No abstract

Background: Cancer patients are at high risk for cancer-associated thrombosis (CAT). CAT is the second leading cause of death in these patients but it can be preventable with thromboprophylaxis. Patients and Methods: An observational, prospective, multicenter study aiming to record CAT management in clinical practice was conducted by the Hellenic Society of Medical Oncology (HeSMO). Results: A total of 426 active cancer patients (mean age 65.3 years, mean BMI: 26.1 kg/m2) who received thromboprophylaxis, were included from 18 oncology units. Tumor types were lung 25.1%, pancreas 13.9%, breast 8.7%, stomach 8.5%, ovarian 7.8%, and others 36%, while 69% had metastases. A total of 71% had a Khorana score ≤2 and 61% received High Thrombotic Risk Chemotherapy Agents (HTRCAs, e.g., platinum). For thromboprophylaxis patients received mainly Low Molecular Weight Heparins (LMWHs), on higher than prophylactic doses in 50% of cases. Overall, 16 (3.8%) thrombotic events and 6 (1.4%) bleeding events were recorded. Notably, patients on higher doses of LMWHs compared to patients who received standard prophylactic doses had 70% lower odds to develop thrombotic events (OR: 0.3, 95% CI: 0.10–1.0, p = 0.04). Conclusion: CAT is an important issue in oncology. Along with the Khorana score, factors as metastasis and use of HTRCAs should also be taken into consideration. Thromboprophylaxis for active cancer patients with LMWHs, even on higher doses is safe and efficient.

Thromboprophylaxis, as a preventive measure for cancer-associated thrombosis (CAT), may be beneficial for patients with active cancer and high-risk for thrombosis. The present post hoc analysis include a total of 407 patients enrolled in the Greek Management of Thrombosis study, who received thromboprophylaxis with tinzaparin. The objectives of the present analysis were: i) To obtain sufficient evidence for the administration of prophylaxis in patients with active cancer, irrespective of Khorana risk assessment model score; ii) to identify the selection criteria for both dose and duration of tinzaparin; and iii) to evaluate the efficacy and safety of tinzaparin administered for CAT prophylaxis. The main tumor types for the patients included in the present study were as follows: Lung (25.1%), pancreatic (14.3%), breast (9.1%), stomach (8.4%), colorectal (7.9%) and ovarian (7.6%). Furthermore, metastatic disease was observed in 69.5% of the patients. High thrombotic burden agents (HTBAs) were administered to 66.3% of the patients, and 17.4% received erythropoietin. A total of 43.7% of the patients exhibited a Khorana score <2. The results of the present study demonstrated that both the presence of metastatic disease and the use of HTBAs seemed to influence oncologists' decisions for the use of thromboprophylaxis in patients with active cancer, regardless of Khorana score. Tinzaparin, in dose expressed in the standard notation for heparins, i.e., anti-Xa factor international units (Anti-Xa IU), was administered at an intermediate dose (InterD; 8,000-12,000 Anti-Xa IU; once daily) to 52.4% of patients, while the remaining patients received a prophylactic dose (ProD; ≤4,500 Anti-Xa IU; once daily). The average duration of thromoprophylaxis was 5 months. Furthermore, a total of 14 (3.4%) thrombotic events and 6 (1.5%) minor bleeding events were recorded. A total of four thrombotic events were observed following an InterD treatment of tinzaparin, while 10 thrombotic events were observed following ProD treatment. The present study also demonstrated that an InterD of tinzaparin was administered more frequently to patients

Background: Cancer-associated thrombosis (CAT), the second leading cause of death in patients with cancer can be treated with low molecular weight heparin (LMWH) according to guidelines. Patients and Methods: A multicenter prospective observational study was carried out to record antithrombotic treatment practice, assess thrombosis recurrence and bleeding, and identify potential risk factors. Adult patients from 18 Oncology Departments throughout Greece were followed-up for 12 months. Results: A total of 120 patients with CAT receiving anticoagulant treatment were enrolled (35% incidental); 85% were treated for more than 6 months, 95.8% were treated with tinzaparin and smaller percentages with other agents. Thrombosis recurred in three patients and there was minor bleeding in four patients. Bleeding was associated with high body mass index (>35 kg/m 2), trauma history, renal insufficiency and bevacizumab use. Conclusion: Incidental thrombosis contributes significantly to CAT burden. Long-term use of LMWH seems to be effective and safe. Several risk factors associated with bleeding should be considered during anti-coagulation therapy planning.

Uterine cervix carcinoids are distinct neuroendocrine cervical tumors, representing a comparatively small percentage of them. These well-differentiated neoplasms are far less prevalent than small- and large-cell carcinomas, characterized by a more favorable biological course. We report a case of a 43-year-old woman with a nonmetastatic cervical carcinoid, managed with radical hysterectomy. She still remains free of disease. Scant reports in the literature prohibit any reliable prediction of cervical carcinoid prognosis. Thus, prompt identification of the disease and subsequent therapeutic intervention could alter the final outcome.