WHAT THIS PAPER ADDS Isolated superficial vein thrombosis (SVT) is a common but underrated condition. This study shows that patients' risk profiles, clinical presentation, and treatment patterns are very heterogeneous. Patients with SVT bear a significant risk of recurrent venous thromboembolism and recurrent or extended SVT at three months despite a high rate of initial anticoagulation. While recognising the methodological limitations of the prospective observational study design, the results suggest a beneficial effect of fondaparinux vs. low molecular weight heparin in isolated SVT under clinical practice conditions, in line with previous controlled and observational studies.Objective: Management and outcomes of superficial vein thrombosis (SVT) are highly variable and not well described. Therefore, the INvestigating SIGnificant Health TrendS in the management of SVT (INSIGHTS-SVT) study collected prospective data under real life conditions. Methods: Prospective observational study of objectively confirmed acute isolated SVT. The primary outcome was a composite of symptomatic deep vein thrombosis (DVT), pulmonary embolism (PE), and extension or recurrence of SVT at three months. The primary safety outcome was clinically relevant bleeding. Results: A total of 1 150 patients were included (mean age 60.2 AE 14.7 years; 64.9% women; mean BMI 29.4 AE 6.3 kg/ m 2 ). SVT was below the knee in 54.5%, above the knee in 26.7%, above and below the knee in 18.8%. At baseline, 93.6% received pharmacological treatment (65.7% fondaparinux, 23.2% heparins, 4.3% direct oral anticoagulants [DOACs], 14.5% analgesics), 77.0% compression treatment, and 1.9% surgery; 6.4% did not receive any anticoagulation. The primary outcome occurred in 5.8%; 4.7% had recurrent or extended SVT, 1.7% DVT, and 0.8% PE. Clinically relevant non-major bleeding occurred in 1.2% and major bleeding in 0.3%. Complete clinical recovery of SVT was reported in 708 patients (62.4%). Primary outcome adjusted by propensity score and for treatment duration was lower with fondaparinux compared with low molecular weight heparin (4.4% vs. 9.6%; hazard ratio [HR] 0.51; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.3 e 0.9; p ¼ .017). On multivariable analysis, associated factors for primary outcome included another SVT prior to the present SVT event (HR 2.3), age per year (HR 0.97), duration of drug treatment per week (HR 0.92), and thrombus length (HR 1.03). Conclusion: At three month follow up, patients with isolated SVT are at risk of thromboembolic complications (mainly recurrent or extended SVT), despite anticoagulation. In this real life study, about one third had received either heparins, oral anticoagulants, or no anticoagulation.

We analyzed data for women who received fondaparinux for ≥7 days during pregnancy. The study retrospectively included women who received fondaparinux pre-, peri- and/or postpartum for ≥7 days for prophylaxis/venous thromboembolism (VTE) treatment at German specialist centers (2004-2010). Data on pregnancy, VTE risk factors, anticoagulant treatment, pregnancy outcome and adverse events were extracted from medical records. 120 women (mean age 31.5 years) were included. Among 84 women with prior pregnancies, 41.0% had ≥1 abortion. Anticoagulation was indicated for prophylaxis in 92.5% cases, including 82.5% women with an elevated VTE risk (82.8% thrombophilia, 34.2% VTE history). All women received low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) as first-line therapy; 3 also unfractionated heparin. Treatment changed to fondaparinux, due to heparin allergy (41.7%) or heparin-induced thrombocytopenia (10.0%). Fondaparinux was generally well tolerated. Adverse events included bleeding events (n = 5), abortion (n = 2), premature births (n = 2), stillbirth (n = 1), arrested labors (n = 2), injection site erythema (n = 4) and unspecified drug hypersensitivity (n = 6). No VTE events or increased liver enzymes occurred during treatment. In this retrospective study, fondaparinux was effective and well tolerated. Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01004939.

T. Platelet activation in the presence of neutral protamine Hagedorn insulin: a new feature of antibodies against protamine/heparin complexes.J Thromb Haemost 2017; 15: 176-84. Essentials• Protamine (PRT) is used to stabilize insulin in neutral protamine Hagedorn (NPH) insulin.• The interaction between NPH-insulin, anti-PRT/heparin antibodies and platelets was investigated.• Anti-PRT/heparin antibodies activate platelets in presence of NPH-insulin dependent on heparin.• Cross-reactivity seems to have no major effect on the clinical outcome of medical patients.Summary. Background: Protamine (PRT) is used to stabilize insulin in neutral protamine Hagedorn (NPH) insulin, a commonly used therapeutic agent for diabetes mellitus. Immunization against PRT/heparin complexes is common in diabetic patients. Objectives: To investigate the impact of NPH-insulin on the interaction between anti-PRT/heparin antibodies and platelets. Methods: The interaction between NPH-insulin and anti-PRT/heparin antibodies was tested using in-house enzyme immunoassays. The ability of anti-PRT/heparin antibodies to activate platelets in the presence of NPH-insulin (and heparin) was investigated using flow cytometry. Results: Twenty-one out of 80 sera containing anti-PRT/heparin IgG showed binding to NPH-insulin. Anti-PRT/heparin IgG from immunized patients bound to platelets in the presence of NPH-insulin, but not in the presence of native insulin. Anti-PRT/heparin antibodies induced P-selectin expression in the presence of NPH-insulin in a heparin-dependent way (median mean fluorescence intensity in the presence of NPH-insulin: 55, 95% confidence interval [CI] 18.7-100.5 vs. NPH-insulin and heparin: 204, 95% CI 106.5-372.8). The clinical relevance of platelet-activating anti-PRT/heparin antibodies was assessed by investigating a multicenter study cohort of 332 acutely ill medical patients who received heparin. None of the 21 patients with anti-PRT/heparin IgG developed thrombocytopenia or thromboembolic complications. Conclusions: Anti-PRT/heparin antibodies activate platelets in the presence of NPH-insulin in a heparin-dependent way. However, results from our preliminary study indicate no major impact of these antibodies on the clinical outcome in medical patients receiving heparin, particularly on thromboembolic complications.

Summary: Background: Thrombosis is a common complication of cancer with a negative impact on quality of life and overall prognosis. Guidelines recommend low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) as initial and prolonged anticoagulation treatment. Little is known about current treatment patterns of these patients in ambulatory care. Patients and methods: The current retrospective observational study interrogates a large German statutory health insurance claims database in order to understand which kind of data can be extracted and analysed. An age- and sex-adjusted sample of about 4.1 million insured people from 2011 to 2016 could be used. Cancer patients with incident deep and superficial leg vein thrombosis were identified. Patients with preexisting cancer were allocated to a normal risk group; those who suffered from simultaneously diagnosed cancer and thrombosis were classified as high-risk group. Results: We identified 322,600 patients with inpatient or outpatient documented cancer diagnosis in at least two different quarters within one year. 87,755 patients were identified with an incident deep or superficial vein thrombosis. 8,201 patients suffered from both cancer and incident thrombosis. 56.9% of the patients received an anticoagulation regimen with predominant LMWH prescription, 24.2% vitamin K antagonists, 17.2% direct oral anticoagulants; in 1.7% of patients, no predominant anticoagulant drug/regime could be identified. On average, patients were prescribed anticoagulants for 4.5 months. An estimate of clinically relevant gastrointestinal bleeding could be derived (1.8% of patients). Conclusions: The dataset allows assigning detailed information of anticoagulant prescriptions in ambulatory care to well-defined groups of cancer patients. A first analysis suggests that in Germany current medical care of patients with cancer-related deep or superficial vein thrombosis does not entirely comply with guideline recommendations regarding type and duration of anticoagulation.

Objective This article aims to investigate the reality of anticoagulation treatment for cancer patients with thrombosis in the outpatient sector of Germany. Methods For the analysis period 2012 to 2015, anonymized data from 4.1 million statutory insured patients were analyzed. Cancer patients with incident thrombosis and an outpatient prescription of anticoagulant drugs were identified and evaluated for three subsequent quarters with regard to anticoagulant use. Results A total of 7,313 cancer patients with incident thrombosis (ICD-10: I80*) were evaluated. About, 90% of patients with thromboses were diagnosed and treated in the ambulatory sector. More than 80% of the prescriptions were issued by general practitioners. And 57% of patients were anticoagulated predominantly (>50% of the time) with different low-molecular-weight heparins (LMWHs), 24% predominantly with vitamin K antagonists (VKAs), and 17% with direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs). Anticoagulants were prescribed for an average of 4.5 months. LMWH had a substantially longer prescription period (90–135 days) than VKA (53 days) or DOAC (47 days). Gastrointestinal bleeding in conjunction with hospitalization was documented in 1.76% of patients with a range of 1.3 to 3% for the different LMWHs. Conclusion The prescription practice documented by this representative and comprehensive evaluation demonstrates an anticoagulation duration in accordance with the guidelines, although the choice of the respective anticoagulant was often not in compliance with the contemporary label or guidelines.