The NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology (NCCN Guidelines ®) are a statement of consensus of the authors regarding their views of currently accepted approaches to treatment. The NCCN Guidelines ® Insights highlight important changes in the NCCN Guidelines ® recommendations from previous versions. Colored markings in the algorithm show changes and the discussion aims to further understanding of these changes by summarizing salient portions of the panel's discussion, including the literature reviewed. The NCCN Guidelines Insights do not represent the full NCCN Guidelines; further, the National Comprehensive Cancer Network® (NCCN ®) makes no representation or warranties of any kind regarding the content, use, or application of the NCCN Guidelines and NCCN Guidelines Insights and disclaims any responsibility for their applications or use in any way. The full and most current version of these NCCN Guidelines is available at NCCN.org.

Purpose To investigate the risk and outcomes of second hematologic malignancies (SHMs) in a population-based cohort of patients with well-differentiated thyroid cancer (WDTC) treated or not with radioactive iodine (RAI). Methods Patients with WDTC were identified from SEER registries. Competing risk regression analysis was performed to calculate the risks of SHMs that occurred after WDTC treatment and outcomes after SHM development were assessed. Results Of 148,215 patients with WDTC, 53% received surgery alone and 47% received RAI. In total, 783 patients developed an SHM after a median interval of 6.5 years (interquartile range, 3.3 to 11.2 years) from WDTC diagnosis. In multivariable analysis, compared with those undergoing thyroidectomy alone, RAI treatment was associated with an increased early risk of developing acute myeloid leukemia (AML; hazard ratio, 1.79; 95% CI, 1.13 to 2.82; P = .01) and chronic myeloid leukemia (CML; hazard ratio, 3.44; 95% CI, 1.87 to 6.36; P < .001). This increased risk of AML and CML after RAI treatment was seen even in low-risk and intermediate-risk WDTC tumors. Occurrence of AML but not CML in patients with WDTC was associated with shorter median overall survival compared with matched controls (8.0 years v 31.0 years; P = .001). In addition, AML developing after RAI trended toward inferior survival compared with matched controls with de novo AML (median overall survival, 1.2 years v 2.9 years; P = .06). Conclusion Patients with WDTC treated with RAI had an increased early risk of developing AML and CML but no other hematologic malignancies. AML that arises after RAI treatment has a poor prognosis. RAI use in patients with WDTC should be limited to patients with high-risk disease features, and patients with WDTC treated with adjuvant RAI should be monitored for myeloid malignancies as part of cancer surveillance.

Compared to age-matched controls, cancer patients have increased risk of bleeding when treated with anticoagulation. However, there are little data regarding bleeding as it relates to anticoagulant choice and other risk factors. We evaluated the six-month incidence of bleeding among patients treated with anticoagulation who had bleeding risk factors. Data were obtained from Explorys (IBM Watson, Inc.), which pools data from multiple US healthcare organizations. Cohorts of patients were created to compare bleeding events between cancer and non-cancer patients treated with anticoagulation within six months of starting anticoagulation. Potential bleeding risk factors such as cancer type, metastatic disease, obesity, chronic kidney disease stage III or higher, and platelet count were evaluated. We compared ratios of numbers of patients in specific cohorts using chi-squared tests with continuity correction. The cohort comprised 3 283 140 cancer patients, of whom 435 140 (13.3%) received anticoagulation within six months of their cancer diagnosis. Bleeding incidence was higher in cancer vs non-cancer patients across all anticoagulants studied: warfarin 20.2% vs 12.6%, rivaroxaban 16.7% vs 12.1%, LMWH 13.2% vs 9.7%, and apixaban 14.5% vs 9.3%, P < .001 for all comparisons. Among all anticoagulants except warfarin, we found increased bleeding incidence in cancer patients with metastatic disease, gastrointestinal primary, CKD ≥ stage III, and platelets <100,000 × 10 9 /L. Bleeding incidence was higher in cancer patients regardless of the anticoagulant used. Patients with gastrointestinal malignancies had a higher incidence of bleeding compared to other tumors across all anticoagulants. Other factors associated with increased risk of bleeding included metastatic disease, chronic kidney disease, and thrombocytopenia.

No abstract

Background Previous studies suggest isolated distal deep vein thrombosis (IDDVT) has a self‐limited clinical course. However, these studies excluded cancer patients, who remain a high‐risk population. In addition, studies to evaluate the long‐term clinical outcomes of IDDVT in cancer patients have been limited. Here, we report outcomes from our experience in treating cancer‐associated IDDVT versus proximal venous thromboembolism (VTE). Methods We prospectively evaluated a cohort of patients referred to our cancer‐associated thrombosis clinic from August 2014 through May 2018. We compared clinical characteristics, anticoagulation prescription, VTE recurrence, overall survival, major bleeding, and subsequent hospital admission between cancer patients with IDDVT and proximal VTE. A propensity score matching method was used to reduce bias from confounding variables. Results Of 1100 patients referred to the clinic, 124 IDDVT and 178 proximal VTE events were analyzed. After propensity score matching, 96 patients were included in each cohort. There was no difference in the rate of recurrent VTE between cancer patients with proximal VTE vs IDDVT, with or without matching (matched: hazard ratio [HR], 0.77; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.31‐1.92; P = .58). There was no difference in overall survival between cancer patients with proximal VTE vs. IDDVT with or without matching (matched: HR, 1.18; 95% CI, 0.77‐1.82; P = .45). Furthermore, subsequent hospital admissions and major bleeding events were similar between patients with proximal VTE events versus IDDVT. Conclusions Cancer patients with IDDVT have similar outcomes as their proximal counterparts, including rate of recurrence and overall survival. These findings suggest treatment of cancer‐associated IDDVT should mirror treatment of proximal events.