Literature DB >> 28525975

Venous thromboembolism in hospitalized patients receiving chemotherapy for malignancies at Japanese community hospital: prospective observational study.

Hiromitsu Kitayama1, Tomohiro Kondo2, Junko Sugiyama2, Kazutomo Kurimoto3, Yasuhiro Nishino4, Michiaki Hirayama5, Yasushi Tsuji2.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Although Asian population was recognized to have a lower risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE), its increasing prevalence and incidence remain unclear in patients with malignancies. We attempted to predict VTE development using activation markers of coagulation and fibrinolysis.
METHODS: We enrolled patients with malignancy admitted to Tonan Hospital between April and December 2014 to receive a new-for-them chemotherapy regimen. All patients were examined for VTE by computed tomography and whole-leg compression ultrasonography before chemotherapy and three months later. We also examined plasma levels of thrombin-antithrombin complex (TAT) and plasmin α2-plasmin inhibitor complex (PIC) before chemotherapy. The cut off values of TAT and PIC were set at 2.1 ng/mL and 1.8 μg/mL, respectively.
RESULTS: Of 97 patients, the majority (67%) had distant metastases. The most common malignancies were colorectal (26%), breast (23%), and stomach (19%) cancer. VTE was detected in 29 patients (31%); all were asymptomatic. VTE was newly developed in 12 patients in the three-month observation period, which means the incidence was 49 per 1000 person-years. Non-increased PIC with increased TAT was the only significant risk factor for both VTE prevalence and incidence in multivariate analysis, and the odds ratios were 3.0 (95% confidence interval, 1.1-8.2; P = 0.034) and 9.4 (95% confidence interval, 1.7-51.9; P = 0.011), respectively.
CONCLUSIONS: The prevalence and incidence of VTE were high in hospitalized Japanese patients receiving chemotherapy for malignancies. Non-increased PIC with increased levels of TAT may be an independent risk factor for VTE development.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Antineoplastic agents; Antithrombin III-protease complex; Biomarkers; Blood coagulation; Fibrinolysis; Patient admission; Plasmin-plasmin inhibitor complex; Prospective studies; Risk factors; Venous thromboembolism

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2017        PMID: 28525975      PMCID: PMC5438527          DOI: 10.1186/s12885-017-3326-1

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  BMC Cancer        ISSN: 1471-2407            Impact factor:   4.430


Background

Cancer causes hypercoagulable states and thromboembolism [1]. No less than 11% of Western cancer patients develop thromboembolism, which is a secondary cause of cancer death [2, 3]. Hospitalization and chemotherapy are important risk factors for venous thromboembolism (VTE) [1, 4]. Prophylactic anticoagulation is generally recommended to hospitalized Western cancer patients [5, 6]. So far even VTE prevalence in Japanese cancer patients remains undetermined. Asian people have been recognized to have lower risk for VTE [7], however, estimated VTE incidence is definitely increasing in Japan [8]. It also remains unclear whether Asian cancer patients should receive prophylactic anticoagulation. Increased plasma levels of coagulation activation markers, D-dimer and prothrombin fragment 1 + 2 (F1 + 2), were reported to be useful in prediction of VTE development [9-12]. Thrombin-antithrombin complex (TAT) reflects hypercoagulable states directly as with F1 + 2, and plasmin α2-plasmin inhibitor complex (PIC) reflects hyperfibrinolytic states [13]. What are the prevalence and incidence of VTE in hospitalized Japanese patients receiving chemotherapy? What are the biomarkers predicting VTE development? The purpose of this study is to investigate VTE rates prospectively and to predict the development using activation markers of coagulation and fibrinolysis.

Methods

Study population

We enrolled patients with histologically or cytologically confirmed malignancies admitted to Tonan Hospital, Sapporo, Japan, between April and December 2014 to receive a new-for-them chemotherapy regimen. Patients were required to have an acceptable hematologic, hepatic, and renal function for chemotherapy, and adequate performance status. Exclusion criteria included symptomatic thromboembolism, prophylactic anticoagulation, active infection, and pregnancy. Patients with asymptomatic VTE without anticoagulation diagnosed at enrollment were eligible in this study.

Study protocol

All patients received inpatient chemotherapy. We prospectively observed the patients for three months. The main endpoint was an objectively confirmed VTE. We also collected following data: age, sex, body mass index, mobility, previous chemotherapy or hormone therapy, time from tumor onset, central venous access device, using anti-vascular endothelial cell growth factor antibody, recent trauma, surgery, or radiation therapy, complications including acute infection, tumor subtype, distant metastases, and laboratory data.

Diagnostic imaging

All patients were examined for VTE by chest-abdomen-pelvic computed tomography (CT) and whole-leg compression ultrasonography before chemotherapy and three months later. The following veins were examined by a high frequency liner transducer of an Aplio XG SSA-790A ultrasound device (Toshiba Medical Systems, Toshiba Medical Systems Co., Ltd., Otawara, Japan): femoral, popliteal, and posterior tibial vein. Deep vein thrombosis (DVT) was diagnosed using compression maneuver and Doppler ultrasound technique, if the vein was non-compressible and blood flow compromised. VTE was also diagnosed by direct visualization of a thrombus in CT scans of blood vessels. Arterial-phase scans covering pulmonary arteries were not performed for patients without PE symptoms. Contrast enhanced CT was also not performed in patient without adequate renal function, which means estimated glomerular filtration rate by Japanese equation is 45 mL/min/1.73 m2 or over [14].

Laboratory data

Only at baseline, we measured CBC and serum levels of activation markers of coagulation and fibrinolysis: D-dimer, TAT, and PIC. D-dimer and PIC were measured by latex immunoassay kits: LIAS AUTO D-dimer NEO and LIAS AUTO PIC, respectively (Sysmex Co., Ltd., Kobe, Japan). TAT was determined by a chemiluminescent enzyme immunoassay kit: STACIA CLEIA TAT (LSI Medience Co., Ltd., Tokyo, Japan). The cut off values of each CBC and D-dimer were set based on Khorana and Vienna VTE risk assessment score, validated models to estimate the risk in Western patients receiving chemotherapy [15, 16]. Those of TAT and PIC were at 2.1 ng/mL and 1.8 μg/mL, 50th and 75th percentile of our data, respectively.

Statistical analysis

This study was conducted as a preliminary assessment of VTE prevalence, incidence, and its risk factors. Continuous variables were expressed as mean ± standard division, mean ± standard error, or median (interquartile range), as appropriate, which were categorized because linearity on the logit scale could not be achieved with all continuous covariates. Odds ratio (OR) with 95% confidence interval (CI), calculated using Woolf’s method, is presented as risk ratio of VTE prevalence and incidence between groups. OR with the CI were calculated using Woolf-Haldane correction when an observed frequency has a value of zero. The difference in VTE prevalence and incidence between groups was analyzed with chi-square test. Pearson’s test with Yates’s continuity correction was used when expected frequencies were all over 5, otherwise data were analyzed with Fisher’s exact test. We used multivariate logistic regression model to confirm the interaction between TAT and PIC for VTE prevalence. The predictor variables were increased TAT, non-increased PIC, and the first-order interaction term (increased TAT × non-increased PIC). Selected risk factors for VTE prevalence and incidence were analyzed by the multivariate model. We assumed that TAT, PIC, or the combination would affect VTE prevalence and incidence. Therefore, these three factors and other factors which were P < 0.10 in the univariate analysis were selected for the multivariate analysis. TAT and PIC were analyzed separately from the combination to avoid multicollinearity by the multivariable analysis. Multicollinearity was assessed by using the variance inflation factor, which greater than 4.0 may be a cause for concern. All statistical tests were two-sided, and P < 0.05 was considered statically significant. All analyses were performed using EZR (Saitama Medical Center, Jichi Medical University, Saitama, Japan), which is a graphical user interface for R (The R Foundation for Stastical Computing, Vienna, Austria) [17]. More precisely, it is a modified version of R commander designed to add Stastical functions frequently used in biostatistics.

Results

Patient characteristics

A total of 99 patients were enrolled, of which 2 patients could not be followed up. Remaining 97 patients were observed for the three-month period. Table 1 summarizes baseline clinical characteristics available for analysis. All patients were Japanese with practically equal male-female distribution. Most patients had a central venous access device and did not require bedrest for three days. Part of the patients (18%) was treated with anti-vascular endothelial cell growth factor antibody. Few patients (9%) had a history of surgery or radiation therapy within one month. Practically no patients had obesity, chronic heart failure, rheumatic arthritis, or acute infection. No patients had a previous history of coagulation defects, VTE, chronic respiratory failure, nephrosis syndrome, or hormone therapy including erythropoietin. The majority (67%) had distant metastases, and a few patients (20%) had a history of chemotherapy. Time from tumor onset as well as specific tumor subtypes varied widely: the median was three months, and the majority subtypes (68%) were colorectal, breast, and stomach cancer.
Table 1

Baseline clinical characteristics (n = 97)

CharacteristicNo. of patients(%)
Age (yr.)65±12.1a
Sex ratio (M:F)47:50
Body mass index (kg/m2)22± 3.4a
Reduced mobilityc 1010
Previous chemotherapy1920
Time from tumor onset (yr.)3(1–12)b
Using anti-VGEF antibody1718
Recent (≤1 month) surgery66
Recent (≤1 month) radiation33
Complication
 Rheumatic arthritis33
 Chronic heart failure11
Tumor type
Digestive cancer
 Colon or rectum2627
 Stomach1819
 Esophagus66
 Pancreas77
 Otherd 22
Female reproductive system cancer
 Breast2223
 Ovary33
Other tumor
 Lung cancer22
 Urinary tract cancer22
 Urachus cancer11
 Cancer of unknown primary44
 Sarcomae 33
 Lymphoma11
Distant metastases6567

VEGF vascular endothelial cell growth factor

aMean ± standard deviation. bMedian (interquartile range). cBedrest with bathroom privileges for at least three days, either due to patient’s limitation or on physician’s order. dLiver and biliary tract. ethymus and prostate.

Baseline clinical characteristics (n = 97) VEGF vascular endothelial cell growth factor aMean ± standard deviation. bMedian (interquartile range). cBedrest with bathroom privileges for at least three days, either due to patient’s limitation or on physician’s order. dLiver and biliary tract. ethymus and prostate.

VTE

Figure 1 shows prevalence of VTE, which was detected in 29 patients (31%), 12 male and 17 female. VTE of 17 patients was detected before chemotherapy, and 12 (12%), 4 male and 8 female, were developed in the three-month observation period. VTE incidence was then 49 per 1000 person-years. Figure 2 shows VTE details of the 29 patients: 18 of which had distal DVT, 12 had proximal DVT, and 2 had PE. Three patients had both proximal and distal DVT, one had both distal DVT and PE, and one had both proximal DVT and PE. Almost all distal DVT was detected in soleus vein. Of the 12 proximal DVT, 9 were in lower extremity: iliac, femoral, or popliteal vein, 3 were catheter-related, 1 was in internal jugular vein, 1 in inferior vena cava, and 1 in portal vein. All VTE was asymptomatic, and only patients with proximal DVT and/or PE received anticoagulant therapy except where contraindicated or with limited life expectancy. One patient with proximal DVT was inserted inferior vena cava filter. No DVT progressed in size or number, and no patients suffered bleeding due to anticoagulation therapy.
Fig. 1

VTE prevalence in hospitalized patients receiving chemotherapy for malignancy (n = 97). VTE, venous thromboembolism; PE, pulmonary embolism

Fig. 2

Details of total VTE (n = 29). Abbreviations are as in Fig. 1. There is some overlap. No deep vein thrombosis was found in upper-extremities

VTE prevalence in hospitalized patients receiving chemotherapy for malignancy (n = 97). VTE, venous thromboembolism; PE, pulmonary embolism Details of total VTE (n = 29). Abbreviations are as in Fig. 1. There is some overlap. No deep vein thrombosis was found in upper-extremities

Predictor analysis of VTE prevalence

Table 2 shows univariate OR of risk factors for VTE prevalence, which was significantly higher in patients with reduced mobility (OR, 6.9; 95% CI, 1.6–29.0; P = 0.007). Elderly (≥70 years old) female was not a significant risk factor compared to male and female <70 years old, but lower limit of 95% CI of the OR was over 1.0 (3.7; 95% CI, 1.1–12.2; P = 0.054). Other factors were not significant risks. Figure 3 shows interaction between increased TAT and non-increased PIC, which was significant. VTE prevalence in patients with non-increased PIC was high (41%) with increased TAT levels, but low (16%) in patients without increased TAT. Lower limit of 95% CI of the OR was almost over 1.0 in a combination of non-increased PIC with increased TAT (OR, 2.6; 95% CI, 1.0–6.6; P = 0.082) by univariate analysis. Table 3 shows VTE prevalence of a high- and low-risk group based on tumor subtypes [6, 18]. The absolute rates of the high- and low-risk group were 38% and 25%, respectively, which is not a significant difference.
Table 2

Univariable analysis of risk factors for total VTE of 29 patients

VariableNo. of patients(%)OR(95% CI) P
Sex and age (yr.)
  < 7017/64271.0(ref.)
  ≥ 70 male4/19210.7(0.2–2.5)0.77
  ≥ 70 female8/14573.7(1.1–12.2)a 0.054
BMI
  < 2521/74281.0(ref.)
  ≥ 258/23351.4(0.5–3.6)0.75
Reduced mobilityb
 No22/87251.0(ref.)
 Yes7/10706.9(1.6–29.0)a 0.007*
Previous chemotherapy
 No24/78311.0(ref.)
 Yes5/19260.8(0.3–2.5)0.92
Time from tumor onset (mo.)
  < 6 or >1223/85271.0(ref.)
 6–126/12502.7(0.8–9.2)0.17
Central venous access device
 No1/ 7141.0(ref.)
 Yes28/90312.7(0.3–23.6)0.67
Using anti-VEGF antibody
 No26/80331.0(ref.)
 Yes3/17180.5(0.1–1.7)0.26
Distant metastases
 No7/32221.0(ref.)
 Yes22/65341.8(0.7–4.9)0.33
Developing acute infectionc
 No18/67271.0(ref.)
 Yes11/30371.6(0.6–3.9)0.46
Platelet count (/μL)d
  < 350,00025/87291.0(ref.)
  ≥ 350,0004/10401.7(0.4–6.4)0.48
Hemoglobin (g/dL)d
  ≥ 1026/84311.0(ref.)
  < 103/13230.7(0.2–2.6)0.75
Leukocyte count (/μL)d
  < 11,00029/93311.0(ref.)
  ≥ 11,0000/ 400.2(0.0–4.7)0.31
D-dimer (μg/mL)de
  < 1.57/36191.0(ref.)
  ≥ 1.519/58332.0(0.8–5.4)0.24
TAT (ng/mL)de
  < 2.110/50201.0(ref.)
  ≥ 2.116/44362.3(0.9–5.8)0.12
PIC (μg/mL)d, e
  ≥ 1.87/21331.0(ref.)
  < 1.819/73260.7(0.2–2.0)0.70
TAT ≥2.1 ng/mL and PIC <1.8 μg/mLd, e
 No14/65221.0(ref.)
 Yes12/29412.6(1.0–6.6)0.082

VTE venous thromboembolism, OR odds ratio, CI confidence interval, BMI body mass index, VEGF vascular endothelial cell growth factor, TAT thrombin-antithrombin complex, PIC plasmin α2-plasmin inhibitor complex

* P < 0.05. a95% CI over 1.0. bBedrest with bathroom privileges for at least three days at baseline, either due to patient’s limitation or on physician’s order. cDuring the three-month observation period. dMeasured at baseline, just before the first cycle of chemotherapy. eUnmeasured in three patients

Fig. 3

Change of VTE prevalence by non-increased PIC level in patients with and without increased TAT level. VTE, venous thromboembolism; TAT, thrombin-antithrombin complex; PIC, plasmin α2-plasmin inhibitor complex. Two crossing line graphs suggest interaction between increased TAT and non-increased PIC for VTE prevalence, which was significant (P = 0.043) Only in patients with increased TAT, non-increased PIC affects high prevalence of VTE

Table 3

Number of patients with total VTE according to underlying specific tumor subtypes

Total VTENo. of patientsPrevalence
Tumor type(n = 29)(n = 97)(%)
High-risk group for VTE
 Stomacha 518
 Pancreasa 37
 Ovarya 13
 Lunga 22
 Urinary tracta 12
 CUPb 14
 Sarcomab 23
 Lymphomaa 01
 Total154038c
Low-risk group for VTE
 Colon or rectum626
 Breast522
 Esophagus36
 Biliary tract01
 Liver01
 Urachus01
 Total145725

VTE venous thromboembolism, CUP cancer of unknown primary

aListed as a risk factor for VTE in National Comprehensive Cancer Network Guidelines 2016 [6]. bListed as a risk factor for VTE in Asian patients [18]. cOdds ratio was 1.84 vs. low-risk group for VTE (95% confidence interval, 0.8–4.4; P = 0.25).

Univariable analysis of risk factors for total VTE of 29 patients VTE venous thromboembolism, OR odds ratio, CI confidence interval, BMI body mass index, VEGF vascular endothelial cell growth factor, TAT thrombin-antithrombin complex, PIC plasmin α2-plasmin inhibitor complex * P < 0.05. a95% CI over 1.0. bBedrest with bathroom privileges for at least three days at baseline, either due to patient’s limitation or on physician’s order. cDuring the three-month observation period. dMeasured at baseline, just before the first cycle of chemotherapy. eUnmeasured in three patients Change of VTE prevalence by non-increased PIC level in patients with and without increased TAT level. VTE, venous thromboembolism; TAT, thrombin-antithrombin complex; PIC, plasmin α2-plasmin inhibitor complex. Two crossing line graphs suggest interaction between increased TAT and non-increased PIC for VTE prevalence, which was significant (P = 0.043) Only in patients with increased TAT, non-increased PIC affects high prevalence of VTE Number of patients with total VTE according to underlying specific tumor subtypes VTE venous thromboembolism, CUP cancer of unknown primary aListed as a risk factor for VTE in National Comprehensive Cancer Network Guidelines 2016 [6]. bListed as a risk factor for VTE in Asian patients [18]. cOdds ratio was 1.84 vs. low-risk group for VTE (95% confidence interval, 0.8–4.4; P = 0.25). Left side of Table 4 shows the multivariate OR of selected five risk factors. Non-increased PIC with increased TAT was the only significant risk factor (OR, 3.2; 95% CI, 1.1–8.2; P = 0.034). Lower limit of 95% CI of the OR was almost over 1.0 in elderly female (OR, 3.3; 95% CI, 0.9–12.4; P = 0.066), reduced mobility (OR, 4.9; 95% CI, 1.0–24.9; P = 0.057), and increased TAT (OR, 2.4; 95% CI, 0.9–6.4; P = 0.092). No evidence of multicollinearity between the five factors was found.
Table 4

Multivariable analysis of risk factors for total VTE of 29 patients and newly developed VTE of 12 patients (n = 97)

Total VTENewly developed VTE
VariableOR(95% CI) P OR(95% CI) P
Elderly femalea 3.3(0.9–12.4)0.066-
BMI ≥25b -2.5(0.5–12.0)0.25
Reduced mobilityc 4.9(1.0–24.9)0.057-
6–12 months from tumor onsetd -3.0(0.6–15.8)0.19
Increased TATe 2.4(0.9–6.4)f 0.0923.8(0.7–20.8)g 0.12
Non-increased PICh 1.2(0.3–4.0)0.78-
Increased TATe and non-increased PICh 3.0(1.1–8.2)i 0.034* 9.4(1.7–51.9)j 0.011*

Abbreviations are as in Table 2. VIF variance inflation factor

* P < 0.05. a ≥ 70 yr. vs. male and female <70 yr., adjusted for reduced mobility and non-increased PIC with increased TAT (VIF, 1.0). bAdjusted for 6–12 months from tumor onset, and non-increased PIC with increased TAT (VIF, 1.0). cAdjusted for elderly female and non-increased PIC with increased TAT (VIF, 1.0). dAdjusted for BMI ≥25 and non-increased PIC with increased TAT (VIF, 1.1). e ≥ 2.1 ng/mL. fAdjusted for elderly female and non-increased PIC (VIF, 1.1). gAdjusted for BMI ≥25 and 6–12 months from tumor onset (VIF, 1.1). h < 1.8 ng/mL, adjusted for elderly female and increased TAT (VIF, 1.2). iAdjusted for elderly female and reduced mobility (VIF, 1.0). jAdjusted for BMI ≥25 and 6–12 months from tumor onset (VIF, 1.1)

Multivariable analysis of risk factors for total VTE of 29 patients and newly developed VTE of 12 patients (n = 97) Abbreviations are as in Table 2. VIF variance inflation factor * P < 0.05. a ≥ 70 yr. vs. male and female <70 yr., adjusted for reduced mobility and non-increased PIC with increased TAT (VIF, 1.0). bAdjusted for 6–12 months from tumor onset, and non-increased PIC with increased TAT (VIF, 1.0). cAdjusted for elderly female and non-increased PIC with increased TAT (VIF, 1.0). dAdjusted for BMI ≥25 and non-increased PIC with increased TAT (VIF, 1.1). e ≥ 2.1 ng/mL. fAdjusted for elderly female and non-increased PIC (VIF, 1.1). gAdjusted for BMI ≥25 and 6–12 months from tumor onset (VIF, 1.1). h < 1.8 ng/mL, adjusted for elderly female and increased TAT (VIF, 1.2). iAdjusted for elderly female and reduced mobility (VIF, 1.0). jAdjusted for BMI ≥25 and 6–12 months from tumor onset (VIF, 1.1)

Predictor analysis of VTE incidence

Table 5 shows univariate OR of risk factors for VTE incidence in the three-month observation period, which was significantly higher in patients with high body mass index (OR, 4.0; 95% CI, 1.2–14.0; P = 0.030), 6–12 months from tumor onset (OR, 8.0; 95% CI, 2.0–31.8; P = 0.006), increased TAT (OR, 5.3; 95% CI, 1.1–26.6; P = 0.042), and non-increased PIC with increased TAT (OR, 12.0; 95% CI, 2.4–61.0; P = 0.001). Other factors did not show significantly higher OR.
Table 5

Univariable analysis of risk factors for newly developed VTE of 12 patients in three-month observation period

VariableNo. of patients% per three monthsOR(95% CI) P
Sex and age (yr.)
 < 707/64111.0(ref.)
 ≥ 70 male1/1950.5(0.05–3.9)0.67
 ≥ 70 female4/14293.3(0.80–13.2)0.10
BMI
 < 256/7481.0(ref.)
 ≥ 256/23264.0(1.2–14.0)a 0.030*
Reduced mobilityb
 No11/87131.0(ref.)
 Yes1/10100.8(0.1–6.7)1.00
Previous chemotherapy
 No9/78121.0(ref.)
 Yes3/19161.4(0.4–5.9)0.70
Time from cancer onset (mo.)
 < 6 or >127/8581.0(ref.)
 6–125/12428.0(2.0–31.8)a 0.006*
Central venous access device
 No0/701.0(ref.)
 Yes12/90132.4(0.1–44.5)0.59
Using anti-VEGF antibody
 No11/80141.0(ref.)
 Yes1/1760.4(0.1–3.3)0.69
Distant metastases
 No3/3291.0(ref.)
 Yes9/65141.6(0.4–6.2)0.75
Developing acute infectionc
 No24/67561.0(ref.)
 Yes5/30200.4(0.1–1.1)0.10
Platelet count (/μL)d
 < 350,00012/87121.0(ref.)
 ≥ 350,0000/1000.3(0.0–5.2)0.60
Hemoglobin (g/dL)d
 ≥ 1010/84121.0(ref.)
 < 102/13151.4(0.3–7.0)0.66
Leukocyte count (/μL)d
 < 11,00012/93131.0(ref.)
 ≥11,0000/400.7(0.0–14.3)1.00
D-dimer (μg/mL)d, e
 <1.53/3681.0(ref.)
 ≥1.57/58121.5(0.4–6.3)0.74
TAT (ng/mL)d, e
 < 2.12/5021.0(ref.)
 ≥ 2.18/44185.3(1.1–26.6)a 0.042*
PIC (μg/mL)d, e
  ≥ 1.80/2101.0(ref.)
  < 1.810/73147.1(0.4–126.5)0.11
TAT ≥2.1 ng/mL and PIC <1.8 μg/mLd, e
 No2/6531.0(ref.)
 Yes8/292812.0(2.4–61.0)a 0.001*

Abbreviations and footnotes are as in Table 2.

Univariable analysis of risk factors for newly developed VTE of 12 patients in three-month observation period Abbreviations and footnotes are as in Table 2. Right side of Table 4 shows the multivariate OR of selected four risk factors. Non-increased PIC with increased TAT was the only significant risk factor (OR, 9.4; 95% CI, 1.7–51.9; P = 0.011), which had a good characteristic for predicting VTE development, 80% (8/10) of sensitivity with 75% (63/84) of specificity. No evidence of multicollinearity between the four factors was found.

Discussion

In this study, we made two important clinical observations. First, the prevalence and incidence of VTE were high in hospitalized Japanese patients receiving chemotherapy for malignancies. The overall prevalence was 31%, high compared to that in Western countries. The prevalence of thromboembolism in Western cancer patients was reported to be about 11% [2, 3]. As for with VTE incidence, it was 49 per 1000 person-years in our study, also high compared to Western countries. In a meta-analysis, VTE incidence was estimated to be 13 (95% CI, 7–23) and 68 (95% CI, 48–96) per 1000 person-years among Western cancer patients at average and high risk for VTE, respectively [19]. VTE incidence in our study, 49 per 1000 person-years, was also high compared to Asian countries. From a nation-wide analysis in Taiwan, VTE incidence in hospitalized cancer patients was 1.9 per 1000 person-years [18]. In Japan, though from a questionnaire survey, estimated VTE incidence was 0.18 per 1000 person-years in 2006 [20]. These incidence rates of both Taiwan and Japan can be considered similar to relative risks of cancer and hospitalization in the Western counties, which was 4.7 (hazard ratio) and 2.63 (OR), respectively [4, 21]. Even considering these relative risks, VTE incidence in our study was high and equivalent to that of average- or high-risk for VTE in Western countries. One important thing is that all patients in this study underwent whole-leg compression ultrasonography before and after inpatient chemotherapy. As far as we could find, no other study includes the ultrasonography for each hospitalized patient receiving chemotherapy for malignancy. This is one of the reasons why we observed such a lot of VTE patients. Hospitalized cancer patients receiving chemotherapy in Western countries must have more asymptomatic VTE than in Asia. The prevalence and incidence have been definitely underestimated. Despite the frequency, the natural history of asymptomatic distal DVT and their real risk of thromboembolic complications are still uncertain because of the scarcity of prospective, blind, nonintervention studies. In fact, no distal DVT in this study progressed after three months from inpatient chemotherapy without anticoagulation. Therefore it is still debated whether we should make the diagnosis and treatment. However, prophylactic anticoagulation in cancer patients may prevent symptomatic VTE, which is associated with a substantial risk of bleeding [22, 23]. For beneficial thromboprophylaxis, we need to define high-VTE risks. The second clinical observation is that non-increased PIC with increased TAT may be an independent risk factor for VTE development. In this study, non-increased PIC with increased TAT was the only significant risk factor of both VTE prevalence and incidence. This is the first study to show the potential of the combination of coagulation and fibrinolytic activation markers to predict VTE development. Antithrombin III inactivates thrombin, which results in increased TAT levels and shows coagulation activation. α2-plasmin inhibitor inactivates plasmin, resulting in increased PIC levels, which shows fibrinolytic activation. In fact, other coagulation activation markers, F1 + 2 and D-dimer, were reported to be able to predict VTE [9-12]. Increased levels of F1 + 2 predicted a twofold increased risk of VTE in cancer patients [9]. Several studies indicate that D-dimer is associated with VTE risk in cancer patients [9-12], and the highest relative risk for VTE development (hazard ratio, 3.6) was found in patients with both increased F1 + 2 and D-dimer [9]. F1 + 2 and D-dimer are both coagulation activation markers, but D-dimer levels are also affected by fibrinolytic activation; D-dimer can be produced more in patients with pleural effusion, ascites, hematoma, or cancer itself. False-positive of D-dimer elevation for VTE is increased in patients with cancer patients. In disseminated intravascular coagulation, D-dimer levels are higher with advanced fibrinolysis than with suppressed fibrinolysis [24, 25]. F1 + 2 and D-dimer then complement each other in the identification of high-risk patients for VTE. In theory, the combination of TAT and PIC shows more simply and directly each activity of coagulation and fibrinolysis, respectively; non-increased PIC with increased TAT shows advanced coagulation with suppressed fibrinolysis, which means a state at high risk for thrombosis. False-positive for VTE can be decreased by the combination of TAT and PIC. According to our study, the interaction between increased TAT and non-increased PIC is also indicative of VTE related processes. Non-increased PIC with increased TAT might be a precise biomarker for VTE in patients with malignancies. This study has two limitations. First, the number of VTE events was insufficient to detect differences in patients with and without each variable in multivariate analysis. The number of newly developed VTE events was only 12. This is a preliminary study to assess VTE prevalence, incidence, and its high-risk factors. Non-increased PIC with increased TAT was not adjusted for a number of VTE risk factors, except two: elderly female and reduced mobility. Second limitation is that blood sampling difficulties were not recorded. TAT levels are highly affected by the duration of needle puncturing; the more time it takes to collect blood, the more the TAT levels increase [26]. This artifact can result in a pseudo-positive VTE prediction. It would have been better to recollect blood in case of blood sampling taking too long, with too high levels of the activation markers, or clotted blood. F1 + 2 levels are less affected by the duration of needle puncturing than TAT levels, however, TAT and F1 + 2 reflect slightly different results of coagulation activation. The combination of TAT and PIC might have a unique role for predicting VTE development.

Conclusions

This study clearly showed that the prevalence and incidence of VTE were high in hospitalized Japanese patients receiving chemotherapy for malignancies, and suggests that non-increased PIC with increased TAT is an independent risk factor for VTE development. Activation markers of coagulation and fibrinolysis are easy to be tested, and may be useful to define the high-risk group. It is worth being investigated further with a large number of patients and including other activation markers.
  25 in total

1.  Incidence and possible reasons for discordant results between positive FDP and negative D-dimer latex assays in clinical specimens.

Authors:  K S Song; Y A Kim; H K Kim; Q Park
Journal:  Yonsei Med J       Date:  1999-04       Impact factor: 2.759

2.  Novel high-sensitive D-dimer determination predicts chemotherapy-associated venous thromboembolism in intermediate risk lung cancer patients.

Authors:  Patrizia Ferroni; Francesca Martini; Ilaria Portarena; Gioia Massimiani; Silvia Riondino; Francesca La Farina; Sabrina Mariotti; Fiorella Guadagni; Mario Roselli
Journal:  Clin Lung Cancer       Date:  2012-05-15       Impact factor: 4.785

3.  Prediction of venous thromboembolism in cancer patients.

Authors:  Cihan Ay; Daniela Dunkler; Christine Marosi; Alexandru-Laurentiu Chiriac; Rainer Vormittag; Ralph Simanek; Peter Quehenberger; Christoph Zielinski; Ingrid Pabinger
Journal:  Blood       Date:  2010-09-09       Impact factor: 22.113

4.  Venous thromboembolism prophylaxis and treatment in patients with cancer: american society of clinical oncology clinical practice guideline update 2014.

Authors:  Gary H Lyman; Kari Bohlke; Alok A Khorana; Nicole M Kuderer; Agnes Y Lee; Juan Ignacio Arcelus; Edward P Balaban; Jeffrey M Clarke; Christopher R Flowers; Charles W Francis; Leigh E Gates; Ajay K Kakkar; Nigel S Key; Mark N Levine; Howard A Liebman; Margaret A Tempero; Sandra L Wong; Mark R Somerfield; Anna Falanga
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2015-01-20       Impact factor: 44.544

5.  Development and validation of a predictive model for chemotherapy-associated thrombosis.

Authors:  Alok A Khorana; Nicole M Kuderer; Eva Culakova; Gary H Lyman; Charles W Francis
Journal:  Blood       Date:  2008-01-23       Impact factor: 22.113

6.  Recurrent venous thromboembolism and bleeding complications during anticoagulant treatment in patients with cancer and venous thrombosis.

Authors:  Paolo Prandoni; Anthonie W A Lensing; Andrea Piccioli; Enrico Bernardi; Paolo Simioni; Bruno Girolami; Antonio Marchiori; Paola Sabbion; Martin H Prins; Franco Noventa; Antonio Girolami
Journal:  Blood       Date:  2002-07-12       Impact factor: 22.113

7.  Revised equations for estimated GFR from serum creatinine in Japan.

Authors:  Seiichi Matsuo; Enyu Imai; Masaru Horio; Yoshinari Yasuda; Kimio Tomita; Kosaku Nitta; Kunihiro Yamagata; Yasuhiko Tomino; Hitoshi Yokoyama; Akira Hishida
Journal:  Am J Kidney Dis       Date:  2009-04-01       Impact factor: 8.860

8.  Preoperative plasma D-dimer is a predictor of postoperative deep venous thrombosis in colorectal cancer patients: a clinical, prospective cohort study with one-year follow-up.

Authors:  Mogens T Stender; Jens B Frøkjaer; Torben B Larsen; Søren Lundbye-Christensen; Ole Thorlacius-Ussing
Journal:  Dis Colon Rectum       Date:  2009-03       Impact factor: 4.585

9.  Incidence of venous thromboembolism in patients with cancer - a cohort study using linked United Kingdom databases.

Authors:  Alex J Walker; Tim R Card; Joe West; Colin Crooks; Matthew J Grainge
Journal:  Eur J Cancer       Date:  2012-11-09       Impact factor: 9.162

Review 10.  Risk of venous thromboembolism in patients with cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Freesia Horsted; Joe West; Matthew J Grainge
Journal:  PLoS Med       Date:  2012-07-31       Impact factor: 11.069

View more
  6 in total

1.  Thrombin antithrombin complex concentration as an early predictor of deep vein thrombosis after total hip arthroplasty and total knee arthroplasty.

Authors:  Zhencan Lin; Hao Sun; Deng Li; Zhiqing Cai; Meiyi Chen; Wenhui Zhang; Fangzhou Liu; Zhencheng Huang; Yimin Wang; Jie Xu; Ruofan Ma
Journal:  BMC Musculoskelet Disord       Date:  2022-06-14       Impact factor: 2.562

2.  Incidence of venous thromboembolism in patients with solid cancers in Japan: retrospective study of 2735 patients.

Authors:  Taku Nose; Yoshinori Imamura; Shinya Ohata; Shiro Kimbara; Yoshiharu Miyata; Yasuko Hyogo; Yoshimi Fujishima; Yohei Funakoshi; Masanori Toyoda; Naomi Kiyota; Hironobu Minami
Journal:  Int J Hematol       Date:  2021-06-06       Impact factor: 2.490

3.  [Value of Coagulation and Fibrinolysis Biomarker in Lung Cancer Patients with Thromboembolism].

Authors:  Yang Fu; Yumei Liu; Yaxiong Jin; Hong Jiang
Journal:  Zhongguo Fei Ai Za Zhi       Date:  2018-08-20

4.  Performance evaluation of thrombomodulin, thrombin-antithrombin complex, plasmin-α2-antiplasmin complex, and t-PA: PAI-1 complex.

Authors:  Qian Chen; Weiling Shou; Wei Wu; Geng Wang; Wei Cui
Journal:  J Clin Lab Anal       Date:  2019-05-15       Impact factor: 2.352

5.  Cumulative incidence of venous thromboembolism in patients with advanced cancer in prospective observational study.

Authors:  Hirotsugu Kenmotsu; Akifumi Notsu; Keita Mori; Shota Omori; Takahiro Tsushima; Yasuomi Satake; Yoshihiro Miki; Masakazu Abe; Masahito Ogiku; Toshio Nakamura; Masakazu Takagi; Hideto Ochiai; Hirofumi Yasui; Toshiaki Takahashi
Journal:  Cancer Med       Date:  2021-01-09       Impact factor: 4.452

6.  Efficacy and Safety of Postoperative Intravenous Tranexamic Acid in Total Knee Arthroplasty: A Prospective Randomized Controlled Study.

Authors:  Chen-Xi Xue; Yun-Feng Yao; Hao Lv; Li Cheng; Jue-Hua Jing
Journal:  Orthop Surg       Date:  2021-10-19       Impact factor: 2.071

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.