Dataset Information

Patterns of Anticoagulation Use in Patients With Cancer With Atrial Fibrillation and/or Atrial Flutter.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Atrial fibrillation (AF) is a common cardiovascular complication affecting patients with cancer, but management strategies are not well established.

Objectives

The purpose of this retrospective cohort study was to evaluate cross-sectional patterns of anticoagulation (AC) use in patients with cancer with AF or atrial flutter (AFL) on the basis of their risk for stroke and bleeding.

Methods

Patients with cancer and electrocardiograms showing AF or AFL performed at Moffitt Cancer Center in either the inpatient or outpatient setting were included in this retrospective analysis. We described percentages of AC prescription by stroke and bleeding risk, as determined by individual CHA₂DS₂-VASc and HAS-BLED scores, respectively. Multivariable logistic regression evaluated clinical variables independently associated with anticoagulant prescription.

Results

The prevalence of electrocardiography-documented AF or AFL was 4.8% (n = 472). The mean CHA₂DS₂-VASc score was 2.8 ± 1.4. Among patients with CHA₂DS₂-VASc scores ≥2 and HAS-BLED scores <3, 44.3% did not receive AC, and of these, only 18.3% had platelet values <50,000/μl. In multivariable analysis, older age, hypertension, prior stroke, and history of venous thromboembolism were each directly associated with AC use, while current chemotherapy use, prior bleeding, renal disease, and thrombocytopenia were each inversely associated with AC use.

Conclusions

Nearly one-half of patients with cancer, the majority with normal platelet counts, had an elevated risk for stroke but did not receive AC. In addition to known predictors, current chemotherapy use was independently associated with a lower odds of AC use. This study highlights the need to improve the application of AF treatment algorithms to cancer populations.

SUBMITTER: Fradley MG

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8352174 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:IMPORTANCE:Atrial fibrillation (AF) during sepsis is associated with an increased risk of ischemic stroke during hospitalization, but risks and benefits associated with anticoagulation for AF during sepsis are unclear. OBJECTIVE:To determine clinician practice patterns and patient risk of stroke and bleeding associated with use of anticoagulation for AF during sepsis. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS:A retrospective cohort study using enhanced administrative claims data from approximately 20% of patients hospitalized in the United States July 1, 2010, to June 30, 2013, examined patients with AF during sepsis who did not have additional indications for therapeutic anticoagulation. Propensity score and instrumental variable analyses were used to evaluate risks of in-hospital stroke and bleeding associated with anticoagulation during sepsis. EXPOSURES:Parenteral anticoagulants administered in doses greater than those used for prophylaxis of venous thromboembolism. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES:Ischemic stroke and clinically significant bleeding events during hospitalization. RESULTS:Of 113?511 patients hospitalized with AF and sepsis, 38?582 were included in our primary analysis (18?976 men and 19?606 women; mean [SD] age, 74.9 [11.7] years). A total of 13?611 patients (35.3%) received parenteral anticoagulants, while 24?971 (64.7%) did not. Hospital utilization rates of parenteral anticoagulants for AF during sepsis varied (median, 33%; 25th-75th percentile, 25%-43%). CHA2DS2VASc scores (congestive heart failure, hypertension, age ?75 years [doubled], type 1 or type 2 diabetes, stroke or transient ischemic attack or thromboembolism [doubled], vascular disease [prior myocardial infarction, peripheral artery disease, or aortic plaque], age 65-75 years, sex category [female]) poorly discriminated the risk of ischemic stroke during sepsis (C statistic, 0.526). Among 27?010 propensity score-matched patients, rates of in-hospital ischemic stroke events did not differ significantly between patients who did (174 of 13?505 [1.3%]) and did not (185 of 13?505 [1.4%]) receive parenteral anticoagulation (relative risk [RR], 0.94; 95% CI, 0.77-1.15). Clinically significant bleeding occurred more often among patients who received parenteral anticoagulation (1163 of 13?505 [8.6%]) than patients who did not receive parenteral anticoagulation (979 of 13?505 [7.2%]; RR, 1.21; 95% CI, 1.10-1.32). Risk of ischemic stroke associated with parenteral anticoagulation did not differ significantly between patients with preexisting (RR, 1.12; 95% CI, 0.86-1.44) or newly diagnosed AF (RR, 0.85; 95% CI 0.57-1.27; P?=?.31 for interaction). Results were robust to multiple sensitivity analyses, including hospital utilization rates of parenteral anticoagulation for AF as an instrument for anticoagulation exposure (RR for stroke, 1.08; 95% CI, 0.62-1.90; RR for bleeding, 1.23; 95% CI, 0.88-1.72). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE:Among patients with AF during sepsis, parenteral anticoagulation was not associated with reduced risk of ischemic stroke and was associated with higher bleeding rates.

Project description:It is uncertain whether bridging anticoagulation is necessary for patients with atrial fibrillation who need an interruption in warfarin treatment for an elective operation or other elective invasive procedure. We hypothesized that forgoing bridging anticoagulation would be noninferior to bridging with low-molecular-weight heparin for the prevention of perioperative arterial thromboembolism and would be superior to bridging with respect to major bleeding.We performed a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial in which, after perioperative interruption of warfarin therapy, patients were randomly assigned to receive bridging anticoagulation therapy with low-molecular-weight heparin (100 IU of dalteparin per kilogram of body weight) or matching placebo administered subcutaneously twice daily, from 3 days before the procedure until 24 hours before the procedure and then for 5 to 10 days after the procedure. Warfarin treatment was stopped 5 days before the procedure and was resumed within 24 hours after the procedure. Follow-up of patients continued for 30 days after the procedure. The primary outcomes were arterial thromboembolism (stroke, systemic embolism, or transient ischemic attack) and major bleeding.In total, 1884 patients were enrolled, with 950 assigned to receive no bridging therapy and 934 assigned to receive bridging therapy. The incidence of arterial thromboembolism was 0.4% in the no-bridging group and 0.3% in the bridging group (risk difference, 0.1 percentage points; 95% confidence interval [CI], -0.6 to 0.8; P=0.01 for noninferiority). The incidence of major bleeding was 1.3% in the no-bridging group and 3.2% in the bridging group (relative risk, 0.41; 95% CI, 0.20 to 0.78; P=0.005 for superiority).In patients with atrial fibrillation who had warfarin treatment interrupted for an elective operation or other elective invasive procedure, forgoing bridging anticoagulation was noninferior to perioperative bridging with low-molecular-weight heparin for the prevention of arterial thromboembolism and decreased the risk of major bleeding. (Funded by the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute of the National Institutes of Health; BRIDGE ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00786474.).

Project description:Three target-specific oral anticoagulants (TSOACs)-dabigatran, rivaroxaban, and apixaban-have been approved by the FDA to reduce the risk of stroke and systemic embolism in patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation; however, no agents are currently approved to reverse the anticoagulant effects of these TSOACs in cases of active bleeding. This review discusses the benefits and risks of these TSOACs from a clinician's perspective, with a focus on the interruption of treatment for either elective or emergent surgery, monitoring, and reversal of anticoagulation. Available coagulation assays are not ideal for monitoring the effects of TSOACs and do not provide reliable quantitative measurement of their anticoagulant effects. When necessary, activated partial thromboplastin time (aPTT) may provide qualitative information on dabigatran, and prothrombin time (PT) may provide qualitative assessment of the presence of the factor Xa inhibitors, rivaroxaban and apixaban. Current recommendations for reversal of TSOACs are based largely on limited and sometimes conflicting data from in vitro or in vivo animal models, and clinical experience with these recommendations is also limited. Methods that have been investigated for effectiveness for reversal of the pharmacodynamic effects of the TSOACs include dialysis, activated charcoal, prothrombin complex concentrate (PCC), and recombinant activated factor VII. It is important to note that even within a class of anticoagulant drugs, compounds respond differently to reversal agents; therefore, recommendations for one agent should not be extrapolated to another, even if they are from the same therapeutic class. New antidotes are being explored, including a mouse monoclonal antibody to dabigatran; andexanet alfa, a potential universal factor Xa inhibitor reversal agent; and a synthetic small molecule (PER977) that may be effective for the reversal of factor Xa inhibitors and direct thrombin inhibitors. Given the short half-lives of TSOACs, watchful waiting, rather than reversal, may be the best approach in some circumstances.