Protocol for a partially nested randomised controlled trial to evaluate the effectiveness of the scleroderma patient-centered intervention network COVID-19 home-isolation activities together (SPIN-CHAT) program to reduce anxiety among at-risk scleroderma patients

Objective: Contagious disease outbreaks and related restrictions can lead to negative psychological outcomes, particularly in vulnerable populations at risk due to pre-existing medical conditions. No randomised controlled trials (RCTs) have tested interventions to reduce mental health consequences of contagious disease outbreaks. The primary objective of the Scleroderma Patient-centered Intervention Network COVID-19 Home-isolation Activities Together (SPIN-CHAT) Trial is to evaluate the effect of a videoconference-based program on symptoms of anxiety. Secondary objectives include evaluating effects on symptoms of depression, stress, loneliness, boredom, physical activity, and social interaction.Methods: The SPIN-CHAT Trial is a pragmatic RCT that will be conducted using the SPIN-COVID-19 Cohort, a sub-cohort of the SPIN Cohort. Eligible participants will be SPIN-COVID-19 Cohort participants without a positive COVID-19 test, with at least mild anxiety (PROMIS Anxiety 4a v1.0 T-score >= 55), not working from home, and not receiving current counselling or psychotherapy. We will randomly assign 162 participants to intervention groups of 7 to 10 participants each or waitlist control. We will use a partially nested RCT design to reflect dependence between individuals in training groups but not in the waitlist control. The SPIN-CHAT Program includes activity engagement, education on strategies to support mental health, and mutual participant support. Intervention participants will receive the 4-week (3 sessions per week) SPIN-CHAT Program via video-conference. The primary outcome is PROMIS Anxiety 4a score immediately post-intervention.Ethics and dissemination: The SPIN-CHAT Trial will test whether a brief videoconference-based intervention will improve mental health outcomes among at-risk individuals during contagious disease outbreak

2019 international clinical practice guidelines for the treatment and prophylaxis of venous thromboembolism in patients with cancer

Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is the second leading cause of death in patients with cancer. These patients are at a high risk of VTE recurrence and bleeding during anticoagulant therapy. The International Initiative on Thrombosis and Cancer is an independent academic working group aimed at establishing a global consensus for the treatment and prophylaxis of VTE in patients with cancer. The International Initiative on Thrombosis and Cancer last updated its evidence-based clinical practice guidelines in 2016 with a free, web-based mobile phone application, which was subsequently endorsed by the International Society on Thrombosis and Haemostasis. The 2019 International Initiative on Thrombosis and Cancer clinical practice guidelines, which are based on a systematic review of the literature published up to December, 2018, are presented along with a Grading of Recommendations Assessment Development and Evaluation scale methods, with the support of the French National Cancer Institute. These guidelines were reviewed by an expanded international advisory committee and endorsed by the International Society on Thrombosis and Haemostasis. Results from head-to-head clinical trials that compared direct oral anticoagulant with low-molecular-weight heparin are also summarised, along with new evidence for the treatment and prophylaxis of VTE in patients with cancer

2022 international clinical practice guidelines for the treatment and prophylaxis of venous thromboembolism in patients with cancer, including patients with COVID-19

The International Initiative on Thrombosis and Cancer is an independent academic working group of experts aimed at establishing global consensus for the treatment and prophylaxis of cancer-associated thrombosis. The 2013, 2016, and 2019 International Initiative on Thrombosis and Cancer clinical practice guidelines have been made available through a free, web-based mobile phone application. The 2022 clinical practice guidelines, which are based on a literature review up to Jan 1, 2022, include guidance for patients with cancer and with COVID-19. Key recommendations (grade 1A or 1B) include: (1) low-molecular-weight heparins (LMWHs) for the initial (first 10 days) treatment and maintenance treatment of cancer-associated thrombosis; (2) direct oral anticoagulants for the initial treatment and maintenance treatment of cancer-associated thrombosis in patients who are not at high risk of gastrointestinal or genitourinary bleeding, in the absence of strong drug–drug interactions or of gastrointestinal absorption impairment; (3) LMWHs or direct oral anticoagulants for a minimum of 6 months to treat cancer-associated thrombosis; (4) extended prophylaxis (4 weeks) with LMWHs to prevent postoperative venous thromboembolism after major abdominopelvic surgery in patients not at high risk of bleeding; and (5) primary prophylaxis of venous thromboembolism with LMWHs or direct oral anticoagulants (rivaroxaban or apixaban) in ambulatory patients with locally advanced or metastatic pancreatic cancer who are treated with anticancer therapy and have a low risk of bleeding

Timing and characteristics of venous thromboembolism after noncancer surgery

Background: Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is a major cause of morbidity and mortality postoperatively. The use of pharmacologic prophylaxis is effective in reducing the incidence of VTE. However, the prophylaxis is often discontinued at hospital discharge, especially for those with benign disease. The implications of this practice are not known. We assessed the data from a large, ongoing registry regarding the time course of VTE and outcomes after noncancer surgery. Methods: We analyzed the RIETE (Computerized Registry on Venous Thromboembolism) registry, which includes data from consecutive patients with symptomatic confirmed VTE. In the present study, we focused on general surgical patients who had developed symptomatic postoperative VTE in the first 8 weeks after noncancer surgery. The main objective was to assess the interval between surgery and the occurrence of VTE. Additional variables included the clinical presentation associated with the event, the use of thrombosis prophylaxis, and unfavorable outcomes. Results: The data from 3296 patients were analyzed. The median time from surgery to the detection of VTE was 16 days (interquartile range, 8-30 days). Of the VTE events, 77% were detected after the first postoperative week and 27% after 4 weeks. Overall, 43.9% of the patients with VTE had received pharmacologic prophylaxis after surgery for a median of 8 days (interquartile range, 5-14 days), and three quarters of the VTE events were detected after pharmacologic prophylaxis had been discontinued. Overall, 54% of the patients with VTE had presented with pulmonary embolism. For 15% of the patients, the clinical outcome was unfavorable, including 4% who had died within 90 days. Conclusions: The risk of VTE after noncancer general surgery remains high for ≤2 months. More than one half of the patients had presented with symptomatic PE as the VTE event, and 15% had had unfavorable outcomes. Only 44% of these patients had received pharmacologic prophylaxis for around 1 week

Characteristics, treatment patterns and outcomes of patients presenting with venous thromboembolic events after knee arthroscopy in the RIETE Registry

Knee arthroscopy is the most common orthopedic procedure worldwide. While incidence of post-arthroscopy venous thromboembolic events (VTE) is low, treatment patterns and patient outcomes have not been described. Patients from the "Registro Informatizado Enfermedad TromboEmbolica" who had confirmed post-arthroscopy VTE were compared to patients with provoked, post bone-fracture, and to patients with unprovoked VTE. Baseline characteristics, presenting signs and symptoms, treatment and outcomes including recurrent VTE, bleeds or death were compared. A total of 101 patients with post-arthroscopy VTE and 19,218 patients with unprovoked VTE were identified. Post-arthroscopy patients were younger (49.5 vs. 66 years, P\u2009<\u20090.0001) and had less history of VTE [5.9% vs. 20%, OR 0.26 (0.11-0.59)]. Among patients with isolated DVT, there were fewer proximal DVT in the post-arthroscopy group [40% vs. 86%, OR 0.11 (0.06-0.19)]. Treatment duration was shorter in the post-arthroscopy group (174\u2009\ub1\u2009140 vs. 311\u2009\ub1\u2009340 days, P\u2009<\u20090.0001) and more often with DOAC [OR 3.67 (1.95-6.89)]. Recurrent VTE occurred in 6.18 (1.96-14.9) and 11.9 (11.0-12.8) per 100 patient years [HR 0.52 (0.16-1.26)] after treatment in the post-arthroscopy and unprovoked groups, respectively. Recurrent VTE occurred in 5.17 (1.31-14.1) per 100 patient years in a separate post bone-fracture group (n\u2009=\u2009147), also not statistically different than the post-arthroscopy recurrence rate. After anticoagulation cessation, some patients post-knee arthroscopy develop VTE. While our small sample size precludes drawing firm conclusions, this signal should warrant further research into the optimal treatment duration for these patients, as some patients may be at increased risk for long-term recurrence

Real-Time Dissemination of Aggregate Data on Presentation and Outcomes of Patients With Venous Thromboembolism: The RIETE Infographics Project

In the current era of patient empowerment and precision medicine, access to timely information is critical to decision-making. Unfortunately, we currently lack patient-specific, real-time data about clinical presentation, risk of thrombotic or hemorrhagic events, key risk factors, and adverse outcomes in patients with venous thromboembolism (VTE). Accordingly, the Registro Informatizado Enfermedad TromboEmb\uf3lica (RIETE) investigators developed a tool to provide an open-source, real-time graphic representation of VTE-related data derived from over 90 000 patients with confirmed VTE. This information is intended to facilitate discussion in the informed decision-making process. The current article describes the aims, rationale, methods, and ongoing and future efforts of the real-time VTE infographics developed by the RIETE registry collaborators

Incidence of major adverse cardiovascular events among patients with provoked and unprovoked venous thromboembolism: Findings from the Registro Informatizado de Enfermedad Tromboemb\uf3lica Registry

Objective: Overlap exists between the risk factors for coronary artery disease and venous thromboembolism (VTE). However, a paucity of data is available on the incidence of major acute cardiovascular events (MACE) and major adverse limb events (MALE) among patients presenting with VTE. Moreover, it is unknown whether the rate of cardiovascular outcomes differs among patients with unprovoked vs provoked VTE. Methods: We analyzed the data from 2009 to 2017 in the Registro Informatizado de Enfermedad Tromboemb\uf3lica registry, an ongoing, multicenter, international registry of consecutive patients with a diagnosis of objectively confirmed VTE. The query was restricted it to patients with data entry for the arterial outcomes. The baseline prevalence of coronary artery disease risk factors was compared between patients with provoked (ie, immobility, cancer, surgery, travel >6 hours, hormonal causes) and unprovoked VTE. After the initial VTE event, we followed up patients for the composite primary outcome of incident MACE (ie, stroke, myocardial infarction, unstable angina) and/or MALE (ie, major limb events). We used the \u3c72 test for baseline associations and a Cox proportional hazard for multivariate analysis. We used IBM SPSS, version 24 (IBM Corp, Armonk, NY) for statistical analysis. A P value of <.05 was considered statistically significant. Results: We analyzed the data from 41,259 patients with VTE, of whom 22,633 (55.6%) had experienced a provoked VTE. During follow-up, the patients with provoked VTE were more likely to develop MACE or MALE than were patients with unprovoked VTE (hazard ratio [HR], 1.3; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.1-1.5). The association of arterial events with recent immobility (HR, 1.4; 95% CI, 1.5-12.1) and cancer (HR, 1.7; 95% CI, 1.4-1.9) was strong. After adjusting for multiple conventional cardiovascular risk factors, provoked VTE, compared with unprovoked VTE, was significantly associated with an increased hazard for MACE (HR, 1.4; 95% CI, 1.1-1.7). Cancer remained a significant adjusted predictor for both MACE (HR, 1.7; 95% CI, 1.4-2.1) and MALE (HR, 2.1; 95% CI 1.01-4.6) in those with provoked VTE. Conclusions: Among patients with VTE, provoked cases, specifically those with cancer-associated VTE, have an increased risk of major arterial events