Peterson, Lisa G

AbstractBackgroundClinical picture and outcome of incidental pulmonary embolism (iPE) compared to symptomatic pulmonary embolism (sPE) remain unclear.MethodsDemographics, recurrent venous thromboembolism (VTE), mortality, major bleeding, and clinically relevant nonmajor bleeding (CRNMB) were compared between iPE and sPE patients who were followed prospectively at Mayo Thrombophilia Clinic (March 1, 2013 to August 1, 2020).ResultsOut of 3576 VTE patients, 1417 (39.6%) had PE: 562 (39.7%) iPE and 855 sPE. Patients with cancer were more likely to have iPE (400 iPE vs. 314 sPE) compared to those without cancer (162 iPE vs. 541 sPE). VTE recurrence rate (all per 100 person‐years) was similar in all iPE and sPE patients (3.34 vs. 3.68, p = .50), with cancer (4.16 vs. 4.89, p = .370), and without cancer patients (0.89 vs. 2.80, p = .25). Higher mortality observed in all patients with iPE compared to sPE (46.45 vs. 23.47, p < .001) and with cancer (56.41 vs. 45.77, p = .03) became not significant after adjustment for age, antiplatelet therapy, metastases, and cancer location. Noncancer iPE patients had higher mortality (15.95 vs. 7.18, p = .006) even after adjustment (p = .05). The major bleeding rate was also higher in all patients iPE compared to sPE (7.10 vs. 3.68, p = .03), but not after adjustment (p = .974); higher major bleeding rate in noncancer patients (6.49 vs. 1.25, p = .007) remained significant after adjustment (.02). CRNMB rate was similar to iPE and sPE patients.ConclusioniPE represents a more serious clinical condition compared to sPE as indicated by the higher mortality and major bleeding but these differences reflect underlying comorbidities rather than the seriousness of the embolic event.

Abstract Objectives To investigate the association of extremes in bodyweight (EBW) and outcomes in patients with acute venous thromboembolism (VTE). Recurrent VTE, major bleeding, and clinically relevant non‐major bleeding were compared between patients with bodyweight <60 kg, 60‐120 kg, and >120 kg. Methods Consecutive patients enrolled in the Mayo Clinic VTE Registry (03/28/2013‐8/31/2019) with acute VTE were followed prospectively. Patient status was assessed in person, by mailing a written questionnaire, or by a scripted phone interview. Results Among 2577 patients with weight ranging from 27.0 kg to 263.2 kg, 2123 (82%) had a bodyweight between 60 and 120 kg, 223 (8.7%) had bodyweight < 60 kg, and 230 (8.9%) had bodyweight >120 kg. Patients with bodyweight <60 kg treated with DOACs had higher 3‐ and 6‐month incidence of major bleeding compared to the bodyweight 60‐120kg group (4.4% vs 1.1%, P = .03, and 4.4% vs 1.4%, P = .05, respectively). Patients with bodyweight >120 kg and cancer on rivaroxaban had higher VTE recurrence compared to bodyweight 60‐120kg group ( P = .01). Conclusions Treatment of acute VTE is associated with a higher incidence of bleeding in patients with bodyweight <60 kg. A higher VTE recurrence rate occurred only in cancer patients with bodyweight >120 kg on rivaroxaban.

AbstractRandomized controlled trials leading to the approval of apixaban and rivaroxaban for venous thromboembolism (VTE) did not include patients with upper extremity deep vein thrombosis (UE‐DVT). We sought to evaluate the safety and effectiveness of rivaroxaban and apixaban for the treatment of acute UE‐DVT. Consecutive patients with VTE enrolled into the Mayo Clinic VTE Registry, between March 1, 2013 and December 31, 2019, were followed prospectively. Clinical, demographic and imaging data were collected at the time of study recruitment. Patients with a diagnosis of acute UE‐DVT who received rivaroxaban, apixaban, LMWH or warfarin were included. Recurrent VTE, major bleeding, clinical‐relevant non‐major bleeding (CRNMB), and death were assessed at 3‐month intervals. During the study period, 210 patients with acute UE‐DVT were included; 63 were treated with apixaban, 39 with rivaroxaban, and 108 with LWMH and/or warfarin. Overall 51% had catheter‐associated UE‐DVT, 60% had a diagnosis of malignancy, and 14% had concurrent pulmonary embolism. Malignancy was more common in patients treated with LMWH/warfarin (67% vs 52%, P = .03). At 3 months of follow up, one (0.9%) recurrent VTE occurred in a patient treated with LMWH/warfarin and one (1.0%) patient treated with apixaban or rivaroxaban (P = .97). Major bleeding occurred in three patients treated with LMWH/warfarin, and in none of those treated with apixaban or rivaroxaban (P = .09). Clinical‐relevant non‐major bleeding occurred in one patient (0.9%) treated with LWMH/warfarin and two patients (2.0%) treated with apixaban or rivaroxaban (P = .53). Treatment of UE‐DVT with apixaban or rivaroxaban appears to be as safe and effective as LMWH/warfarin.

Abstract To provide direct comparison between apixaban and rivaroxaban in patients with acute cancer‐associated venous thromboembolism (Ca‐VTE), consecutive patients treated with apixaban, rivaroxaban, or enoxaparin at Mayo Thrombophilia Clinic (March 1, 2013 to January 31, 2018)) were followed prospectively. The primary effectiveness outcome was venous thromboembolism (VTE) recurrence, and the secondary was mortality. The primary safety outcome was major bleeding, the secondary clinically relevant safety outcome was non‐major bleeding (CRNMB), and the third a composite of major and CRNMB. There were 750 patients treated for acute Ca‐VTE with apixaban (n = 224), rivaroxaban (n = 163), and enoxaparin (n = 363) within 14 days of diagnosis and for at least 3 months, or until study event. Recurrent VTE was diagnosed in 11 receiving apixaban, 7 receiving rivaroxaban (apixaban vs rivaroxaban hazard ratio (HR) 1.31, 95% confidence interval (95% CI) 0.51‐3.36) and 17 in the enoxaparin receiving group (apixaban vs enoxaparin HR 1.14, 95% CI: 0.54, 2.42 and rivaroxaban vs enoxaparin HR 0.85, 95% Cl: 0.36, 2.06). There were 82 deaths in apixaban, 74 rivaroxaban (apixaban vs rivaroxaban HR 1.67, 95% Cl: 1.20, 2.33) and 171 in enoxaparin group (rivaroxaban vs enoxaparin HR 0.73, 95% Cl: 0.56, 0.96). Major bleeding occurred in 11 apixaban, 12 rivaroxaban (apixaban vs rivaroxaban HR 0.73, 95% Cl: 0.32, 1.66) and 21 enoxaparin group (apixaban vs enoxaparin HR 0.89, 95% Cl: 0.43, 1.84 and rivaroxaban vs enoxaparin HR 1.23, 95% Cl: 0.61, 2.50). The CRNMB rate was higher in rivaroxaban compared to apixaban ( P = .03) and LMWH ( P = .01) groups. Recurrence of VTE and major bleeding were similar in apixaban, rivaroxaban, and enoxaparin groups. Rivaroxaban was associated with higher CRNMB but lower mortality compared to apixaban and enoxaparin.