The updated literature search (appendix p 3) for all studies published in French or English between November, 2010, and January, 2016, was done by the Institut National du Cancer using MEDLINE and PubMed Central databases with the following subject headings: “cancer”, “VTE”, “anticoagulant drugs”, and “devices”. Additional key articles and other clinical practice guidelines13, 15, 16, 17, 132 on overlapping clinical questions were consulted and included. The search included meta-analyses,
ReviewInternational clinical practice guidelines including guidance for direct oral anticoagulants in the treatment and prophylaxis of venous thromboembolism in patients with cancer
Introduction
Cancer is an independent major risk factor for venous thromboembolism (VTE), which is the second leading cause of death in medically and surgically treated patients with cancer.1 The incidence of symptomatic and asymptomatic VTE is steadily increasing in these patients2, 3, 4 who are at an increased risk of VTE recurrence and bleeding, and are more likely to use health-care resources.5, 6, 7 As an independent prognostic factor for cancer progression and death,1, 2 it has been recommended that VTE occurrence becomes a secondary endpoint in oncological trials.8
The clinical presentation of VTE—defined as deep vein thrombosis, pulmonary embolism, or central venous catheter-associated thrombosis—poses major therapeutic challenges that are further complicated by multiple cancer-related risk factors and comorbidities, which influence the choice of anticoagulation.9, 10, 11, 12 Despite the development of national clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) on VTE treatment,13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18 substantial knowledge gaps remain.19 Preconceptions about patient tolerance and quality of life with the recommended anticoagulants need to be addressed as they hinder global CPG implementation. The International Initiative on Thrombosis and Cancer (ITAC-CME) initially published the 2013 international CPGs.20, 21 Evidence-based knowledge was translated into clinical practice with a free web-based mobile application (for iOS and Android), in English and French, to improve patient care. In 2015, direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) were prescribed in 20% of patients with cancer in the US22 and worldwide23 despite an absence of direct evidence to support this shifting clinical practice.23 As a result, the ITAC-CME developed an update of the 2013 recommendations to address DOAC use in the treatment of VTE for patients with cancer. In this Review, we summarise those results, and provide the first evidence-based international guidelines on DOAC use in the treatment of VTE. Guidelines were developed by an independent working group of academic experts, reviewed by an expanded global advisory committee, and endorsed by the International Society on Thrombosis and Haemostasis.
Section snippets
Critical appraisal
After suitable articles were selected from the literature search, critical appraisal (appendix p 9) of the selected articles' methodological strength and clinical relevance was done independently by the methodologists (DF and JD) and then approved by the working group. Data were extracted into evidence tables and identified discrepancies were resolved by the working group. Conclusion tables that summarised the evidence for each clinical question were assembled to guide the development of the
Guideline recommendations for the treatment of established VTE
Recommendations on the treatment of established VTE for patients with cancer and the international advisory panel rankings of the guidelines can be found in panel 2.25, 26
Guideline recommendations for VTE prophylaxis in patients with cancer
Recommendations for VTE prophylaxis in patients with cancer and the corresponding international advisory panel rankings can be found in panel 3. VTE risk-assessment models are provided to guide anticoagulant-treatment decisions (panel 4).10, 89, 90, 91
VTE treatment in special clinical situations
Recommendations on VTE treatment for patients in special clinical situations can be found in panel 5.
Conclusion
Most new data from patients with cancer address VTE prophylaxis with LMWH and the effects of DOACs in VTE treatment. LMWH for the treatment and management of established VTE in patients with cancer is well demonstrated, with strong evidence for at least a 3-month treatment duration. Primary thromboprophylaxis with LMWH is also well defined in cancer surgery. The evidence is less clear in medically treated patients with cancer, particularly those receiving ambulatory systemic anticancer therapy.
Search strategy and selection criteria
References (132)
- et al.
Thromboembolism is a leading cause of death in cancer patients receiving outpatient chemotherapy
J Thromb Haemost
(2007) - et al.
Surgical duration and risk of venous thromboembolism
JAMA Surg
(2015) - et al.
Recurrent venous thromboembolism and bleeding complications during anticoagulant treatment in patients with cancer and venous thrombosis
Blood
(2002) - et al.
Venous thromboembolism in cancer clinical trials: recommendation for standardized reporting and analysis
J Thromb Haemost
(2012) - et al.
Development and validation of a predictive model for chemotherapy-associated thrombosis
Blood
(2008) - et al.
Epidemiology of cancer-associated venous thrombosis
Blood
(2013) - et al.
Antithrombotic therapy for VTE disease: CHEST guideline
Chest
(2016) - et al.
International clinical practice guidelines for the treatment and prophylaxis of venous thromboembolism in patients with cancer
J Thromb Haemost
(2013) - et al.
International clinical practice guidelines for the treatment and prophylaxis of thrombosis associated with central venous catheters in patients with cancer
J Thromb Haemost
(2013) - et al.
Evaluation of US prescription patterns: are treatment guidelines for cancer-associated venous thromboembolism being followed?
Thromb Res
(2016)