Assessment of bleeding risk in patients with coronary artery disease on dual antiplatelet therapy. A systematic review.

Patients with coronary artery disease are usually treated with dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) after percutaneous coronary intervention. Patients on DAPT are at risk of both ischaemic and bleeding events. Although side-lined for a long time, real-life studies have shown that both the incidence and the associated morbidity and mortality of out-of-hospital bleeding are high. This indicates that prevention of (post-interventional) bleeding is as important as prevention of ischaemia. For this purpose it is crucial to reliably identify patients with a high bleeding risk. In order to postulate an algorithm, which could help identifying these patients, we performed a systematic review to determine the value of previously proposed prognostic modalities for bleeding. We searched and appraised the following tools: platelet function tests, genetic tests, bleeding scores and questionnaires and haemostatic tests. Most studies indicated that low on-treatment platelet reactivity (LTPR), as measured by several platelet function tests, and the carriage of CYP2C19*17 allele were independent risk factors for bleeding. A bleeding score also proved to be helpful in identifying patients at risk. No studies on haemostatic tests were retrieved. Several patient characteristics were also identified as independent predictors of bleeding, such as older age, female sex and renal failure. Combining these risk factors we propose an algorithm that would hypothetically facilitate identification of those patients at highest risk, warranting prevention measures for bleeding. This could be a starting point for further research concerning the topic.

Clinical utility of genetic signatures in selecting adjuvant treatment: Risk stratification for early vs. late recurrences.

Adjuvant endocrine therapy (ET) reduces the odds of distant recurrence and mortality by nearly one-half in women with hormone receptor (HR) positive early stage breast cancer. While the risk of recurrence is lower for HR positive than negative patients during the first 5-7 years, HR positive patients suffer ongoing recurrences between 0.5 and 2% year over subsequent years. Extended adjuvant ET further reduces recurrence during this late phase of follow-up. ET is associated with post-menopausal side effects (hot flashes, sexual dysfunction, mood changes, and weight gain), and occasional major toxicities (thrombosis and endometrial cancer with tamoxifen; bone mineral loss and possibly heart disease with AIs) persist throughout therapy. Accurate and reliable estimates of the risk of recurrence after five years of ET for women with prior HR positive breast cancer would permit appropriate extended ET decisions. The risk of long-term relapse is related to lymph node status and size of tumor, but these are relatively crude. Several groups have investigated whether multi-parameter tumor biomarker tests might identify those patients whose risk of recurrence is so low that extended ET is not justified. These assays include IHC4, the 21-gene "OncotypeDX", the 12-gene "Endopredict," the PAM50, and the 2-gene "Breast Cancer Index (BCI)" assays. The clinical validity of all these tests for this use context have been established, with at least one paper for each that shows a statistically significant difference in risk of distant recurrence during the 5-10 years after the initial five years of adjuvant endocrine therapy. However, the stakes are high, and although each of these represents a "prospective retrospective" study, they require further validation in subsequent datasets before they should be considered to have "clinical utility" and are used to withhold potentially life-saving treatment. Perhaps more importantly, the clinical breast cancer community, and especially the patient, need to determine how low the risk of late recurrence needs to be to forego the toxicities and side effects of extended adjuvant ET.