Carrier, Marc

Abstract The incidence of venous thromboembolism (VTE) in patients with acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL) receiving asparaginase-based induction is high despite primary thromboprophylaxis. Our aim was to derive and externally validate a VTE risk prediction model in patients with ALL receiving asparaginase-based induction. We conducted a multicenter retrospective cohort study of patients (aged ≥18 years) with newly diagnosed ALL receiving asparaginase-based induction. The derivation and external validation cohorts included 306 and 94 patients, respectively. Primary outcome was VTE at any site. A cause-specific Cox proportional hazards model stratified by thromboprophylaxis and center was performed to identify VTE risk factors in the derivation cohort. A risk prediction model for VTE at 30 days was derived using variables with P value < .05 in the multivariable model and was tested in the validation cohort. VTE risk factors on multivariable analysis in the derivation cohort included D-dimer ≥1 μg fibrinogen equivalent unit per mL (hazard ratio [HR], 2.64; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.07-6.5) and hemoglobin (HR for each 1 g/dL increment, 1.19; 95% CI, 1.06-1.34) at ALL diagnosis. A VTE risk score based on these variables distinguished between a 4% (95% CI, 0.72-12) and 20% (95% CI, 14-27) 30-day cumulative incidence of VTE in the derivation cohort, with similar findings in the validation cohort (area under the curve, 0.56). The negative predictive value for VTE at 30 days was 96% and 93% in the derivation and validation cohorts, respectively, and the positive predictive value was 20% in both. We derived and validated a model using D-dimer and hemoglobin, which stratifies VTE risk in patients with ALL receiving asparaginase-based induction.

Abstract Direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) are an emerging treatment option for patients with cancer and 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 (LMWHs) in these patients. MEDLINE, Embase, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, 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 nonmajor bleeding (CRNMB), and all-cause mortality. Summary relative risks (RRs) were calculated in a random effects meta-analysis. In the primary analysis comprising 2607 patients, the risk of recurrent VTE was nonsignificantly lower with DOACs than with LMWHs (RR, 0.68; 95% CI, 0.39-1.17). Conversely, the risks of major bleeding (RR, 1.36; 95% CI, 0.55-3.35) and CRNMB (RR, 1.63; 95% CI, 0.73-3.64) were nonsignificantly higher. The risk of the composite of recurrent VTE or major bleeding was nonsignificantly lower with DOACs than with LMWHs (RR, 0.86; 95% CI, 0.60-1.23). Mortality was comparable in both groups (RR, 0.96; 95% CI, 0.68-1.36). Findings were consistent during the on-treatment period and in those with incidental VTE. In conclusion, DOACs are an effective treatment option for patients with cancer and acute VTE, although caution is needed in patients at high risk of bleeding.