.33 to 9.07, low-certainty evidence). Mood or personal well-being were not reported. Computerised learning compared to no intervention Two trials (57 participants) reported on interventions aimed at children and adolescents and their impact on promoting a sense of self-efficacy (primary outcome 'Mood and personal well-being'), but only one showed an increase, MD 7.46 (95%CI 3.21 to 11.71, 17 participants, very low-certainty evidence); the second did not report control group data. One trial (30 participants) showed the intervention did not improve self-efficacy in adults, but appropriate data could not be extracted. Two trials (47 participants) reported coping strategies; one only reported within-group differences from baseline, the second showed an increase from baseline in coping strategies in the Internet program group compared to the no intervention group (disease-specific knowledge, MD 2.45 (95% CI 0.89 to 4.01); self-management ability and transition readiness, MD 19.90 (95% CI 3.61 to 36.19; low-certainty evidence). One trial reported QoL but with insufficient information to calculate changes from baseline; no difference in post-treatment scores was seen between groups, MD -8.65, 95% CI -18.30 to 1.00, very low-certainty evidence). Auto-hypnosis (self-hypnosis) compared to control There were two older trials that reported on this intervention (50 participants) focusing mainly on the secondary outcome 'physical health'; only one trial reported the primary outcome 'mood and personal well-being' (only within-group differences in the treatment group). Coping strategies and QoL were not assessed in the trials. Relaxation (progressive or self control) compared to no treatment Only one trial (seven participants) from 1985, was included which focused on 'physical health' and did not report on any of our primary outcomes. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Not all of the seven included trials analysed the effects of the interventions on our primary outcomes (mood and personal well-being, coping strategies and QoL). Three trials were conducted in the 1970s and 1980s using techniques of auto-hypnosis or relaxation and, in accordance with the needs and therapeutic possibilities of the time, they focused on secondary outcomes, e.g. frequency of bleeding (physical health) and adherence to the intervention. The four newer trials assessed psycho-educational interventions all mediated by the use of technologies (DVD or computer) and often created according to age needs of the target group. In these cases, attention was shifted to our pre-defined primary outcomes. This review has identified low- and very low-certainty evidence, prompting caution in its interpretation. The major problem we encountered was the heterogeneity of trial designs, of interventions and of outcome measures used across the trials. We strongly suggest that researchers consider developing a core outcome set to streamline future research; randomization was proven to be safe and acceptable, and blinding should be considered for those assessing patient-reported outcomes.

Prognostic factors for VTE and bleeding in hospitalized medical patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

There may be many predictors of venous thromboembolism (VTE) and bleeding in hospitalized medical patients, but until now, systematic reviews and assessments of the certainty of the evidence have not been published. We conducted a systematic review to identify prognostic factors for VTE and bleeding in hospitalized medical patients and searched Medline and EMBASE from inception through May 2018. We considered studies that identified potential prognostic factors for VTE and bleeding in hospitalized adult medical patients. Reviewers extracted data in duplicate and independently and assessed the certainty of the evidence using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation approach. Of 69 410 citations, we included 17 studies in our analysis: 14 that reported on VTE, and 3 that reported on bleeding. For VTE, moderate-certainty evidence showed a probable association with older age; elevated C-reactive protein (CRP), D-dimer, and fibrinogen levels; tachycardia; thrombocytosis; leukocytosis; fever; leg edema; lower Barthel Index (BI) score; immobility; paresis; previous history of VTE; thrombophilia; malignancy; critical illness; and infections. For bleeding, moderate-certainty evidence showed a probable association with older age, sex, anemia, obesity, low hemoglobin, gastroduodenal ulcers, rehospitalization, critical illness, thrombocytopenia, blood dyscrasias, hepatic disease, renal failure, antithrombotic medication, and presence of a central venous catheter. Elevated CRP, a lower BI, a history of malignancy, and elevated heart rate are not included in most VTE risk assessment models. This study informs risk prediction in the management of hospitalized medical patients for VTE and bleeding; it also informs guidelines for VTE prevention and future research.

Screening for Breast Cancer in Average-Risk Women: A Guidance Statement From the American College of Physicians.

Description: The purpose of this guidance statement is to provide advice to clinicians on breast cancer screening in average-risk women based on a review of existing guidelines and the evidence they include. Methods: This guidance statement is derived from an appraisal of selected guidelines from around the world that address breast cancer screening, as well as their included evidence. All national guidelines published in English between 1 January 2013 and 15 November 2017 in the National Guideline Clearinghouse or Guidelines International Network library were included. In addition, the authors selected other guidelines commonly used in clinical practice. Web sites associated with all selected guidelines were checked for updates on 10 December 2018. The AGREE II (Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation II) instrument was used to evaluate the quality of guidelines. Target Audience and Patient Population: The target audience is all clinicians, and the target patient population is all asymptomatic women with average risk for breast cancer. Guidance Statement 1: In average-risk women aged 40 to 49 years, clinicians should discuss whether to screen for breast cancer with mammography before age 50 years. Discussion should include the potential benefits and harms and a woman's preferences. The potential harms outweigh the benefits in most women aged 40 to 49 years. Guidance Statement 2: In average-risk women aged 50 to 74 years, clinicians should offer screening for breast cancer with biennial mammography. Guidance Statement 3: In average-risk women aged 75 years or older or in women with a life expectancy of 10 years or less, clinicians should discontinue screening for breast cancer. Guidance Statement 4: In average-risk women of all ages, clinicians should not use clinical breast examination to screen for breast cancer.

The association between platelet transfusions and mortality in patients with critical illness.

BACKGROUND: Platelet (PLT) transfusions are frequently administered in the setting of critical illness but their clinical impacts remain unknown. This study examined the association between PLT transfusions and death in a large intensive care unit (ICU) patient population. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: Using a transfusion registry spanning 2008 to 2015, this study assessed effect of in-ICU PLT transfusions on ICU and in-hospital mortality using a stratified, time-dependent Cox proportional hazards model adjusted for illness severity, thrombocytopenia, and other confounders. Patients with known malignancy were excluded. Exposure to PLT transfusions were analyzed dichotomously (ever or never transfused) and continuously (number of transfusions). Medical, general surgery, and cardiac surgery subgroups were analyzed separately. RESULTS: Overall 32,842 adult patients were admitted to ICU, and 4927 patients received PLT transfusion(s). Crude in-ICU and in-hospital mortality were higher for PLT-transfused patients compared to nontransfused patients (9.2% vs. 6.7% and 12.3% vs. 9.3%, respectively). After confounders were adjusted for, PLT transfusions (ever vs. never) were not associated with increased mortality in ICU (hazard ratio [HR], 0.78; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.60-1.02; p = 0.06) or in hospital (HR, 0.89; 95% CI, 0.68-1.09; p = 0.41). Continuous exposure analysis also showed no association between PLT transfusions and death. PLT transfusions have a protective effect on in-hospital mortality in the subgroup of general surgery patients (HR, 0.71; 95% CI, 0.51-0.99; p = 0.04; ever or never analysis). CONCLUSION: Platelet transfusions were not associated with increased risk of death in critically ill patients. Further studies are required to identify subgroups for which PLT transfusions may be beneficial.

Healthcare provider knowledge, attitudes, beliefs, and practices surrounding the prescription of opioids for chronic non-cancer pain in North America: protocol for a mixed-method systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Evidence from diverse areas of medicine (e.g., cardiovascular disease, diabetes) indicates that healthcare providers (HCPs) often do not adhere to clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) despite a clear indication to implement recommendations-a phenomenon commonly termed clinical inertia. There are a variety of reasons for clinical inertia, but HCP-related factors (e.g., knowledge, motivation, agreement with guidelines) are the most salient and amenable to intervention aimed to improve adherence. CPGs have been developed to support the safe and effective prescription of opioid medication for the management of chronic non-cancer pain. The extent of physician uptake and adherence to such guidelines is not yet well understood. The purpose of this review is to synthesize the published evidence about knowledge, attitudes, beliefs, and practices that HCPs hold regarding the prescription of opioids for chronic non-cancer pain. METHODS: An experienced information specialist will perform searches of CINAHL, Embase, MEDLINE, and PsycINFO bibliographic databases. The Cochrane library, PROSPERO, and the Joanna Briggs Institute will be searched for systematic reviews. Searches will be performed from inception to the present. Quantitative and qualitative study designs that report on HCP knowledge, attitudes, beliefs, or practices in North America will be eligible for inclusion. Studies reporting on interventions to improve HCP adherence to opioid prescribing CPGs will also be eligible for inclusion. Two trained graduate-level research assistants will independently screen articles for inclusion, perform data extraction, and perform risk of bias and quality assessment using recommended tools. Confidence in qualitative evidence will be evaluated using the Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation-Confidence in the Evidence from Qualitative Reviews (GRADE-CERQual) approach. Confidence in quantitative evidence will be assessed using the GRADE approach. DISCUSSION: The ultimate goal of this work is to support interventions aiming to optimize opioid prescribing practices in order to prevent opioid-related morbidity and mortality without restricting a HCP's ability to select the most appropriate treatment for an individual patient. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42018091640 .

Rate and appropriateness of polypharmacy in older patients with hemophilia compared with age-matched controls.

BACKGROUND: In older people, multiple chronic ailments lead to the intake of multiple medications (polypharmacy) that carry a number of negative consequences (adverse events, prescription and intake errors, poor adherence, higher mortality). Because ageing patients with haemophilia (PWHs) may be particularly at risk due to their pre-existing multiple comorbidities (arthropathy, liver disease), we chose to analyse the pattern of chronic drug intake in a cohort of PWHs aged 60 years or more. PATIENTS AND METHODS: S + PHERA is a multicentre observational study, with the broad goal to evaluate prospectively the health status and medication intake in 102 older patients with severe haemophilia A or B compared with 204 age- and residence-matched controls chosen randomly from the same general practices of PWHs. The rate of potential drug-drug interactions (PDDI) was evaluated as a proxy of prescription appropriateness. RESULTS: After excluding replacement therapies and antiviral drugs, PWHs took in average less daily drugs than controls (2.4 ± 2.5 vs 3.0 ± 2.4) and had a lower rate of polypharmacy. Moreover, their prevalence of PDDI was lower (16.7% vs 27%). CONCLUSIONS: The rate of polypharmacy and the appropriateness of medications other than those for haemophilia and related comorbidities are acceptable in Italian PWHs, and better than those in their age peers without haemophilia, perhaps owing to drug tailoring and deprescribing by the specialized haemophilia centres at the time of regular visits. However, the PWHs investigated herewith were relatively young and the rate of polypharmacy and related PDDIs may become more prominent and crucial when older ages are reached, suggesting the need of continuous surveillance on prescribed drugs and the risk of drug-drug interactions.

Hemoglobin A1c Targets for Glycemic Control With Pharmacologic Therapy for Nonpregnant Adults With Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus: A Guidance Statement Update From the American College of Physicians.

Description: The American College of Physicians developed this guidance statement to guide clinicians in selecting targets for pharmacologic treatment of type 2 diabetes. Methods: The National Guideline Clearinghouse and the Guidelines International Network library were searched (May 2017) for national guidelines, published in English, that addressed hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) targets for treating type 2 diabetes in nonpregnant outpatient adults. The authors identified guidelines from the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence and the Institute for Clinical Systems Improvement. In addition, 4 commonly used guidelines were reviewed, from the American Association of Clinical Endocrinologists and American College of Endocrinology, the American Diabetes Association, the Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network, and the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs and Department of Defense. The AGREE II (Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation II) instrument was used to evaluate the guidelines. Guidance Statement 1: Clinicians should personalize goals for glycemic control in patients with type 2 diabetes on the basis of a discussion of benefits and harms of pharmacotherapy, patients' preferences, patients' general health and life expectancy, treatment burden, and costs of care. Guidance Statement 2: Clinicians should aim to achieve an HbA1c level between 7% and 8% in most patients with type 2 diabetes. Guidance Statement 3: Clinicians should consider deintensifying pharmacologic therapy in patients with type 2 diabetes who achieve HbA1c levels less than 6.5%. Guidance Statement 4: Clinicians should treat patients with type 2 diabetes to minimize symptoms related to hyperglycemia and avoid targeting an HbA1c level in patients with a life expectancy less than 10 years due to advanced age (80 years or older), residence in a nursing home, or chronic conditions (such as dementia, cancer, end-stage kidney disease, or severe chronic obstructive pulmonary disease or congestive heart failure) because the harms outweigh the benefits in this population.

Vitamin K Antagonists After 6 Months of Low-Molecular-Weight Heparin in Cancer Patients with Venous Thromboembolism.

BACKGROUND: Low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) is the treatment of choice in cancer patients with venous thromboembolism. However, data on continuing LMWH treatment beyond 6 months remain scanty. METHODS: We used the RIETE (Registro Informatizado Enfermedad TromboEmbólica) registry to compare the rate of venous thromboembolism recurrences and major bleeding appearing beyond the first 6 months of anticoagulant therapy in cancer patients with venous thromboembolism, according to therapy with LMWH or vitamin K antagonists (VKA). We performed a propensity score-matched cohort study. RESULTS: After propensity matching, 482 cancer patients continued to receive LMWH and 482 switched to VKA. During the course of anticoagulant therapy (mean 275.5 days), 57 patients developed venous thrombosis recurrences (recurrent pulmonary embolism 26, recurrent deep vein thrombosis 29, both 2), 28 had major bleeding, 38 had nonmajor bleeding, and 129 died. No patient died of recurrent venous thrombosis, and 5 patients died of bleeding (2 were on LMWH, 3 on VKA). Patients who continued with LMWH had a similar rate of deep vein thrombosis recurrences (relative risk [RR] 1.41; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.68-2.93), pulmonary embolism recurrences (RR 0.73; 95% CI, 0.34-1.58), major bleeding (RR 0.96; 95% CI, 0.51-1.79), or nonmajor bleeding (RR 1.15; 95% CI, 0.55-2.40), compared with those who switched to VKA, but a higher mortality rate (RR 1.58; 95% CI, 1.13-2.20). CONCLUSIONS: In cancer patients with venous thromboembolism who completed 6 months of LMWH therapy, switching to VKA was associated with a similar risk of venous thrombosis recurrences or bleeding when compared with patients who continued LMWH.