14
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: not found
      • Article: not found

      Parenteral anticoagulation in ambulatory patients with cancer

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPMC
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Anticoagulation may improve survival in patients with cancer through a speculated anti‐tumour effect, in addition to the antithrombotic effect, although may increase the risk of bleeding. To evaluate the efficacy and safety of parenteral anticoagulants in ambulatory patients with cancer who, typically, are undergoing chemotherapy, hormonal therapy, immunotherapy or radiotherapy, but otherwise have no standard therapeutic or prophylactic indication for anticoagulation. A comprehensive search included (1) a major electronic search (February 2016) of the following databases: Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (2016, Issue 1), MEDLINE (1946 to February 2016; accessed via OVID) and Embase (1980 to February 2016; accessed via OVID); (2) handsearching of conference proceedings; (3) checking of references of included studies; (4) use of the 'related citation' feature in PubMed and (5) a search for ongoing studies in trial registries. As part of the living systematic review approach, we are running searches continually and we will incorporate new evidence rapidly after it is identified. This update of the systematic review is based on the findings of a literature search conducted on 14 August 2017. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) assessing the benefits and harms of parenteral anticoagulation in ambulatory patients with cancer. Typically, these patients are undergoing chemotherapy, hormonal therapy, immunotherapy or radiotherapy, but otherwise have no standard therapeutic or prophylactic indication for anticoagulation. Using a standardized form we extracted data in duplicate on study design, participants, interventions outcomes of interest, and risk of bias. Outcomes of interested included all‐cause mortality, symptomatic venous thromboembolism (VTE), symptomatic deep vein thrombosis (DVT), pulmonary embolism (PE), major bleeding, minor bleeding, and quality of life. We assessed the certainty of evidence for each outcome using the GRADE approach ( GRADE handbook ). Of 6947 identified citations, 19 RCTs fulfilled the eligibility criteria. These trials enrolled 9650 participants. Trial registries' searches identified nine registered but unpublished trials, two of which were labeled as 'ongoing trials'. In all included RCTs, the intervention consisted of heparin (either unfractionated heparin or low molecular weight heparin). Overall, heparin appears to have no effect on mortality at 12 months (risk ratio (RR) 0.98; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.93 to 1.03; risk difference (RD) 10 fewer per 1000; 95% CI 35 fewer to 15 more; moderate certainty of evidence) and mortality at 24 months (RR 0.99; 95% CI 0.96 to 1.01; RD 8 fewer per 1000; 95% CI 31 fewer to 8 more; moderate certainty of evidence). Heparin therapy reduces the risk of symptomatic VTE (RR 0.56; 95% CI 0.47 to 0.68; RD 30 fewer per 1000; 95% CI 36 fewer to 22 fewer; high certainty of evidence), while it increases in the risks of major bleeding (RR 1.30; 95% 0.94 to 1.79; RD 4 more per 1000; 95% CI 1 fewer to 11 more; moderate certainty of evidence) and minor bleeding (RR 1.70; 95% 1.13 to 2.55; RD 17 more per 1000; 95% CI 3 more to 37 more; high certainty of evidence). Results failed to confirm or to exclude a beneficial or detrimental effect of heparin on thrombocytopenia (RR 0.69; 95% CI 0.37 to 1.27; RD 33 fewer per 1000; 95% CI 66 fewer to 28 more; moderate certainty of evidence); quality of life (moderate certainty of evidence). Heparin appears to have no effect on mortality at 12 months and 24 months. It reduces symptomatic VTE and likely increases major and minor bleeding. Future research should further investigate the survival benefit of different types of anticoagulants in patients with different types and stages of cancer. The decision for a patient with cancer to start heparin therapy should balance the benefits and downsides, and should integrate the patient's values and preferences. Editorial note:This is a living systematic review. Living systematic reviews offer a new approach to review updating in which the review is continually updated, incorporating relevant new evidence, as it becomes available. Please refer to the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews for the current status of this review. Injectable blood thinners (anticoagulants) in patients with cancer Background 
 Research evidence suggests that blood thinners may improve the survival of patients with cancer, by preventing life‐threatening blood clots and might also have a direct anticancer effect. However, blood thinners can also increase the risk of bleeding, which can be serious and reduce survival. It is therefore important to understand the pros and cons of treatment to allow patients and their doctors to be aware of the balance of risks and benefits. Study characteristics 
 We searched the scientific literature for studies of anticoagulants in people with cancer. The evidence is current to 14 August 2017. We included 19 eligible trials. Key results 
 We selected 19 trials including 9650 participants with cancer. Most trials included participants with various types of cancer, especially small cell lung cancer, non‐small cell lung cancer, and pancreatic cancer. All studies were conducted in the outpatient setting. The results suggest that the effect of injectable blood thinners on survival is uncertain, but if anything of small size. Also the results suggest that injectable blood thinners reduce the risk of blood clots by about half and possibly increase the risk of major bleeding and minor bleeding by 4 more per 1000 and 17 more per 1000, respectively. The effect on quality of life is uncertain. Certainty of evidence 
 We judged the certainty of evidence to be high for symptomatic VTE and minor bleeding, and moderate for mortality, major bleeding and quality of life. Editorial note: This is a living systematic review. Living systematic reviews offer a new approach to review updating in which the review is continually updated, incorporating relevant new evidence, as it becomes available. Please refer to the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews for the current status of this review.

          Related collections

          Most cited references126

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Tinzaparin vs Warfarin for Treatment of Acute Venous Thromboembolism in Patients With Active Cancer: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

          Low-molecular-weight heparin is recommended over warfarin for the treatment of acute venous thromboembolism (VTE) in patients with active cancer largely based on results of a single, large trial.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Randomized, placebo-controlled trial of dalteparin for the prevention of venous thromboembolism in acutely ill medical patients.

            Considerable variability exists in the use of pharmacological thromboprophylaxis among acutely ill medical patients, partly because clinically relevant end points have not been fully assessed in this population. We undertook an international, multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial using clinically important outcomes to assess the efficacy and safety of dalteparin in the prevention of venous thromboembolism in such patients. Patients (n=3706) were randomly assigned to receive either subcutaneous dalteparin 5000 IU daily or placebo for 14 days and were followed up for 90 days. The primary end point was venous thromboembolism, defined as the combination of symptomatic deep vein thrombosis, symptomatic pulmonary embolism, and asymptomatic proximal deep vein thrombosis detected by compression ultrasound at day 21 and sudden death by day 21. The incidence of venous thromboembolism was reduced from 4.96% (73 of 1473 patients) in the placebo group to 2.77% (42 of 1518 patients) in the dalteparin group, an absolute risk reduction of 2.19% or a relative risk reduction of 45% (relative risk, 0.55; 95% CI, 0.38 to 0.80; P=0.0015). The observed benefit was maintained at 90 days. The overall incidence of major bleeding was low but higher in the dalteparin group (9 patients; 0.49%) compared with the placebo group (3 patients; 0.16%). Dalteparin 5000 IU once daily halved the rate of venous thromboembolism with a low risk of bleeding.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Efficacy and safety of fondaparinux for the prevention of venous thromboembolism in older acute medical patients: randomised placebo controlled trial.

              To determine the efficacy and safety of the anticoagulant fondaparinux in older acute medical inpatients at moderate to high risk of venous thromboembolism. Double blind randomised placebo controlled trial. 35 centres in eight countries. 849 medical patients aged 60 or more admitted to hospital for congestive heart failure, acute respiratory illness in the presence of chronic lung disease, or acute infectious or inflammatory disease and expected to remain in bed for at least four days. 2.5 mg fondaparinux or placebo subcutaneously once daily for six to 14 days. The primary efficacy outcome was venous thromboembolism detected by routine bilateral venography along with symptomatic venous thromboembolism up to day 15. Secondary outcomes were bleeding and death. Patients were followed up at one month. 425 patients in the fondaparinux group and 414 patients in the placebo group were evaluable for safety analysis (10 were not treated). 644 patients (75.9%) were available for the primary efficacy analysis. Venous thrombembolism was detected in 5.6% (18/321) of patients treated with fondaparinux and 10.5% (34/323) of patients given placebo, a relative risk reduction of 46.7% (95% confidence interval 7.7% to 69.3%). Symptomatic venous thromboembolism occurred in five patients in the placebo group and none in the fondaparinux group (P = 0.029). Major bleeding occurred in one patient (0.2%) in each group. At the end of follow-up, 14 patients in the fondaparinux group (3.3%) and 25 in the placebo group (6.0%) had died. Fondaparinux is effective in the prevention of asymptomatic and symptomatic venous thromboembolic events in older acute medical patients. The frequency of major bleeding was similar for both fondaparinux and placebo treated patients.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews
                Wiley
                14651858
                September 11 2017
                Affiliations
                [1 ]American University of Beirut Medical Center; Department of Internal Medicine; Riad El Solh St Beirut Lebanon
                [2 ]American University of Beirut; Faculty of Medicine; Beirut Lebanon
                [3 ]American University of Beirut; Family Medicine; Beirut Lebanon 1107 2020
                [4 ]Regina Elena National Cancer Institute; Biostatistics-Scientific Direction; Via Elio Chianesi 53 Rome Italy 00144
                [5 ]IRCCS Regina Elena National Cancer Institute; Division of Medical Oncology 2 - Scientific Direction; Via Elio Chianesi 53 Rome Italy 00144
                [6 ]Buffalo Medical Group; 85 High Street Buffalo New York USA 14203-1149
                [7 ]Monash University; Cochrane Australia, School of Public Health and Preventive Medicine; L4 551 St Kilda Rd Melbourne Victoria Australia 3004
                [8 ]La Trobe University; Cochrane Consumers and Communication, Centre for Health Communication and Participation, School of Psychology and Public Health; Bundoora Vic Australia 3086
                [9 ]McMaster University; Departments of Health Research Methods, Evidence, and Impact and of Medicine; 1280 Main Street West Hamilton ON Canada L8N 4K1
                Article
                10.1002/14651858.CD006652.pub5
                6419241
                28892556
                53916022-f62f-489b-9e0d-d38a0b856b20
                © 2017
                History

                Comments

                Comment on this article