Efficacy and Safety of Tinzaparin Thromboprophylaxis in Lung Cancer Patients with High Thromboembolic Risk: A Prospective, Observational, Single-Center Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to record and assess the efficacy and safety ofthromboprophylaxis with an intermediate dose of Tinzaparin in lung cancer patients with high thrombotic risk. METHODS: This was a non-interventional, single-arm, prospective cohort study of lung cancer patients who received thromboprophylaxis with Tinzaparin 10.000 Anti-Xa IU in 0.5 mL, OD, used in current clinical practice. Enrolled ambulatory patients signed informed consent. Anti-Xa levels were tested. RESULTS: In total, 140 patients were included in the study, of which 81.4% were males. The histology of the tumor was mainly adenocarcinoma. Lung cancer patients with high thrombotic risk based on tumor, patient, treatment, and laboratory-related factors were enrolled. Only one patient experienced a thrombotic event (0.7%), and 10 patients had bleeding events (7.1%), including only one major event. Anti-Xa levels measured at 10 days and 3 months did not differ significantly between patients who developed hemorrhagic events and those who did not (p = 0.26 and p = 0.32, respectively). CONCLUSION: Thromboprophylaxis with an intermediate Tinzaparin dose in high thrombotic-risk lung cancer patients is a safe and effective choice for the prevention of VTE.

A RAND/UCLA-Modified VAS Study on Telemedicine, Telehealth, and Virtual Care in Daily Clinical Practice of Vascular Medicine.

Background: Telemedicine is increasingly used in several fields of healthcare, including vascular medicine. This study aimed to investigate the views of experts and propose clinical practice recommendations on the possible applications of telemedicine in vascular medicine. Methods: A clinical guidance group proposed a set of 67 clinical practice recommendations based on the synthesis of current evidence and expert opinion. The Telemedicine Vascular Medicine Working Group included 32 experts from Europe evaluating the appropriateness of each clinical practice recommendation based on published RAND/UCLA methodology in two rounds. Results: In the first round, 60.9% of clinical practice recommendations were rated as appropriate, 35.9% as uncertain, and 3.1% as inappropriate. The strongest agreement (a median value of 10) was reached on statements regarding the usefulness of telemedicine during the 2019 coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic, its usefulness for geographical areas that are difficult to access, and the superiority of video calls compared to phone calls only. The lowest degree of agreement (a median value of 2) was reported on statements regarding the utility of telemedicine being limited to the COVID-19 pandemic and regarding the applicability of teleconsultation in the diagnosis and management of abdominal aortic aneurysm. In the second round, 11 statements were re-evaluated to reduce variability. Conclusions: This study highlights the levels of agreement and the points that raise concern on the use of telemedicine in vascular medicine. It emphasizes the need for further clarification on various issues, including infrastructure, logistics, and legislation.

Molecular interactions of antibodies with PD-1/PD-L1 proteins.

Aim: To compare the protein-protein interactions of antibodies targeting PD-1 and its ligand (PD-L1) with their targets in an attempt to explain the antibodies' binding affinity. Materials & methods: The structural features of complexes between pembrolizumab, nivolumab, durvalumab, atezolizumab, avelumab and PD-1/PD-L1 are described, with the use of software and based on crystallographic data. Results: Pembrolizumab has more structural features, including the number and type of the bonds and total binding surface area, which could rationalize its different clinical behavior compared with nivolumab. Similarly, protein-protein interactions with PD-L1 differ among durvalumab, atezolizumab and avelumab. Conclusion: Differential protein-protein interactions between antibodies and PD-1/PD-L1 may indicate differential clinical activity; however, further research is needed to provide evidence.

This study looked at different immunotherapy drugs used to treat cancer. These drugs bind to two different proteins, called PD-1 and PD-L1, that are part of our immune system. These proteins usually act as brakes in our immune system. The drugs block the brakes, which boosts the immune system and improves the immune defense against cancer. Using computer images, the authors compared how each drug binds to PD-1/PD-L1. The results showed that these drugs bind to PD-1 and PD-L1 with different chemical bonds. These bonds can be smaller or larger depending on the drug. The drugs' different chemical bonds with PD-1/PD-L1 might show that they do not act exactly the same when they are given to patients. However, further studies are needed for more information.

Emerging therapies in thymic epithelial tumors (Review).

Thymic epithelial tumors (TETs), including thymomas and thymic carcinomas, are rare malignancies arising from the thymus gland. The optimal management requires a multidisciplinary approach. Standard first-line systemic treatment involves cytotoxic chemotherapeutic regimens; however, alternative options for systemic treatment are required. Current research focuses on the unique profile of immune-related pathogenic mechanisms of TETs, involving an overlap with certain autoimmune phenotypes, as well as on determining the landscape of oncogenic molecular alterations and the role of tumor angiogenesis. The aim of the present review is to summarize the current clinical investigation on immunotherapy and targeted agents in the management of TETs. Regarding immune checkpoint inhibitors, efficacy results are promising in certain subsets of patients; however, caution is required concerning their toxicity. Anti-angiogenic agents, mainly potent small-molecule inhibitors, have demonstrated antitumor activity in TETs, whereas other targeted agents, including KIT inhibitors and epigenetic agents, are associated with encouraging, yet still modest results for unselected populations, in the absence of predictive biomarkers. Future research should focus on identifying predictive biomarkers for patients with TETs, and should implement multicenter collaborations and appropriate clinical trials tailored for rare tumor types.

Practical Recommendations for Optimal Thromboprophylaxis in Patients with COVID-19: A Consensus Statement Based on Available Clinical Trials.

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has been shown to be strongly associated with increased risk for venous thromboembolism events (VTE) mainly in the inpatient but also in the outpatient setting. Pharmacologic thromboprophylaxis has been shown to offer significant benefits in terms of reducing not only VTE events but also mortality, especially in acutely ill patients with COVID-19. Although the main source of evidence is derived from observational studies with several limitations, thromboprophylaxis is currently recommended for all hospitalized patients with acceptable bleeding risk by all national and international guidelines. Recently, high quality data from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) further support the role of thromboprophylaxis and provide insights into the optimal thromboprophylaxis strategy. The aim of this statement is to systematically review all the available evidence derived from RCTs regarding thromboprophylaxis strategies in patients with COVID-19 in different settings (either inpatient or outpatient) and provide evidence-based guidance to practical questions in everyday clinical practice. Clinical questions accompanied by practical recommendations are provided based on data derived from 20 RCTs that were identified and included in the present study. Overall, the main conclusions are: (i) thromboprophylaxis should be administered in all hospitalized patients with COVID-19, (ii) an optimal dose of inpatient thromboprophylaxis is dependent upon the severity of COVID-19, (iii) thromboprophylaxis should be administered on an individualized basis in post-discharge patients with COVID-19 with high thrombotic risk, and (iv) thromboprophylaxis should not be routinely administered in outpatients. Changes regarding the dominant SARS-CoV-2 variants, the wide immunization status (increasing rates of vaccination and reinfections), and the availability of antiviral therapies and monoclonal antibodies might affect the characteristics of patients with COVID-19; thus, future studies will inform us about the thrombotic risk and the optimal therapeutic strategies for these patients.

Thromboembolic Disease in Patients With Cancer and COVID-19: Risk Factors, Prevention and Practical Thromboprophylaxis Recommendations-State-of-the-Art.

Cancer and COVID-19 are both well-established risk factors predisposing to thrombosis. Both disease entities are correlated with increased incidence of venous thrombotic events through multifaceted pathogenic mechanisms involving the interaction of cancer cells or SARS-CoV2 on the one hand and the coagulation system and endothelial cells on the other hand. Thromboprophylaxis is recommended for hospitalized patients with active cancer and high-risk outpatients with cancer receiving anticancer treatment. Universal thromboprophylaxis with a high prophylactic dose of low molecular weight heparins (LMWH) or therapeutic dose in select patients, is currentlyindicated for hospitalized patients with COVID-19. Also, prophylactic anticoagulation is recommended for outpatients with COVID-19 at high risk for thrombosis or disease worsening. However, whether there is an additive risk of thrombosis when a patient with cancer is infected with SARS-CoV2 remains unclear In the current review, we summarize and critically discuss the literature regarding the epidemiology of thrombotic events in patients with cancer and concomitant COVID-19, the thrombotic risk assessment, and the recommendations on thromboprophylaxis for this subgroup of patients. Current data do not support an additive thrombotic risk for patients with cancer and COVID-19. Of note, patients with cancer have less access to intensive care unit care, a setting associated with high thrombotic risk. Based on current evidence, patients with cancer and COVID-19 should be assessed with well-established risk assessment models for medically ill patients and receive thromboprophylaxis, preferentially with LMWH, according to existing recommendations. Prospective trials on well-characterized populations do not exist.

Position Paper on the Management of Pregnancy-Associated Superficial Venous Thrombosis. Balkan Working Group for Prevention and Treatment of Venous Thromboembolism.

Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is a multifactorial disease that can possibly affect any part of venous circulation. The risk of VTE increases by about 2 fold in pregnant women and VTE is one of the major causes of maternal morbidity and mortality. For decades superficial vein thrombosis (SVT) has been considered as benign, self-limiting condition, primarily local event consequently being out of scope of well conducted epidemiological and clinical studies. Recently, the approach on SVT has significantly changed considering that prevalence of lower limb SVT is twice higher than both deep vein thrombosis (DVT) and pulmonary embolism (PE). The clinical severity of SVT largely depends on the localization of thrombosis, when it concerns the major superficial vein vessels of the lower limb and particularly the great saphenous vein. If untreated or inadequately treated, SVT can potentially cause DVT or PE. The purpose of this review is to discuss the complex interconnection between SVT and risk factors in pregnancy and to provide evidence-based considerations, suggestions, and recommendations for the diagnosis and treatment of this precarious and delicate clinical entity.

Early Occurrence of Adverse Events in Hospitalized Patients With COVID-19 and Beneficial Effect of Anticoagulation.

BACKGROUND/AIM: This study analyzed the characteristics of patients with COVID-19 with major events during the first days of hospitalization. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This is a retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data from consecutive patients admitted to two hospitals in Athens, Greece. The characteristics of patients with COVID-19 who suffered the primary endpoint (venous thromboembolic events, intubation, and death) during the first days of hospitalization were analyzed. RESULTS: Among 95 patients included in the analysis, 21 presented with major adverse events during a median follow-up of 13 days. More than 50% of these patients presented with a major event during the first 3 days. Anticoagulation treatment was inversely associated with the cumulative incidence of the primary endpoint [hazard ratio=0.16 (95% confidence interval=0.06-0.47)]. Patients with major events were older, with lower baseline SatO2, and higher number of Wells' criteria and Charlson comorbidity index. Among these patients, those with hypertension were at higher risk for early occurrence of events (≤ first three days of hospitalization). CONCLUSION: Major adverse events may occur early in hospitalized patients with COVID-19 with a high-risk profile. Anticoagulation treatment appears to reduce this risk and thus prompt thromboprophylaxis should be employed in these patients.

Malignant Superior Vena Cava Syndrome: State of the Art.

Superior vena cava syndrome (SVCS) is a clinical entity characterized by signs and symptoms arising from the obstruction or occlusion of the thin-walled superior vena cava (SVC) and can result in significant morbidity and mortality. Despite the rise of benign cases of SVCS, as a thrombotic complication of intravascular devices, it is most commonly seen secondary to malignancy as a consequence of thrombosis, direct invasion of tumor cells inside the vessel, or external compression. SVCS can be the initial presentation of a previously undiagnosed tumor in up to 60% of cases. Lung cancer and non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL) are responsible for up to 85%-90% of malignancy-related SVCS, while metastatic cancers account for approximately 10%. Herein, we review the pathophysiology, etiology, clinical presentation, diagnosis, and management of malignancy-related SVCS.

High versus Standard Intensity of Thromboprophylaxis in Hospitalized Patients with COVID-19: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Thromboprophylaxis in hospitalized patients with COVID-19 has been associated with a survival benefit and is strongly recommended. However, the optimal dose of thromboprophylaxis remains unclear. A systematic review and meta-analysis (PubMed/EMBASE) of studies comparing high (intermediate or therapeutic dose) versus standard (prophylactic dose) intensity of thrombo-prophylaxis with regard to outcome of hospitalized patients with COVID-19 was performed. Randomized and non-randomized studies that provided adjusted effect size estimates were included. Meta-analysis of 7 studies comparing intermediate versus prophylactic dose of thromboprophylaxis (2 randomized and 5 observational, n = 2009, weighted age 61 years, males 61%, ICU 53%) revealed a pooled adjusted relative risk (RR) for death at 0.56 (95% confidence intervals (CI) 0.34, 0.92) in favor of the intermediate dose. For the same comparison arms, the pooled RR for venous thromboembolism was 0.84 (95% CI 0.54, 1.31), and for major bleeding events was 1.63 (95% CI 0.79, 3.37). Meta-analysis of 17 studies comparing therapeutic versus prophylactic dose of thromboprophylaxis (2 randomized and 15 observational, n = 7776, weighted age 64 years, males 54%, ICU 21%) revealed a pooled adjusted RR for death at 0.73 (95% CI 0.47, 1.14) for the therapeutic dose. An opposite trend was observed in the unadjusted analysis of 15 observational studies (RR 1.24 (95% CI 0.88, 1.74)). For the same comparison arms, the pooled RR for venous thromboembolism was 1.13 (95% CI 0.52, 2.48), and for major bleeding events 3.32 (95% CI 2.51, 4.40). In conclusion, intermediate compared with standard prophylactic dose of thromboprophylaxis appears to be rather safe and is associated with additional survival benefit, although most data are derived from observational retrospective analyses. Randomized studies are needed to define the optimal thromboprophylaxis in hospitalized patients with COVID-19.

Milestones in thromboangiitis obliterans: a position paper of the VAS-European independent foundation in angiology/vascular medicine.

Even today thromboangiitis obliterans has disease features that remain misunderstood or underappreciated. The epidemiology, etiology and pathophysiology of the disease are still unclear. Biomarkers and disease activity markers are lacking, thus clinical assessment is difficult. We are still struggling to establish unique diagnostic, staging and treatment criteria. This is an academic-collaborative effort to describe the pathophysiology, the clinical manifestations, the diagnostic approach, and the challenges of management of patients with TAO. A systematic search for relevant studies dating from 1900 to the end of 2020 was performed on the PubMed, SCOPUS, and Science Direct databases. Given the intriguing nature of presentation of TAO, its management, to some extent is not only different in different regions of the world but also varies within the same region. Following this project, we discovered ambiguity, overlap and lack of clear-cut criteria for management of TAO. An international group of experts however came to one conclusion. They all agree that management of TAO needs a call for action for a renewed global look with multi-center studies, to update the geographical distribution of the disease and to establish a unique set of diagnostic criteria and a consensus-based guideline for best treatment based on current evidence.

Risk Factors for Venous Thromboembolism in Patients With Small Cell Lung Cancer.

BACKGROUND/AIM: Small cell lung cancer (SCLC) accounts for 13% of all lung cancers. Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is a frequent complication. The purpose of this study was to investigate the incidence and risk factors for VTE in SCLC patients. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Retrospective analysis of patients with histologically confirmed SCLC treated between January 2015 and June 2018 at Sotiria General Hospital, Athens, Greece. RESULTS: Two hundred and seventeen patients were included in the analysis. The incidence of VTE was 4.1%. Increased body mass index (BMI) was correlated with the development of VTE. Moreover, VTE appeared more frequently in patients with major vessel infiltration and with poor Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status. Other factors, including gender, age, stage, presence of metastasis, treatment, immobilization, anticoagulation, comorbidities, and laboratory values did not correlate with the development of VTE. CONCLUSION: Factors associated with the development of VTE were BMI, major vessel infiltration and PS. Identifying factors that predispose to VTE could help physicians detect high-risk patients who would benefit from prophylactic anticoagulation therapy.

Beneficial Effects of Intermediate Dosage of Anticoagulation Treatment on the Prognosis of Hospitalized COVID-19 Patients: The ETHRA Study.

BACKGROUND/AIM: To investigate the efficacy (prognosis, coagulation/inflammation biomarkers) and safety (bleeding events) of different anticoagulation dosages in COVID-19 inpatients. PATIENTS AND METHODS: COVID-19 inpatients (Athens, Greece) were included. The "Enhanced dose THRomboprophylaxis in Admissions (ETHRA)" protocol was applied in certain Departments, suggesting the use of intermediate anticoagulation dosage. The primary endpoint was a composite of intubation/venous thromboembolism/death. Inflammation/coagulation parameters were assessed. RESULTS: Among 127 admissions, 95 fulfilled the inclusion criteria. Twenty-one events (4 deaths, 17 intubations) were observed. Regression analysis demonstrated significant reduction of events with intermediate or therapeutic dosage [HR=0.16 (95%CI=0.05-0.52) p=0.002; HR=0.17 (0.04-0.71) p=0.015, respectively]. D-Dimer values were higher in those who met the composite endpoint. Intermediate dosage treatment was associated with decreased values of ferritin. Three patients (3%) had minor hemorrhagic complications. CONCLUSION: Anticoagulation treatment (particularly intermediate dosage) appears to have positive impact on COVID-19 inpatients' prognosis by inhibiting both coagulation and inflammatory cascades.

Guidance for the Management of Patients with Vascular Disease or Cardiovascular Risk Factors and COVID-19: Position Paper from VAS-European Independent Foundation in Angiology/Vascular Medicine.

COVID-19 is also manifested with hypercoagulability, pulmonary intravascular coagulation, microangiopathy, and venous thromboembolism (VTE) or arterial thrombosis. Predisposing risk factors to severe COVID-19 are male sex, underlying cardiovascular disease, or cardiovascular risk factors including noncontrolled diabetes mellitus or arterial hypertension, obesity, and advanced age. The VAS-European Independent Foundation in Angiology/Vascular Medicine draws attention to patients with vascular disease (VD) and presents an integral strategy for the management of patients with VD or cardiovascular risk factors (VD-CVR) and COVID-19. VAS recommends (1) a COVID-19-oriented primary health care network for patients with VD-CVR for identification of patients with VD-CVR in the community and patients' education for disease symptoms, use of eHealth technology, adherence to the antithrombotic and vascular regulating treatments, and (2) close medical follow-up for efficacious control of VD progression and prompt application of physical and social distancing measures in case of new epidemic waves. For patients with VD-CVR who receive home treatment for COVID-19, VAS recommends assessment for (1) disease worsening risk and prioritized hospitalization of those at high risk and (2) VTE risk assessment and thromboprophylaxis with rivaroxaban, betrixaban, or low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) for those at high risk. For hospitalized patients with VD-CVR and COVID-19, VAS recommends (1) routine thromboprophylaxis with weight-adjusted intermediate doses of LMWH (unless contraindication); (2) LMWH as the drug of choice over unfractionated heparin or direct oral anticoagulants for the treatment of VTE or hypercoagulability; (3) careful evaluation of the risk for disease worsening and prompt application of targeted antiviral or convalescence treatments; (4) monitoring of D-dimer for optimization of the antithrombotic treatment; and (5) evaluation of the risk of VTE before hospital discharge using the IMPROVE-D-dimer score and prolonged post-discharge thromboprophylaxis with rivaroxaban, betrixaban, or LMWH.

Effectiveness and Safety of Complete Decongestive Therapy of Phase I: A Lymphedema Treatment Study in the Greek Population.

Background Lymphedema is a chronic condition caused by a failure in the lymphatic system that most commonly occurs in the limbs. Complete decongestive therapy (CDT) is the gold standard for lymphedema management. Objective To evaluate the effectiveness and safety of complete decongestive therapy (CDT) of phase I in the Greek population with lymphedema. Methods The patients' demographic and clinical characteristics were recorded. CDT was implemented in all patients for 20 sessions in a four-week treatment period. The edema's (excess volume (EV) and percent of excess volume (PEV)) measurements were carried out four times in the treatment period, whereas the percent reduction of excess volume (PREV) was calculated at the end of phase I. Moreover, we recorded every infection, trauma of skin, and pain of limb during the treatment. Results One-hundred five patients with lymphedema were enrolled in the present study, of whom 31.4% had upper limb lymphedema and 68.6% had lower limb lymphedema. All patients with upper limb lymphedema had a secondary type while the corresponding proportion of patients with lower limb lymphedema was 58.3%. A significant reduction (p<0.001) between the pre-treatment and post-treatment values of EV and PEV was found for both upper and lower limb lymphedema. For patients with upper limb lymphedema, the average PREV was 66.5% (interquartile range, 57.3%-80.6%), whereas for patients with lower limb lymphedema, a 71.5% (interquartile range, 64.5%-80.7%) median value was measured. No side effects from the treatment were recorded during CDT. Conclusion The proper treatment of the CDT phase I ensures safety and a great reduction in edema in patients with lymphedema that predispose the success of phase II of CDT.

Pharmacological Agents Targeting Thromboinflammation in COVID-19: Review and Implications for Future Research.

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), currently a worldwide pandemic, is a viral illness caused by the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). The suspected contribution of thrombotic events to morbidity and mortality in COVID-19 patients has prompted a search for novel potential options for preventing COVID-19-associated thrombotic disease. In this article by the Global COVID-19 Thrombosis Collaborative Group, we describe novel dosing approaches for commonly used antithrombotic agents (especially heparin-based regimens) and the potential use of less widely used antithrombotic drugs in the absence of confirmed thrombosis. Although these therapies may have direct antithrombotic effects, other mechanisms of action, including anti-inflammatory or antiviral effects, have been postulated. Based on survey results from this group of authors, we suggest research priorities for specific agents and subgroups of patients with COVID-19. Further, we review other agents, including immunomodulators, that may have antithrombotic properties. It is our hope that the present document will encourage and stimulate future prospective studies and randomized trials to study the safety, efficacy, and optimal use of these agents for prevention or management of thrombosis in COVID-19.

COVID-19 and Thrombotic or Thromboembolic Disease: Implications for Prevention, Antithrombotic Therapy, and Follow-Up: JACC State-of-the-Art Review.

Coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19), a viral respiratory illness caused by the severe acute respiratory syndrome-coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2), may predispose patients to thrombotic disease, both in the venous and arterial circulations, because of excessive inflammation, platelet activation, endothelial dysfunction, and stasis. In addition, many patients receiving antithrombotic therapy for thrombotic disease may develop COVID-19, which can have implications for choice, dosing, and laboratory monitoring of antithrombotic therapy. Moreover, during a time with much focus on COVID-19, it is critical to consider how to optimize the available technology to care for patients without COVID-19 who have thrombotic disease. Herein, the authors review the current understanding of the pathogenesis, epidemiology, management, and outcomes of patients with COVID-19 who develop venous or arterial thrombosis, of those with pre-existing thrombotic disease who develop COVID-19, or those who need prevention or care for their thrombotic disease during the COVID-19 pandemic.