Casanegra, Ana I

Background: Incidental pulmonary embolism (PE) is not infrequently found on CT scans with highest incidence reported in patients with cancer. It is unclear whether patients with symptomatic pulmonary embolism (iPE) have different clinical profile or outcomes compared to patients with symptomatic PE (sPE) and whether this is affected by the presence or type of malignancy. Objective: Compare baseline characteristics of patients diagnosed with iPE to patients with sPE with attention to cancer-specific risk factors as well as evaluate clinical outcomes. Methods: Consecutive patients enrolled in the Mayo Thrombophilia Clinic VTE Registry between March 1, 2013 and December 31st, 2018 with PE were followed prospectively. Outcomes of recurrent venous thromboembolism (VTE), major bleeding, clinically relevant non-major bleeding (CRNMB) and mortality data were collected every 3 months. Clinical outcomes were analyzed with specific focus on patients with cancer. Information was collected and managed using REDCap (Research Electronic Data Capture) and data analysis was performed using SAS software (SAS Institute Inc., Cary, North Carolina). Results: Out of a total of 1033 patients with PE in VTE registry, there were 655 patients with PE (284 with incidental and 363 symptomatic) who completed at least 3 months of anticoagulation and were started on treatment within 14 days of diagnosis. Apixaban was used in 220 (34 %), Rivaroxaban 175 (27 %), Enoxaparin 179 (27%), and Warfarin in 81 (12 %) patients. Overall cancer was present in 61% of patients and was more common in patients with iPE compared to sPE (80.2% vs 45.2%, p<0.001). Patients with iPE were less likely to have previous VTE (8.2% vs 25.5%, p< 0.0001) and tended to have lower BMI (mean 28.8 vs 31.4, p<0.0001) Characteristics of the subgroup of only cancer patients with PE are summarized in the Table. Of note, pancreatic and GI cancers were more common in patients with iPE. There were no differences in recurrent VTE, major bleeding and CRNMB in patients with iPE compared to sPE. This also held true for patients with underlying malignancies. Mortality rates were significantly higher in all patients with iPE even when adjusting for presence of malignancy (p=0.03). When adjusting for presence of metastatic malignancy though the difference was no longer present (p=0.33). Conclusion: Patients with iPE were more likely to have an underlying malignancy, potentially due to higher likelihood of undergoing staging imaging studies. Additionally, patients with iPE more often had metastatic disease which was associated with higher mortality. Recurrent VTE and bleeding outcomes were similar in patients with iPE and sPE, this was independent of the presence of underlying malignancy. Disclosures McBane: BMS: Research Funding.

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.

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.

AbstractBackgroundLow molecular weight heparin (LMWH) is the guideline‐endorsed treatment for cancer‐associated venous thromboembolism (cVTE). Study objectives were to compare the efficacy and safety of rivaroxaban and enoxaparin in cVTE.MethodsUsing a cohort study design, consecutive patients with cVTE (3/1/2013‐7/31/2016), enrolled in the Mayo Thrombophilia Clinic Direct Oral Anticoagulants Registry, were compared to contemporary cancer patients receiving enoxaparin. The cumulative incidence of venous thromboembolism (VTE) recurrence, major and clinically relevant non‐major bleeding, and survival were assessed at 3 and 12 months.ResultsNinety‐eight patients received rivaroxaban (51% female, mean age 63 ± 12 years) and 168 enoxaparin (34.5% female, mean age 62 ± 15 years). The most common cancers included gastrointestinal/pancreatic, genitourinary and hematologic cancers. More than half of patients had pulmonary emboli at presentation. More than half had metastases, and two‐thirds were receiving chemotherapy. At 3 months, there were no differences in VTE recurrence (rivaroxaban 1.0% vs enoxaparin 4.2%; P = .15), major bleeding (rivaroxaban 5.1% vs enoxaparin 3.6%; P = .55), or all‐cause mortality (rivaroxaban 4.1% vs enoxaparin 8.9%; P = .14). At 12 months, these outcomes did not differ by treatment strategy.ConclusionThe results of this “real‐world” experience with cVTE suggest that rivaroxaban may offer a safe and effective alternative to LMWH.

AbstractPurposeTesticular vein thrombosis (TVT) etiology, recurrence, and survival were compared with lower extremity deep vein thrombosis (DVT) in order to determine whether treatment guidelines for DVT could be applied to TVT.Patients and MethodsAn inception cohort of patients with confirmed TVT (January 1995‐October 2015) was compared to a control group of patients with lower extremity DVT matched by age, gender, and diagnosis date.ResultsThirty‐nine men with TVT were identified; 15 (38%) with isolated TVT. Left testicular vein was affected in 77% patients; there were no cases of bilateral TVT. Cancer was over twofold more common in TVT patients (59% vs 28%, P = .01). Most cancers (78%) involved organs in proximity to the testicular vein. Although TVT patients were less frequently treated with anticoagulants (49% vs 97%, P = .0001), recurrence rates were similar to DVT group (TVT 4.2 vs DVT 1.1 per 100 patient‐years, P = .11). Despite higher cancer prevalence, survival rates were similar between groups (31% vs 28%; P = .34). Major bleeding events were rare (one patient per group).ConclusionsIdentifying TVT should prompt a search for a regional malignancy. Despite the high cancer prevalence and low utilization of anticoagulants, recurrent venous thrombosis and mortality rates are similar to DVT patients.

SummaryThe post thrombotic syndrome is one of the most dreaded complications of proximal deep vein thrombosis. This syndrome leads to pain and suffering with leg swelling, recalcitrant ulceration and venous claudication which greatly impairs mobility and quality of life. The prevalence can be high in patients with iliofemoral venous involvement particularly in the setting of a proximal venous stenosis, such as occurs in May Thurner syndrome. Anticoagulation alone does not reduce the likelihood of this outcome. Compression therapy may be effective but garment discomfort limits its implementation. Pharmacomechanical thrombectomy, which combines catheter‐directed thrombolysis with mechanical thrombus dissolution, provides an attractive treatment strategy for such patients. The rationale and delivery of pharmacomechanical thrombectomy, including patient selection and adjunctive antithrombotic therapy, will be reviewed in addition to tips and tricks for managing difficult patient scenarios.