Time to improve statin prescription guidelines in low-risk patients?

Background The challenge of the primary prevention of cardiovascular disease (CVD) is to identify patients who would benefit from treatment with statins. Statins are currently prescribed to many patients, even those at a low 10-year risk of CVD. These latter patients may not be eligible for statins according to current guidelines. Design This study investigated the prescription of guideline-consistent (according to guidelines) and guideline-inconsistent (not according to guidelines) lipid-lowering treatment in primary prevention in a large contemporary Dutch cohort study (Lifelines). Methods Lifelines is a large cohort study from the Netherlands. Participants were recruited between 2006 and 2013. They completed questionnaires and underwent a physical examination. Participants with previous CVD were excluded. Statins and ezetimibe were grouped as statin treatment. The Dutch guideline on cardiovascular management was used to assess eligibility for statins. Results Of 147,785 participants, 7092 (4.8%) reported statin treatment. In 4667 (66%) participants, statin treatment was inconsistent with the Dutch guideline. A total of 78% of these participants had a low 10-year predicted CVD risk. Multivariable logistic regression analysis showed that female sex and smoking were strongly associated with guideline-inconsistent treatment. Interestingly, 65% of the these participants had low-density lipoprotein cholesterol levels above the 95(th) percentile, adjusted for age and sex, two or more major risk factors of CVD or a positive family history of premature CVD. Therefore treatment might be reasonable. Conclusions There is a large inconsistency between guideline recommendations and the prescription of statins in clinical practice in the Netherlands. This is especially true for patients with low CVD risk. Many of these patients probably had risk-increasing circumstances justifying treatment

Idarucizumab for Dabigatran Reversal - Full Cohort Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Idarucizumab, a monoclonal antibody fragment, was developed to reverse the anticoagulant effect of dabigatran. METHODS: We performed a multicenter, prospective, open-label study to determine whether 5 g of intravenous idarucizumab would be able to reverse the anticoagulant effect of dabigatran in patients who had uncontrolled bleeding (group A) or were about to undergo an urgent procedure (group B). The primary end point was the maximum percentage reversal of the anticoagulant effect of dabigatran within 4 hours after the administration of idarucizumab, on the basis of the diluted thrombin time or ecarin clotting time. Secondary end points included the restoration of hemostasis and safety measures. RESULTS: A total of 503 patients were enrolled: 301 in group A, and 202 in group B. The median maximum percentage reversal of dabigatran was 100% (95% confidence interval, 100 to 100), on the basis of either the diluted thrombin time or the ecarin clotting time. In group A, 137 patients (45.5%) presented with gastrointestinal bleeding and 98 (32.6%) presented with intracranial hemorrhage; among the patients who could be assessed, the median time to the cessation of bleeding was 2.5 hours. In group B, the median time to the initiation of the intended procedure was 1.6 hours; periprocedural hemostasis was assessed as normal in 93.4% of the patients, mildly abnormal in 5.1%, and moderately abnormal in 1.5%. At 90 days, thrombotic events had occurred in 6.3% of the patients in group A and in 7.4% in group B, and the mortality rate was 18.8% and 18.9%, respectively. There were no serious adverse safety signals. CONCLUSIONS: In emergency situations, idarucizumab rapidly, durably, and safely reversed the anticoagulant effect of dabigatran. (Funded by Boehringer Ingelheim; RE-VERSE AD ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02104947 .)

Potential of an age adjusted D-dimer cut-off value to improve the exclusion of pulmonary embolism in older patients: a retrospective analysis of three large cohorts

Objectives In older patients, the the D-dimer test for pulmonary embolism has reduced specificity and is therefore less useful. In this study a new, age dependent cut-off value for the test was devised and its usefulness with older patients assessed

Preface

Reproductive tract bleeding in women is a naturally occurring event during menstruation and childbirth. In women with menorrhagia, however, congenital bleeding disorders historically have been underdiagnosed. This consensus is intended to allow physicians to better recognize bleeding disorders as a cause of menorrhagia and consequently offer effective disease-specific therapies. © 2009 Mosby, Inc. All rights reserved

Short-term prognosis of breakthrough venous thromboembolism in anticoagulated patients

Background: Evidence for guideline recommendations for the treatment of venous thromboembolism (VTE) during anticoagulant therapy is scarce. We aimed to observe and to describe the management of VTE occurring during anticoagulant therapy. Methods: This prospective multi-center, observational study included patients with objectively confirmed VTE during anticoagulant therapy (breakthrough event), with a follow-up of 3 months, after the breakthrough event. Results: We registered 121 patients with a breakthrough event, with a mean age of 56 years (range, 19 to 90); 61 were male (50%). Fifty-eight patients (48%) had an active malignancy. At the time of the breakthrough event, 57 patients (47%) were treated with a vitamin K antagonist (VKA), 53 patients (44%) with low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) and 11 patients (9%) with direct oral anticoagulants, unfractionated heparin, or VKA plu

The Khorana score for prediction of venous thromboembolism in cancer patients:a systematic review and meta-analysis

We aimed to evaluate the performance of the Khorana score in predicting venous thromboembolic events in ambulatory cancer patients. Embase and MEDLINE were searched from January 2008 to June 2018 for studies which evaluated the Khorana score. Two authors independently screened studies for eligibility, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias. Additional data on the 6-month incidence of venous thromboembolism were sought by contacting corresponding authors. The incidence in each Khorana score risk group was estimated with random effects meta-analysis. A total of 45 articles and eight abstracts were included, comprising 55 cohorts enrolling 34,555 ambulatory cancer patients. For 27,849 patients (81%), 6-month follow-up data were obtained. Overall, 19% of patients had a Khorana score of 0 points, 64% a score of 1 or 2 points, and 17% a score of 3 or more points. The incidence of venous thromboembolism in the first six months was 5.0% (95% CI: 3.9-6.5) in patients with a low-risk Khorana score (0 points), 6.6% (95% CI: 5.6-7.7) in those with an intermediate-risk Khorana score (1 or 2 points), and 11.0% (95% CI: 8.8-13.8) in those with a high-risk Khorana score (3 points or higher). Of the patients with venous thromboembolism in the first six months, 23.4% (95% CI: 18.4-29.4) had been classified as high risk according to the Khorana score. In conclusion, the Khorana score can be used to select ambulatory cancer patients at high risk of venous thromboembolism for thromboprophylaxis; however, most events occur outside this high-risk group

Comparison of risk prediction scores for venous thromboembolism in cancer patients:A prospective cohort study

In ambulatory patients with solid cancer, routine thromboprophylaxis to prevent venous thromboembolism is not recommended. Several risk prediction scores to identify cancer patients at high risk of venous thromboembolism have been proposed, but their clinical usefulness remains a matter of debate. We evaluated and directly compared the performance of the Khorana, Vienna, PROTECHT, and CONKO scores in a multinational, prospective cohort study. Patients with advanced cancer were eligible if they were due to undergo chemotherapy or had started chemotherapy in the previous three months. The primary outcome was objectively confirmed symptomatic or incidental deep vein thrombosis or pulmonary embolism during a 6-month followup period. A total of 876 patients were enrolled, of whom 260 (30%) had not yet received chemotherapy. Fifty-three patients (6.1%) developed venous thromboembolism. The c-statistics of the scores ranged from 0.50 to 0.57. At the conventional positivity threshold of 3 points, the scores classified 13-34% of patients as high-risk; the 6-month incidence of venous thromboembolism in these patients ranged from 6.5% (95% CI: 2.8-12) for the Khorana score to 9.6% (95% CI: 6.6-13) for the PROTECHT score. High-risk patients had a significantly increased risk of venous thromboembolism when using the Vienna (subhazard ratio 1.7; 95% CI: 1.0-3.1) or PROTECHT (subhazard ratio 2.1; 95% CI: 1.23.6) scores. In conclusion, the prediction scores performed poorly in predicting venous thromboembolism in cancer patients. The Vienna CATS and PROTECHT scores appear to discriminate better between low-and high-risk patients, but further improvements are needed before they can be considered for introduction into clinical practice

Direct oral anticoagulants for cancer-associated venous thromboembolism : a systematic review and meta-analysis

Direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) are an emerging treatment option for cancer patients with acute venous thromboembolism (VTE), but studies have reported inconsistent results. This systematic review and meta-analysis compared the efficacy and safety of DOACs and low-molecular-weight heparins (LMWH) in these patients. MEDLINE, Embase, CENTRAL, and conference proceedings were searched to identify relevant randomized controlled trials. Additional data were obtained from the original authors to homogenize definitions for all study outcomes. The primary efficacy and safety outcomes were recurrent VTE and major bleeding, respectively. Other outcomes included the composite of recurrent VTE and major bleeding, clinically relevant non-major bleeding (CRNMB), and all-cause mortality. Summary relative risks (RR) were calculated in a random effects meta-analysis. In the primary analysis comprising 2,607 patients, the risk of recurrent VTE was non-significantly lower with DOACs than with LMWH (RR 0.68; 95% CI, 0.39 to 1.17). Conversely, the risks of major bleeding (RR 1.36; 95% CI, 0.55 to 3.35) and CRNMB (RR 1.63, 95%, 0.73 to 3.64) were non-significantly higher. The risk of the composite of recurrent VTE or major bleeding was non-significantly lower with DOACs than with LMWH (RR 0.86; 95% CI, 0.60 to 1.23). Mortality was comparable in both groups (RR 0.96; 95% CI, 0.68 to 1.36). Findings were consistent during the on-treatment period and in those with incidental VTE. In conclusion, DOACs are an effective treatment option for cancer patients with acute VTE, although caution is needed in patients at high risk of bleeding. [Abstract copyright: Copyright © 2020 American Society of Hematology.