MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Treatment of Cancer Associated Venous Thrombosis; The Cleveland Clinic Experience

2017· article· en· W2981166661 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Shafia Rahman, Dana E. Angelini, Paul Elson, Mailey L Wilks, Vicki Pinkava, Meghan O’Brien, Barb Tripp, Jung Min Song, Keith R. McCrae, Alok A. Khorana

Bibliographic record

VenueBlood · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicVenous Thromboembolism Diagnosis and Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineRivaroxabanVitamin K antagonistLow molecular weight heparinFondaparinuxCancerThrombosisExact testInternal medicineWarfarinVenous thromboembolism

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Introduction: Current guidelines recommend anticoagulation with low molecular weight heparin (LMWH) over vitamin K antagonists (VKA) for the treatment of cancer associated thrombosis (CAT). The use of direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) is gaining more popularity amongst patients and prescribers given the ease of administration and lower cost compared to LMWH. However, there is limited published data comparing LMWH vs DOACs for the treatment of CAT. Here we report patient outcomes from our clinical experience in treating CAT. Methods: We evaluated a prospective cohort of patients referred to our centralized CAT clinic at the Cleveland Clinic Taussig Cancer Institute. This clinic provides urgent outpatient consultation for adult cancer patients with clinical concern for VTE. In effort to standardize initial treatment, reduce variation in care, and minimize the need for hospitalization, a care path was created to recommend LMWH as the preferred anticoagulant for treatment of VTE with rivaroxaban as an alternative based on patient preference or cost. We evaluated clinical characteristics, anticoagulation prescription, VTE recurrence rate, and subsequent hospitalization for patients diagnosed with VTE. Continuous variables were analyzed with t-test, chi-square (or Fisher's exact) for unordered categorical data, and Cochran-Armitage test for ordered categorical data. Kruskal Wallis test for age was used when comparing all treatments and Wilcoxon rank sum test for age was used when comparing enoxaparin vs rivaroxaban. Results: Data from 608 patients seen between 8/2014 and 11/2016 were considered for analysis. Sixteen patients were excluded (15 due to missing data and one because he/she was the only patient treated with apixaban), leaving 592 patients. Males comprised 52% (308/592) of the study population, median age was 63 (range 20-95). Hematologic malignancies comprised 21% (123/586) of patients and most patients with solid tumors had metastatic disease (72%, 265/368). Within the study population, 15% (88/584) had history of prior VTE and 54% (289/537) were considered high risk based on the modified Ottawa score. (Table 1) VTE was diagnosed in 34% of patients referred to the clinic: Of these, 29% (174/529) were diagnosed with deep vein thrombosis (DVT), 2 % (12/529) with pulmonary embolism (PE), 3% (17/592) with both DVT and PE and one patient had visceral vein thrombosis. Of patients diagnosed with VTE, 25% of patients were subsequently hospitalized. Gastrointestinal, brain, and lymphoma's had a higher rate of VTE than other tumor types (45-49% vs 29-35%). Breast cancer had a lower rate of VTE than other cancer types (17%, p=0.001) Enoxaparin was the most commonly prescribed drug given to 76% (149/195) of patients. Rivaroxaban was given to 12% (23/195), 8% (16/195) were treated with Coumadin and 7 patients (4%) were not given anticoagulant therapy due to a contraindication. High Ottawa score patients received rivaroxaban less frequently than other treatments (p=0.02). Patients treated with rivaroxaban had less hospitalizations compared to patients treated with other anticoagulants (p=0.04). Of patients diagnosed with VTE, 16 (8%) had a recurrent event. There were no significant associations with sex, age, type of cancer, stage, or type of anticoagulant. Specifically, there was no difference in risk of VTE recurrence in patients treated with LMWH (11 events) vs rivaroxaban (0 events); p=0.36). The Ottawa score did not statistically correlate with recurrent VTE (0%, 6%, and 10%) for low, intermediate, and high risk, respectively (p=0.2). An increased risk of recurrent VTE was seen in patients who had personal history of VTE and in those who were hospitalized after the VTE (p=0.02 and p=0.005, respectively). Table 2 Conclusion: The Cleveland Clinic provides centralized care to cancer patients diagnosed with VTE. Among patients referred to our CAT clinic, we found risk of VTE correlates with cancer type and personal history of VTE. Most of our patients received our recommended therapy, enoxaparin, but rivaroxaban was prescribed to some due to patient preference. Patients treated with rivaroxaban had fewer adverse outcomes compared to those treated with other anticoagulants. Limitations include the small sample size and greater use of rivaroxaban in lower risk patients. We found the risk of VTE recurrence was higher in those with history of VTE and in those hospitalized for their VTE event. Download : Download high-res image (332KB) Download : Download full-size image Disclosures No relevant conflicts of interest to declare.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.064
GPT teacher head0.374
Teacher spread0.310 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations3
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBlood→Same topicVenous Thromboembolism Diagnosis and Management→French-language works237,207→