Page 4 - Vasoclick emagazine_Issue1_revised
P. 4

Improved Patient Reported Outcomes with Rivaroxaban in Cancer Associated Thrombosis                  03


 treatment option for patients with CAT, because  follow-up.   Anti-Clot  Treatment  Scale  (ACTS)   2) Reasons for switching to rivaroxaban  week 4.
 9
 it can be administered to patients as a fixed oral   questionnaires were performed at baseline, week   The common reasons for shifting to rivaroxaban
 dose  and  without  any  requirement  of  routine   4, and months 3 and 6 for pairwise comparison   were mainly patient-related that were dependent   Conclusion

 anticoagulation monitoring. 8  to mean scores at baseline (Figure 1). 8  on their preferences and desires, as summarized   Following a shift to rivaroxaban, there was a
       in table 1. 8                                             significant improvement in patient treatment

 Cancer-associated thrOmboSIs –   Study outcome:                 satisfaction on the ACTS Burdens subscale at
 patient-reported outcoMes with rivarOx-  Table 1: Major reasons for switching to rivaroxaban from other   week 4 and maintained at months 3 and 6. 8

 aban (COSIMO) study:  1) Percentage of  patients who  switched  to   anticoagulant therapies. 8

 The  COSIMO  study  was  designed  to  evaluate   Rivaroxaban from other therapies   Patient dependent reasons to   % of patients   The  immediate  increase  in  treatment
 patient  satisfaction  after  planned  change  from   Majority  of  patients  changed  to  Rivaroxaban   switch to Rivaroxaban  switched to   satisfaction at week 4 is strongly supportive

 traditional anticoagulant therapy to rivaroxaban   from LMWH therapy (96.65%), while few patients   Rivaroxaban  of treatment dependent nature of the change
 therapy  for  cancer  associated  thrombosis   changed  from  VKA  and  Fondaparinux  as  well   Desire to cease parenteral   26.9%  in satisfaction. 8


 Factors underlying cancer associated   treatment of CAT owing to superior efficacy and   (CAT). 8, 9  (Figure 2). 8  administration  The  COSIMO  study  demonstrates  that  CAT
 4, 5
 thrombosis (CAT)   safety.  The major drawbacks associated with   Desire to improve quality of   18.6%
 VKA include strict requirement of monitoring of   Study plan:  life (QoL)  patients who changed their VTE treatment to
 Cancer promotes hypercoagulability in patients                  Rivaroxaban experienced :
                                                                                           8
 international  normalized  ratio  (INR)  to  track   A  prospective,  non-interventional,  single-arm   General patient preference  15%
 due to some or all of the following factors :  anticoagulation status and interactions with food   cohort  study  enrolled  patients  from  55  sites   Physician’s decision  34.5%  improved   treatment   satisfaction   in
 3
 Long-term chemotherapy  and drugs. 4,5  across  Australia,  Canada  and  Europe.  505   Undesirably high distance   0.8%  everyday clinical practice.
 8,9
 Endothelial damage   cancer patients who received rivaroxaban were   from their physician  reduced  anticoagulation  burden  (patient

 6
 Obstruction to blood flow by tumor masses   However,  patients’  adherence  towards  LMWH   included  in  the  study.  During  analysis,  ratings   reported).
 over oral anticoagulants is low thereby affecting   were  reverse  coded;  as  a  result,  higher  scores   3) Patient-reported treatment  satisfaction  on   This can improve long term persistence and
 Procoagulant microparticles  released  from   the ACTS Burdens subscale after switching to
 patient outcomes. Major reasons are as follows :  reflected greater patient treatment satisfaction.    clinical outcomes.
 4
 8
 cancer cells   Rivaroxaban :
                     8
 Observations  lasted  for  6  months  or  until  the
 Comorbid conditions                                          References
 Inconvenient  intravenous  infusion  requires   participant withdrew consent, died, or was lost to
 Advanced age  recurrent hospital visits and clinical care  a) At Baseline:  1) Agnelli G, Verso M. Management of venous
 Restricted mobility   High treatment cost       ACTS burden score was 51.8 out of 60  thromboembolism in patients with cancer. J Thromb
                                                              Haemost. 2011;9:316-324.
                                                              doi:10.1111/j.1538-7836.2011.04346.x
 Management of VTE in cancer patients  Recently the international guidelines have been   b) At Week 4:  2) Blom JW, Vanderschoot JP, Oostindi  r MJ, Osanto S,

 Due to high VTE recurrence risk in patients with   updated to include recommendations for DOACs        Patients who remained in the study:  van der Meer FJ, Rosendaal FR. Incidence of venous
                                                              thrombosis in a large cohort of 66,329 cancer patients:
 CAT,  especially  in  the  first  6  months,  extended   in patients with cancer and VTE.  The American   ACTS Burden score was significantly higher   results of a record linkage study. J Thromb Haemost.
 4,5
 anticoagulation therapy has been recommended   Society  of  hematology  (ASH)  2021  guidelines   (55.6 out of 60).  2006;4(3):529-535.
                                                              doi:10.1111/j.1538-7836.2006.01804.x
 if the bleeding risk is low. 4,5  recommend the use of direct oral anticoagulants   Significant   increase   in   treatment   3) Campello E, Henderson MW, Noubouossie DF, Simioni
 (DOACs) for the short term treatment of VTE in   satisfaction.  P, Key NS. Contact system activation and cancer: new
 The   previous   guidelines   included   active cancer over low molecular weight heparin   insights in the pathophysiology of cancer-associated
                                                              thrombosis. Thromb Haemost. 2018;118 (2):251-265.
 low-molecular-weight  heparin  (LMWH)  based   (LMWH). 6  c) At 3 months and 6 months:  doi:10.1160/TH17-08-05962014.59.7351

 anticoagulation   therapy   over   vitamin   K   The ACTS Burden score was 56.2 and 56.5 out   4) Key NS, Khorana AA, Kuderer NM, et al. Venous
 antagonists (VKAs) for the initial and long-term   Rivaroxaban  is  a  promising  and  convenient   of 60 at 3 and 6 months, respectively.  thromboembolism prophylaxis and treatment in patients
                                                              with cancer: ASCO clinical practice guideline update. J
           The results were statistically significant as in    Clin Oncol. 2020;38:496-520.














 5) National Comprehensive Cancer Network.
 Cancer-associated venous thromboembolic disease,
 Version 1.2020. National Comprehensive Cancer Network,
 Inc.; 2020. Available at: https://www.nccn.org/profession
 als/physi cian_gls/pdf/vte.pdf [accessed 22 March 2022].

 6) Lyman GH, Carrier M, Ay C, Di Nisio M, Hicks LK,
 Khorana AA, Leavitt AD, Lee AY, Macbeth F, Morgan RL,
 Noble S. American Society of Hematology 2021
 guidelines for management of venous thromboembolism:
 prevention and treatment in patients with cancer. Blood
 Adv. 2021; 5(4):927-974.
 doi:10.1182/bloodadvances.2020003442

 7) Yeh CH, Hogg K, Weitz JI. Overview of the new oral
 anticoagulants: opportunities and challenges. Arterioscler
 Thromb Vasc Biol. 2015;35:1056-1065.

 8) Cohen AT, Maraveyas A, Beyer-Westendorf J, Lee AY,
 Folkerts K, Abdelgawwad K, De Sanctis Y, Fatoba S,
 Bamber L, Bach M, Mantovani LG. Patient-reported
 outcomes associated with changing to rivaroxaban for
 the treatment of cancer-associated venous
 thromboembolism–The COSIMO study. Thromb Res.
 2021; 206; 1-4. doi: 10.1016/j.thromres.2021.06.021

 9) Maraveyas A, Beyer-Westendorf J, Lee AY, et al.
 Cancer-Associated ThrOmboSIs - Patient-Reported
 OutcoMes With RivarOxaban (COSIMO) - Baseline
 characteristics and clinical outcomes. Res Pract Thromb
 Haemost. 2021;5(8):e12604. doi:10.1002/rth2.12604
   1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9