RESUMO
Venous thromboembolism (VTE) remains a significant cause of morbidity and mortality among multiple myeloma patients. Chang and colleagues' findings indicate that factor Xa inhibitors are as effective as warfarin in preventing VTE without raising the risk of gastrointestinal or intracranial bleeding complications. Commentary on: Chang et al. The comparative efficacy and safety of factor Xa inhibitors and warfarin for primary thromboprophylaxis in multiple myeloma patients undergoing immunomodulatory therapy. Br J Haematol 2024;205:473-477.
Assuntos
Inibidores do Fator Xa , Mieloma Múltiplo , Tromboembolia Venosa , Mieloma Múltiplo/tratamento farmacológico , Mieloma Múltiplo/complicações , Humanos , Inibidores do Fator Xa/uso terapêutico , Inibidores do Fator Xa/efeitos adversos , Tromboembolia Venosa/prevenção & controle , Tromboembolia Venosa/etiologia , Anticoagulantes/uso terapêutico , Anticoagulantes/efeitos adversos , Varfarina/uso terapêutico , Varfarina/efeitos adversosRESUMO
In view of the increasing data evaluating carfilzomib-based induction for newly-diagnosed multiple myeloma (NDMM), we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis comparing the efficacy of carfilzomib/lenalidomide/dexamethasone (KRd) versus bortezomib/lenalidomide/dexamethasone (VRd). Three studies totaling 1597 patients (50% KRd-treated, 50% VRd-treated) were included. Despite similar survival outcomes and overall response rate compared with the VRd arm, KRd-treated subjects showed higher odds of achieving complete responses and measurable residual disease negativity. Among patients with high-risk cytogenetics (n = 348), KRd was associated with significant improvement in progression-free survival (HR = 0.70; 95% CI = 0.50-0.97; p = .03; I2 = 0%), suggesting carfilzomib-based induction may be preferable in this NDMM subpopulation.
Assuntos
Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica , Bortezomib , Dexametasona , Lenalidomida , Mieloma Múltiplo , Oligopeptídeos , Mieloma Múltiplo/tratamento farmacológico , Mieloma Múltiplo/mortalidade , Humanos , Lenalidomida/administração & dosagem , Lenalidomida/uso terapêutico , Dexametasona/administração & dosagem , Dexametasona/uso terapêutico , Oligopeptídeos/administração & dosagem , Oligopeptídeos/uso terapêutico , Bortezomib/administração & dosagem , Bortezomib/uso terapêutico , Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica/uso terapêutico , Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica/administração & dosagem , Intervalo Livre de Progressão , Resultado do TratamentoRESUMO
INTRODUCTION: Several interventions have been tested for cardio-protection against anthracycline-induced cancer therapy-related cardiovascular dysfunction (CTRCD). The role of statins in this setting remains unclear. METHODS: We systematically searched PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, Clinicaltrials.gov, and Web of Science for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing statins versus control (placebo or no intervention) for preventing anthracycline-induced CTRCD. We applied a random-effects model to pool risk ratios (RR) and mean differences (MD) with 95 % confidence intervals (CI). RESULTS: We included seven RCTs comprising 887 patients with planned chemotherapy with anthracycline-based regimens, of whom 49.8 % were randomized to statins. Relative to placebo, statins significantly reduced the incidence of cardiotoxicity/CTRCD (RR 0.46; 95 % CI 0.29 to 0.72; p < 0.001). The left ventricular end-systolic volume was also lower in patients treated with statin (MD -3.12 mL; 95 % CI -6.13 to -0.12 mL; p = 0.042). There was no significant difference between groups in post-anthracycline left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) overall. CONCLUSION: In this meta-analysis of RCTs, statins were significantly associated with a lower incidence of anthracycline-induced CTRCD and attenuated changes in the left ventricular end-systolic volume. Thus, our findings suggest that statins should be considered as a cardio-protection strategy for patients with planned anthracycline-based chemotherapy.
Assuntos
Antraciclinas , Cardiotoxicidade , Inibidores de Hidroximetilglutaril-CoA Redutases , Ensaios Clínicos Controlados Aleatórios como Assunto , Humanos , Antraciclinas/efeitos adversos , Antraciclinas/uso terapêutico , Inibidores de Hidroximetilglutaril-CoA Redutases/uso terapêutico , Inibidores de Hidroximetilglutaril-CoA Redutases/efeitos adversos , Cardiotoxicidade/prevenção & controle , Cardiotoxicidade/etiologia , Neoplasias/tratamento farmacológico , Doenças Cardiovasculares/prevenção & controle , Doenças Cardiovasculares/induzido quimicamente , Volume Sistólico/efeitos dos fármacosRESUMO
Thrombosis represents a frequent and potentially severe complication in individuals diagnosed with multiple myeloma (MM). These events can be driven by both the disease as well as the therapies themselves. Overall, available evidence is inconclusive about the differential thrombogenicity of carfilzomib/lenalidomide/dexamethasone (KRd) and bortezomib/lenalidomide/dexamethasone (VRd). This meta-analysis compares the risk for venous thromboembolism (VTE; including deep venous thrombosis and pulmonary embolism) and arterial thromboembolism (ATE; including myocardial infarction and ischemic stroke) with KRd versus VRd as primary therapy for newly diagnosed MM (NDMM). Out of 510 studies identified after deduplication, one randomized controlled trial and five retrospective cohort studies were included. We analyzed 2304 patients (VRd: 1380; KRd: 924) for VTE events and 2179 patients (VRd: 1316; KRd: 863) for ATE events. Lower rates of VTE were observed in the VRd group when compared with the KRd group (6.16% vs. 8.87%; odds ratio [OR], 0.53; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.32-0.88; p = .01). Both treatment groups exhibited minimal ATE incidence, with no significant difference between them (0.91% vs. 1.16%; OR, 1.01; 95% CI, 0.24-4.20; p = .99). In view of potential biases from retrospective studies, heterogeneity of baseline population characteristics, and limited access to patient-level data (e.g., VTE risk stratification and type of thromboprophylaxis regimen used) inherent to this meta-analysis, additional research is warranted to further validate our findings and refine strategies for thrombosis prevention in MM.
Assuntos
Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica , Bortezomib , Dexametasona , Lenalidomida , Mieloma Múltiplo , Oligopeptídeos , Humanos , Mieloma Múltiplo/tratamento farmacológico , Dexametasona/administração & dosagem , Dexametasona/efeitos adversos , Dexametasona/uso terapêutico , Oligopeptídeos/administração & dosagem , Oligopeptídeos/efeitos adversos , Oligopeptídeos/uso terapêutico , Bortezomib/administração & dosagem , Bortezomib/efeitos adversos , Bortezomib/uso terapêutico , Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica/efeitos adversos , Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica/uso terapêutico , Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica/administração & dosagem , Lenalidomida/administração & dosagem , Lenalidomida/efeitos adversos , Tromboembolia/prevenção & controle , Tromboembolia/epidemiologia , Tromboembolia/etiologia , Tromboembolia/induzido quimicamente , Tromboembolia Venosa/prevenção & controle , Tromboembolia Venosa/epidemiologia , Tromboembolia Venosa/induzido quimicamenteRESUMO
BACKGROUND: Cancer survivors are at increased risk for atrial fibrillation (AF). However, data on the efficacy and safety of catheter ablation (CA) in this population remain limited. Therefore, we aimed to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis comparing outcomes after CA for AF in patients with versus without prior or active cancer. METHODS: We systematically searched PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Embase from inception to April 2023 for studies comparing the safety and efficacy of CA for AF in cancer survivors. Outcomes of interest were bleeding events, late AF recurrence, and need for repeat ablation. Statistical analyses were performed using Review Manager 5.4.1. We pooled odds ratios (OR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) for binary endpoints. RESULTS: We included 5 retrospective cohort studies comprising 998 patients, of whom 41.4% had a history of cancer. Cancer survivors were at significantly higher risk of clinically relevant bleeding (OR 2.17; 95% CI 1.17-4.0; p=0.01) as compared with those without cancer. The efficacy of CA for AF was similar between groups. Late AF recurrence at 12 months was not significantly different between patients with vs. without a history of cancer (OR 1.29; 95% CI 0.78-2.13; p=0.32). Similar findings were observed in the outcome of repeat ablations (OR 0.71; 95% CI 0.37-1.37; p=0.31). CONCLUSIONS: These findings suggest that cancer survivors have an increased risk of bleeding after CA for AF relative to patients without cancer, with no significant difference in the efficacy of CA for maintenance of sinus rhythm between groups. STUDY REGISTRATION: This systematic review is registered in the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO) under registration number CRD42023394538.
Assuntos
Fibrilação Atrial , Sobreviventes de Câncer , Ablação por Cateter , Neoplasias , Humanos , Ablação por Cateter/efeitos adversos , Hemorragia/epidemiologia , Neoplasias/cirurgia , Recidiva , Estudos Retrospectivos , Resultado do TratamentoRESUMO
Patients with multiple myeloma (MM) are at an elevated risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE), which is further increased for those undergoing anti-myeloma therapy. Current guidelines suggest low-dose direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) as an alternative to aspirin for primary thromboprophylaxis in this population, but data comparing these two therapies are limited. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to compare DOACs with aspirin for primary thromboprophylaxis in individuals undergoing outpatient anti-myeloma therapy. Studies were selected when comparing DOACs versus aspirin for thrombotic and haemorrhagic outcomes. We included 10 randomised controlled trials and observational studies comprising 1026 patients with MM who received primary thromboprophylaxis with DOACs (n = 337) or aspirin (n = 689). DOAC thromboprophylaxis was associated with a significantly lower incidence of VTE compared with aspirin (OR 0.33; 95% CI 0.16-0.68; p < 0.001). Major, clinically relevant non-major and minor bleeding event rates did not differ significantly between groups. Overall, our meta-analysis suggests that DOACs may be a preferable option to aspirin for the prevention of MM-related thrombosis. However, these results should be interpreted in the context of heterogeneous baseline population characteristics and potential bias from including observational studies. Further research is needed to evaluate the optimal thromboprophylaxis strategy, particularly in high-risk individuals.
RESUMO
AIM: In the Roux-en-Y gastric bypass technique, classic laparoscopic surgical retractors are usually rigid, require an additional incision for its installation, or must be handled by an assistant during the surgical procedure, involving a risk of liver injury. The aim of this study was to evaluate and validate a technique of the esophagogastric junction exposure obtained by the flexible liver retractor in bariatric surgery, comparing its efficacy with the retractor classically used for this purpose. METHODS: This study was performed as a randomized, open, prospective, controlled, and comparative design in patients with medical indications of bariatric surgery. The subjects were distributed in the classic (control) and flexible (test) retractor groups. RESULTS: A total of 100 patients (n=50 control group, n=50 test group) were included. No statistically significant difference was observed in the mean duration of surgery. Regarding visibility, 100% of the patients in the flexible retractor group demonstrated an optimal visibility level, although without statistical significance concerning the classic retractor group (94%). Invariably, carrying a trocar was necessary when using the classic retractor. CONCLUSIONS: The flexible liver retractor is safe, effective, ergonomic, and inexpensive. Furthermore, it presented a satisfactory aesthetic profile, and the use of specific instruments, new adaptation curve, and training for its handling were not required.
OBJETIVOS: Os afastadores clássicos de cirurgia laparoscópica são geralmente rígidos, necessitando de uma incisão adicional para sua instalação ou de um auxiliar para manuseio durante o ato cirúrgico e ainda, podem envolvem risco de injúria hepática. Avaliar e validar uma técnica de exposição da junção esofagogástrica obtida pelo afastador flexível de fígado em cirurgia bariátrica comparando sua eficácia com a de afastador classicamente utilizado para este fim. MÉTODOS: Tratou-se de um estudo prospectivo, aberto, controlado e comparativo em pacientes com indicação de cirurgia, distribuídos de forma randomizada em dois grupos: clássico (controle) e afastador flexível (teste). RESULTADOS: Foram incluídos 100 pacientes (n=50 grupo controle, n=50 grupo teste), sem diferença estatística na distribuição por idade e por morbidades, havendo diferença estatística somente no gênero (grupo controle obteve proporção maior de homens, p=0,020). Em relação ao tempo médio de realização das operações, não foi constatada diferença estatística. No quesito visibilidade, verificou-se que 100% dos pacientes do grupo afastador flexível obteve nível de visibilidade ótima, porém sem significância estatística com relação ao grupo clássico (94%). Invariavelmente, foi necessário um portal a mais de trocarte quando do uso do afastador clássico. CONCLUSÃO: O afastador flexível de fígado demonstrou-se seguro, eficaz, ergonômico, de baixo custo, de perfil estético satisfatório, não requerendo instrumental específico para uso ou nova curva de adaptação e aprendizado para manuseio.
Assuntos
Cirurgia Bariátrica , Derivação Gástrica , Obesidade Mórbida , Junção Esofagogástrica/cirurgia , Humanos , Estudos ProspectivosRESUMO
RESUMO - RACIONAL: Os afastadores clássicos de cirurgia laparoscópica são geralmente rígidos, necessitando de uma incisão adicional para sua instalação ou de um auxiliar para manuseio durante o ato cirúrgico e ainda, podem envolvem risco de injúria hepática. OBJETIVOS: Avaliar e validar uma técnica de exposição da junção esofagogástrica obtida pelo afastador flexível de fígado em cirurgia bariátrica comparando sua eficácia com a de afastador classicamente utilizado para este fim. MÉTODOS: Tratou-se de um estudo prospectivo, aberto, controlado e comparativo em pacientes com indicação de cirurgia, distribuídos de forma randomizada em dois grupos: clássico (controle) e afastador flexível (teste). RESULTADOS: Foram incluídos 100 pacientes (n=50 grupo controle, n=50 grupo teste), sem diferença estatística na distribuição por idade e por morbidades, havendo diferença estatística somente no gênero (grupo controle obteve proporção maior de homens, p=0,020). Em relação ao tempo médio de realização das operações, não foi constatada diferença estatística. No quesito visibilidade, verificou-se que 100% dos pacientes do grupo afastador flexível obteve nível de visibilidade ótima, porém sem significância estatística com relação ao grupo clássico (94%). Invariavelmente, foi necessário um portal a mais de trocarte quando do uso do afastador clássico. CONCLUSÃO: O afastador flexível de fígado demonstrou-se seguro, eficaz, ergonômico, de baixo custo, de perfil estético satisfatório, não requerendo instrumental específico para uso ou nova curva de adaptação e aprendizado para manuseio.
ABSTRACT - BACKGROUND: In the Roux-en-Y gastric bypass technique, classic laparoscopic surgical retractors are usually rigid, require an additional incision for its installation, or must be handled by an assistant during the surgical procedure, involving a risk of liver injury. Aim: The aim of this study was to evaluate and validate a technique of the esophagogastric junction exposure obtained by the flexible liver retractor in bariatric surgery, comparing its efficacy with the retractor classically used for this purpose. Methods: This study was performed as a randomized, open, prospective, controlled, and comparative design in patients with medical indications of bariatric surgery. The subjects were distributed in the classic (control) and flexible (test) retractor groups. Results: A total of 100 patients (n=50 control group, n=50 test group) were included. No statistically significant difference was observed in the mean duration of surgery. Regarding visibility, 100% of the patients in the flexible retractor group demonstrated an optimal visibility level, although without statistical significance concerning the classic retractor group (94%). Invariably, carrying a trocar was necessary when using the classic retractor. Conclusions: The flexible liver retractor is safe, effective, ergonomic, and inexpensive. Furthermore, it presented a satisfactory aesthetic profile, and the use of specific instruments, new adaptation curve, and training for its handling were not required.