Anticoagulation Therapy for Thrombotic Events in Paediatric Cancer Patients with Low Platelet Counts
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Background Thrombocytopenia is common in children receiving cancer chemotherapy. In addition, children with cancer are also at increased risk of acute thrombotic events (TE). When these two complications occur simultaneously, TE management with anticoagulants (ACT) poses a unique challenge, as ACT use in thrombocytopenic patients increases their bleeding risk. Current guidelines provide only best practice recommendations on how to manage this treatment conundrum, and even these recommendations vary on optimal management due to the lack of evidence to guide treatment. To date, no systematic literature review summarizing the available paediatric data on treatment of TE in the presence of thrombocytopenia has been conducted. The aim of our systematic review was to summarize the data available to evaluate the safety of ACT for management of TE in paediatric oncology patients during periods of thrombocytopenia. Methods We systematically searched MEDLINE and EMBASE from the OVID platform from inception to April 15th 2016 for studies that included children aged less than 18 years with diagnosis of cancer complicated by an objectively confirmed TE, whose anticoagulation therapy was complicated by a period of thrombocytopenia (as defined by the study author). We included all study designs. Two authors (LB and AA) screened the data at title then full-text level to select eligible studies. Disputes were arbitrated by a third author (UA) until a consensus was reached. Our primary outcome was haemorrhagic complications, categorized as minor or major according to paediatric ISTH criteria. Bleeding episodes were divided according to anticoagulation intensity (age-appropriate, agent-specific full dose vs. half-dose, as per CHEST guidelines) and degree of thrombocytopenia (i.e. severe </=50 x109/L, moderate 51-99 x109/L, mild >/=100 x109/L). Our secondary outcome was the identification of platelet transfusion triggers according to degree of anticoagulation intensity. Results Our search yielded 244 articles, of which 13 were screened at a full text level. Four manuscripts were selected for inclusion, as follows: case report (n=1), case series (n=2), and prospective cohort study (n=1). Details of included studies are described inTable 1 and patient information in table 2. The studies included 39 patients with malignancies, of which the most common were acute lymphoblastic leukaemia (n=13), CNS malignancies (n=6), non-hodgkinlymphoma(n=4). All patients had venous TE. Type and regimen of ACT, and author definitions of thrombocytopenia and bleeding were variable. Thirty-five patients received low-molecular weight heparin (LMWH), of whom 33 received therapeutic dose, and no dose was recorded for two. Three patients received unfractionated heparin (UFH) with antithrombin(AT) supplementation; however, UFH wasstopped in periods of low platelet counts, and one received a reduced dose UFH. According to our definition, 36/39 (92.3%) experienced severe thrombocytopenia, 1 (2.6%) developed moderate thrombocytopenia, platelet count was not stated in 2(5.1%). Using the ISTH bleeding criteria, one patient (2.6%) developed major bleeding, and seven (17.9%) developed minor bleeding (n=2 intestinal bleeding, n=5 injection site/port bleeding). Only one study reported our secondary outcome, which used a platelet transfusion trigger of <40x109/L if receiving therapeutic LMWH and <20x109/L if receiving prophylactic LMWH. Given the heterogeneity, we were unable to statistically aggregate any data. Discussion The results of this systematic review highlight the paucity of high-quality data to assess the use and safety of ACT for TE in paediatric cancer patients during periods of thrombocytopenia. We identified only observational studies- one prospective and three retrospective in design. These studies included very few patients (total n=39), and had variable patients, disease and treatment-related factors. Evidence-based recommendations cannot be generated to guide an optimal ACT management in such situations. Further research using standardized definitions is needed to identify optimal strategies for treating thrombotic events during periods of thrombocytopenia. Such research will help on the development of evidence-based clinical practice guidelines to improve patient care. Disclosures Brandão: Boehringer Ingelheim: Consultancy.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,003 | 0,023 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,003 | 0,003 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,005 | 0,006 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,003 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».