Lang, Teresa

Background: Reduced or low-dose direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) have been studied in randomized control trials for the extended prevention of venous thromboembolism (VTE) after 6 months of treatment at full, therapeutic doses. The real-world effectiveness as well as utilization of this approach in clinical practice compared to continuing at therapeutic doses is unclear. Aims: Examine the effectiveness, safety and utilization of reduced-dose DOACs in cancer patients and overweight patients. Methods: Consecutive patients with VTE were identified using the Mayo Clinic VTE Registry from March 1st, 2013 to December 31st, 2021. Patients were followed prospectively for outcomes of VTE recurrence, death, major bleeding and clinically relevant non major bleeding (CRNMB) either in person or by survey. Patients with recurrent VTE or bleeding during the first 3 months were excluded from further analysis. After completion of anticoagulation treatment for 3 months with either rivaroxaban or apixaban, patients continuing anticoagulation were evaluated in a nested case-control study. Results: A total of 404 patients (283 (70%) on apixaban and 121 (30%) on rivaroxaban) were identified in the low dose DOAC and 3060 in the full dose anticoagulation group. Overall, the mean age was 60.7 years (SD 14.4), mean weight was 89.9 kg (SD 23.8) and 55.1% were males. Within the full cohort, patients with active cancer were less likely to be prescribed low dose DOACs (HR 0.56; 95%CI 0.42-0.73; p<0.001). However, low dose DOAC prescription was more likely in patients with pulmonary embolism alone (HR 1.48; 95%CI 1.21-1.80; p<0.001) or in combination with DVT (HR 1.54; 95%CI 1.25,1.90; p<0.001). Patients transitioned to low dose DOACs had similar age, sex and weight compared to the full dose anticoagulation group, however, fewer patients with weight ≥120 kg had reduced dosing (HR 0.68; 95%CI 0.46,0.99; p=0.046). The mean time to start of a low dose DOAC was 5.1 months overall, 5.4 months in cancer patients, and 3.6-4.9 months in non-cancer patients (Table 1). Non-cancer patients had significantly lower transition numbers in those ≥120kg (HR 0.62; 95%CI 0.40,0.97; p=0.038). In non-cancer patients In comparing weight, ≥120kg to <120kg, in the low dose group, only death was statistically different with higher risk in those ≥120kg (HR 6.44; 95%CI1.27,32.81; p=0.025). Cancer patients transitioned to low dose DOACs around 5 months on average with a median of 3.3 months. Apixaban continued to be the dominant DOAC used (78%) in the low dose group. The cancers with the most patients on low dose DOACs include lymphoma, prostate, melanoma, ovarian, and breast. There was no significant difference in VTE recurrence or death in the cancer group on different DOAC doses. Conclusion: Our results show that anticoagulant prescribers are not always waiting until 6 months to transition to low doses and low doses are being utilized in cancer patients despite lack of cancer-specific studies during the analyzed time period. Although the sample size limits the precision of this analysis, we did not find statistically significant increases in VTE recurrence with low dose DOACs in either cancer patients or with elevated body weight. We did find CRNMB but not MB was observed more frequently in weights above 120kg, possibly from unadjusted confounding in this unadjusted analysis.

Abstract Background: Randomized control trials (RCT) have examined the safety and efficacy of direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) compared to dalteparin in patients with cancer-associated thrombosis (CAT). Increased major bleeding (MB) was seen with edoxaban and increased clinically relevant non-major bleeding (CRNMB) was seen with rivaroxaban and there has been specific concern about increased risk of bleeding among patients with gastrointestinal malignancies (GIM). Results from RCTs comparing apixaban to dalteparin in CAT are pending. Objective: Using the Mayo Clinic VTE registry, we examined the rates of MB, CRNMB, and overall bleeding (MB + CRNMB) in patients with GIM treated with anticoagulation for CAT. Methods: Consecutive patients treated for CAT were enrolled into Mayo Clinic VTE Registry between March 1, 2013 and July 27, 2018 and were followed prospectively for safety and efficacy. Clinical, demographic and imaging data were collected from each participant at the time of study recruitment. Cancer type, stage, and treatment with chemotherapy were recorded. Major and CRNMB events were evaluated at 3-month intervals. Clinical status was assessed by written questionnaire in subjects unable to return at 3 months. Unreturned questionnaires were followed up with a scripted phone interview. The study was approved by Mayo Clinic Institutional Review Board. Results: In the 535 subjects in the registry with CAT, the mean age (64.6 vs. 62.8 years), mean BMI (28.4 vs. 28.8), and percent female (46.4% vs 40.6%) were numerically similar between DOAC and LMWH treatment groups (Table 1). Metastatic disease was present in 53.6% and 60.2% and chemotherapy was being administered in 66.5% and 71.2% of DOAC and LMWH treated patients, respectively. Thrombocytopenia (<100x109/L) at initiation of anticoagulation was present in 6.8% of DOAC treated and 7.5% of LMWH treated patients. Among all cancer patients, 110 (21%) patients had a GIM, 58 (53%) were treated with LWMH and 52 (47%) were treated with a DOAC (42% rivaroxaban or 58% apixaban). In all CAT, the rate of MB was similar in DOAC versus LMWH treated patients (7.8 vs. 5.4 per 100 person-years; HR 1.48, 95% CI 0.72-3.05; Table 2). The rate of CRNMB however, was significantly increased in the DOAC patients compared to LMWH treated patients (6.18 vs. 0.44 per 100 person-years; HR 14.7, 95% CI 1.92, 112.26). In the sub-group of patients with GIM, the rate of MB was non-significantly higher in the DOAC versus LMWH treated patients (11.1 vs. 3.9 per 100 person-years; HR 2.90, 95% CI 0.57, 14.73). In contrast to the overall CAT group, the rate of CRNMB was similar in the DOAC compared to LMWH treated patients (2.10 vs. 1.92 per 100 person-years; HR 1.18, 95% CI 0.07, 20.21). In GIM patients, apixaban compared to rivaroxaban had a numerically higher, but non-significant, rate of major bleeding (23.98 vs. 3.50 per 100 person-years; HR 4.0, 95% CI 0.54-29.87). In the overall group of CAT, the risk of major bleeding was similar between apixaban and rivaroxaban (9.51 vs. 6.77 per 100 person-years). Conclusion: In our registry of subjects with CAT, we identified a significantly increased rate of CRNMB and overall bleeding, but not MB with the use of DOACs. In our data, GIM alone does not appear to account for the increased bleeding risk seen in CAT with DOACs, as we demonstrated no significant increase in major, CRNMB, or overall bleeding compared to LMWH. Direct comparison between apixaban and rivaroxaban was limited by sample size and number of events. Disclosures No relevant conflicts of interest to declare.