Literature DB >> 33649980

Heparin versus aspirin thromboprophylaxis adds independent value to IMPEDE-VTE score for venous thrombosis prediction in multiple myeloma.

C Bravo-Perez1,2, M Fernández-Caballero3,4, E Soler-Espejo3, E Garcia-Torralba3, M Sorigue4, M D García-Malo3, A Jerez3, V Vicente3, V Roldán3, F de Arriba3.   

Abstract

Multiple myeloma (MM) is associated to an increased incidence of venous thromboembolism (VTE). IMPEDE-VTE score constitutes a valuable risk assessment tool for VTE prediction in first-line MM patients. Nevertheless, refinement of the primary thromboprophylaxis category of this score (which pools aspirin and heparin) seems desirable. To investigate the role of the type of thromboprophylaxis, within IMPEDE-VTE score, for VTE prediction in MM patients. Retrospective analysis of a single-center cohort of 438 MM patients receiving first-line antimyeloma treatment (1991-2020). IMPEDE-VTE score was calculated. Primary thromboprophylaxis was additionally stratified into aspirin- and heparin-based regimen subgroups. VTE risk was analyzed by Cox regression. Median follow-up during first-line antimyeloma treatment was 6.0 months (IQR 4.1-9.0 months). Twenty-three patients developed VTE (5.3%, 95%CI 3.4-7.8%). IMPEDE-VTE score showed a notable predictive value (area under the ROC curve: 0.70, 95%CI 0.60-0.80). Cox analysis confirmed that 1-point increase in the score resulted in a 1.3-fold increase in VTE risk (HR 1.30, 95%CI 1.13-1.53, p < 0.001). In the multivariable analysis, the type of primary thromboprophylaxis (heparin versus aspirin) was an independent predictive factor (HR 0.15, 95% CI 0.05-0.47, p = 0.001). The combined model showed a higher goodness-of-fit (Akaike Information Criterion [AIC]: 99) than IMPEDE-VTE separately (AIC:235). Our analysis contributes to the external validation of IMPEDE-VTE score for the prediction of VTE in MM. But more interestingly, our results demonstrate that among those patients receiving thromboprophylaxis, the type of regimen (heparin versus aspirin) adds independent predictive value and should be explored for a more accurate risk assessment.
© 2021. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Science+Business Media, LLC part of Springer Nature.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Antithrombotic therapy; Myeloma; Risk factors; Venous thromboembolism

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2021        PMID: 33649980     DOI: 10.1007/s11239-021-02407-5

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Thromb Thrombolysis        ISSN: 0929-5305            Impact factor:   2.300


  8 in total

1.  Cancer-associated thrombosis.

Authors:  Rodger L Bick
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2003-07-10       Impact factor: 91.245

2.  Retrospective study of the incidence and patterns of arterial and venous thrombosis in Chinese versus African American patients with multiple myeloma.

Authors:  Radha Raghupathy; Sabarish Ayyappan; Dhivya Prabhakar; Erica L Campagnaro; Frankie K F Mo; Wa Li; Edwin P Hui; Anthony T C Chan; Kenny I K Lei
Journal:  Br J Haematol       Date:  2016-01-26       Impact factor: 6.998

3.  Phase III clinical trial of thalidomide plus dexamethasone compared with dexamethasone alone in newly diagnosed multiple myeloma: a clinical trial coordinated by the Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group.

Authors:  S Vincent Rajkumar; Emily Blood; David Vesole; Rafael Fonseca; Philip R Greipp
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2005-12-19       Impact factor: 44.544

4.  Predicting venous thromboembolism in multiple myeloma: development and validation of the IMPEDE VTE score.

Authors:  Kristen M Sanfilippo; Suhong Luo; Tzu-Fei Wang; Mark Fiala; Martin Schoen; Tanya M Wildes; Joseph Mikhael; Nicole M Kuderer; David C Calverley; Jesse Keller; Theodore Thomas; Kenneth R Carson; Brian F Gage
Journal:  Am J Hematol       Date:  2019-08-19       Impact factor: 10.047

5.  First-line therapy with thalidomide and dexamethasone in preparation for autologous stem cell transplantation for multiple myeloma.

Authors:  Michele Cavo; Elena Zamagni; Patrizia Tosi; Claudia Cellini; Delia Cangini; Paola Tacchetti; Nicoletta Testoni; Michela Tonelli; Antonio de Vivo; Gualtiero Palareti; Sante Tura; Michele Baccarani
Journal:  Haematologica       Date:  2004-07       Impact factor: 9.941

6.  Monoclonal gammopathy of undetermined significance and multiple myeloma are associated with an increased incidence of venothromboembolic disease.

Authors:  Gordan Srkalovic; Marte G Cameron; Lisa Rybicki; Steven R Deitcher; Kandice Kattke-Marchant; Mohamad A Hussein
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  2004-08-01       Impact factor: 6.860

Review 7.  Prevention of thalidomide- and lenalidomide-associated thrombosis in myeloma.

Authors:  A Palumbo; S V Rajkumar; M A Dimopoulos; P G Richardson; J San Miguel; B Barlogie; J Harousseau; J A Zonder; M Cavo; M Zangari; M Attal; A Belch; S Knop; D Joshua; O Sezer; H Ludwig; D Vesole; J Bladé; R Kyle; J Westin; D Weber; S Bringhen; R Niesvizky; A Waage; M von Lilienfeld-Toal; S Lonial; G J Morgan; R Z Orlowski; K Shimizu; K C Anderson; M Boccadoro; B G Durie; P Sonneveld; M A Hussein
Journal:  Leukemia       Date:  2007-12-20       Impact factor: 11.528

8.  NCCN Guidelines Insights: Cancer-Associated Venous Thromboembolic Disease, Version 2.2018.

Authors:  Michael B Streiff; Bjorn Holmstrom; Dana Angelini; Aneel Ashrani; Paula L Bockenstedt; Carolyn Chesney; John Fanikos; Randolph B Fenninger; Annemarie E Fogerty; Shuwei Gao; Samuel Z Goldhaber; Krishna Gundabolu; Paul Hendrie; Alfred I Lee; Jason T Lee; Janelle Mann; Brandon McMahon; Michael M Millenson; Colleen Morton; Thomas L Ortel; Sadat Ozair; Rita Paschal; Sanford Shattil; Tanya Siddiqi; Kristi J Smock; Gerald Soff; Tzu-Fei Wang; Eliot Williams; Anaadriana Zakarija; Lydia Hammond; Mary A Dwyer; Anita M Engh
Journal:  J Natl Compr Canc Netw       Date:  2018-11       Impact factor: 11.908

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.