Philippe Robin1, Pierre-Yves Le Roux1, Benjamin Planquette2, Sandrine Accassat3, Pierre-Marie Roy4, Francis Couturaud5, Nadia Ghazzar6, Nathalie Prevot-Bitot7, Olivier Couturier8, Aurélien Delluc5, Olivier Sanchez2, Bernard Tardy9, Grégoire Le Gal10, Pierre-Yves Salaun11. 1. Service de Médecine Nucléaire, EA 3878 (GETBO) IFR 148, Centre Hospitalo-Universitaire de Brest, Université de Bretagne Occidentale, Brest, France. 2. Service de Pneumologie, Hôpital Européen Georges Pompidou, AP-HP, Paris, France; Université Paris Descartes, Sorbonne Paris Cité, INSERM UMR-S 1140, Paris, France. 3. Service de médecine vasculaire et thérapeutique, Centre Hospitalo-Universitaire de Saint-Etienne, Université Jean Monnet, Saint-Etienne, France; INSERM CIC 1408, Saint-Etienne, France. 4. Département de médecine d'urgences, Centre Hospitalo-Universitaire d'Angers, Angers, France. 5. Département de Médecine Interne et Pneumologie, EA 3878, CIC INSERM 1412, Centre Hospitalo-Universitaire de Brest, Université de Bretagne Occidentale, Brest, France. 6. Service de Médecine Nucléaire, Hôpital Européen Georges Pompidou, AP-HP, Paris, France; Université Paris Descartes, Sorbonne Paris Cité, INSERM UMR-S 1140, Paris, France. 7. Service de médecine nucléaire, INSERM U1059, Centre Hospitalo-Universitaire de Saint-Etienne, Université Jean Monnet, Saint-Etienne, France. 8. Service de Médecine Nucléaire, Centre Hospitalo-Universitaire d'Angers, Angers, France. 9. Service des urgences et de réanimation médicale, Centre Hospitalo-Universitaire de Saint-Etienne, Université Jean Monnet, Saint-Etienne, France; INSERM CIC 1408, Saint-Etienne, France. 10. Département de Médecine Interne et Pneumologie, EA 3878, CIC INSERM 1412, Centre Hospitalo-Universitaire de Brest, Université de Bretagne Occidentale, Brest, France; Department of Medicine, Ottawa Hospital Research Institute at the University of Ottawa, Ottawa, ON, Canada. 11. Service de Médecine Nucléaire, EA 3878 (GETBO) IFR 148, Centre Hospitalo-Universitaire de Brest, Université de Bretagne Occidentale, Brest, France. Electronic address: pierre-yves.salaun@chu-brest.fr.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Clear guidelines for the investigation of occult malignancy after unprovoked venous thromboembolism are not yet available. (18)F-fluorodeoxyglucose ((18)F-FDG) PET/CT could serve as a comprehensive screening strategy for occult malignancy in this context. We aimed to compare a screening strategy based on (18)F-FDG PET/CT with a limited screening strategy for detection of malignant disease in patients with unprovoked venous thromboembolism. METHODS: In an open-label, multicentre, randomised study we enrolled patients from four French university hospitals. Patients aged 18 years or older, diagnosed with unprovoked venous thromboembolism (not provoked by a major inherited or acquired risk factor) were invited to participate. Patients were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to a limited screening strategy (physical examination, usual laboratory tests, and basic radiographs) or a screening strategy consisting of the limited strategy plus an (18)F-FDG PET/CT scan. Randomisation was done with a dedicated central web-based randomisation system, in block sizes of six, stratified by centre, and concealed from the investigators. Patients and investigators were not masked to study group assignment. Patients were followed up for 2 years. The primary outcome was the proportion of patients with a cancer diagnosis in each group after the initial screening assessment. Analyses were conducted in modified intention-to-test and per-protocol populations. This trial is completed and registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00964275. FINDINGS: Between March 3, 2009, and Aug 18, 2012, we enrolled and randomly assigned 399 patients; five withdrew consent, leaving 197 in each group for the modified intention-to-test analysis. After initial screening assessment, cancer was diagnosed in 11 (5·6%) patients in the (18)F-FDG PET/CT group and four (2·0%) patients in the limited screening group (absolute risk difference 3·6%, 95% CI -0·4 to 7·9; p=0·07). At the initial screening assessment, seven (64%) of the 11 cancers diagnosed in the (18)F-FDG PET/CT group were early-stage compared with two of four cancers diagnosed in the limited screening group (p=1·00). One (0·5%) occult malignancy was detected in 186 patients who had negative initial screening in the (18)F-FDG PET/CT group, compared with nine (4·7%) in 193 patients in the limited screening group (absolute risk difference 4·1%, 95% CI 0·8 to 8·4, p=0·01). Overall, five (42%) of the 12 cancers diagnosed in the (18)F-FDG PET/CT group were advanced stage, compared with seven (54%) of the 13 cancers diagnosed in the limited screening group (p=0·70). 16 patients died during follow-up, eight (4·1%) in each group. Two (1·0%) patients in the (18)F-FDG PET/CT group and five (2·5%) in the limited screening group had cancer-related deaths. INTERPRETATION: A strategy including limited screening and a (18)F-FDG PET/CT was not associated with a significantly higher rate of cancer diagnosis after unprovoked venous thromboembolism. The risk of subsequent cancer diagnosis was, however, lower in patients who had negative initial screening that included (18)F-FDG PET/CT than in patients who had negative initial limited screening. Whether or not (18)F-FDG PET/CT might be useful in a more selected population of patients with a high risk of cancer remains to be determined. FUNDING: Programme Hospitalier de Recherche Clinique (French Department of Health).
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND: Clear guidelines for the investigation of occult malignancy after unprovoked venous thromboembolism are not yet available. (18)F-fluorodeoxyglucose ((18)F-FDG) PET/CT could serve as a comprehensive screening strategy for occult malignancy in this context. We aimed to compare a screening strategy based on (18)F-FDG PET/CT with a limited screening strategy for detection of malignant disease in patients with unprovoked venous thromboembolism. METHODS: In an open-label, multicentre, randomised study we enrolled patients from four French university hospitals. Patients aged 18 years or older, diagnosed with unprovoked venous thromboembolism (not provoked by a major inherited or acquired risk factor) were invited to participate. Patients were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to a limited screening strategy (physical examination, usual laboratory tests, and basic radiographs) or a screening strategy consisting of the limited strategy plus an (18)F-FDG PET/CT scan. Randomisation was done with a dedicated central web-based randomisation system, in block sizes of six, stratified by centre, and concealed from the investigators. Patients and investigators were not masked to study group assignment. Patients were followed up for 2 years. The primary outcome was the proportion of patients with a cancer diagnosis in each group after the initial screening assessment. Analyses were conducted in modified intention-to-test and per-protocol populations. This trial is completed and registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00964275. FINDINGS: Between March 3, 2009, and Aug 18, 2012, we enrolled and randomly assigned 399 patients; five withdrew consent, leaving 197 in each group for the modified intention-to-test analysis. After initial screening assessment, cancer was diagnosed in 11 (5·6%) patients in the (18)F-FDG PET/CT group and four (2·0%) patients in the limited screening group (absolute risk difference 3·6%, 95% CI -0·4 to 7·9; p=0·07). At the initial screening assessment, seven (64%) of the 11 cancers diagnosed in the (18)F-FDG PET/CT group were early-stage compared with two of four cancers diagnosed in the limited screening group (p=1·00). One (0·5%) occult malignancy was detected in 186 patients who had negative initial screening in the (18)F-FDG PET/CT group, compared with nine (4·7%) in 193 patients in the limited screening group (absolute risk difference 4·1%, 95% CI 0·8 to 8·4, p=0·01). Overall, five (42%) of the 12 cancers diagnosed in the (18)F-FDG PET/CT group were advanced stage, compared with seven (54%) of the 13 cancers diagnosed in the limited screening group (p=0·70). 16 patients died during follow-up, eight (4·1%) in each group. Two (1·0%) patients in the (18)F-FDG PET/CT group and five (2·5%) in the limited screening group had cancer-related deaths. INTERPRETATION: A strategy including limited screening and a (18)F-FDG PET/CT was not associated with a significantly higher rate of cancer diagnosis after unprovoked venous thromboembolism. The risk of subsequent cancer diagnosis was, however, lower in patients who had negative initial screening that included (18)F-FDG PET/CT than in patients who had negative initial limited screening. Whether or not (18)F-FDG PET/CT might be useful in a more selected population of patients with a high risk of cancer remains to be determined. FUNDING: Programme Hospitalier de Recherche Clinique (French Department of Health).
Authors: Philippe Robin; Ravinder K Grewal; Pierre-Yves Le Roux; Grégoire Le Gal; Pierre-Yves Salaun Journal: Thromb Res Date: 2020-01-30 Impact factor: 3.944
Authors: Nick van Es; Grégoire Le Gal; Hans-Martin Otten; Philippe Robin; Andrea Piccioli; Ramon Lécumberri; Luis Jara-Palomares; Piotr Religa; Viriginie Rieu; Matthew T Rondina; Mariëlle M Beckers; Paolo Prandoni; Pierre-Yves Salaun; Marcello Di Nisio; Patrick M Bossuyt; Harry R Büller; Marc Carrier Journal: BMJ Open Date: 2017-06-10 Impact factor: 2.692
Authors: Luis Jara-Palomares; Remedios Otero; David Jimenez; Juan Manuel Praena-Fernandez; Carme Font; Conxita Falga; Silvia Soler; David Riesco; Peter Verhamme; Manuel Monreal Journal: PLoS One Date: 2018-03-20 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Philippe Robin; Pierre-Yves Le Roux; Karine Lacut; Benjamin Planquette; Nathalie Prévot-Bitot; Christian Lavigne; Jean Pastre; Adel Merah; Grégoire Le Gal; Pierre-Yves Salaun Journal: PLoS One Date: 2017-06-01 Impact factor: 3.240