Cargando…

Evaluation of unmet clinical needs in prophylaxis and treatment of venous thromboembolism in high-risk patient groups: cancer and critically ill

BACKGROUND: Clinical practice shows that venous thromboembolism (VTE) presents a substantial burden in medical patients, and awareness and advocacy for its primary and secondary prevention remains inadequate. Specific patient populations, such as those with cancer and the critically ill, show elevat...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Brenner, Benjamin, Hull, Russell, Arya, Roopen, Beyer-Westendorf, Jan, Douketis, James, Elalamy, Ismail, Imberti, Davide, Zhai, Zhenguo
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6466798/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31011294
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12959-019-0196-6
_version_ 1783411178562650112
author Brenner, Benjamin
Hull, Russell
Arya, Roopen
Beyer-Westendorf, Jan
Douketis, James
Elalamy, Ismail
Imberti, Davide
Zhai, Zhenguo
author_facet Brenner, Benjamin
Hull, Russell
Arya, Roopen
Beyer-Westendorf, Jan
Douketis, James
Elalamy, Ismail
Imberti, Davide
Zhai, Zhenguo
author_sort Brenner, Benjamin
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Clinical practice shows that venous thromboembolism (VTE) presents a substantial burden in medical patients, and awareness and advocacy for its primary and secondary prevention remains inadequate. Specific patient populations, such as those with cancer and the critically ill, show elevated risk for VTE, bleeding or both, and significant gaps in VTE prophylaxis and treatment exist in these groups. OBJECTIVE: To present novel insights and consolidated evidence collected from experts, clinical practice guidelines and original studies on the unmet needs in thromboprophylaxis, and on the treatment of VTE in two high-risk patient groups: patients with cancer and the critically ill. METHODOLOGY: To identify specific unmet needs in the management of VTE, a methodology was designed and implemented that assessed gaps in prophylaxis and treatment of VTE through interviews with 44 experts in the field of thrombosis and haemostasis, and through a review of current guidelines and seminal studies to substantiate the insights provided by the experts. The research findings were then analysed, discussed and consolidated by a multidisciplinary group of experts. RESULTS: The gap analysis methodology identified shortcomings in the VTE risk assessment tools, patient stratification approaches for prophylaxis, and the suboptimal use of anticoagulants for primary prophylaxis and treatment. CONCLUSIONS: Specifically, patients with cancer need better VTE risk assessment tools to tailor primary thromboprophylaxis to tumour types and disease stages, and the potential for drug–drug interactions needs to be considered. In critically ill patients, unfractionated heparin is not advised as a first-line treatment option, and the strength of evidence is increasing for direct oral anticoagulants as a treatment option over low-molecular-weight heparins. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1186/s12959-019-0196-6) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6466798
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2019
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-64667982019-04-22 Evaluation of unmet clinical needs in prophylaxis and treatment of venous thromboembolism in high-risk patient groups: cancer and critically ill Brenner, Benjamin Hull, Russell Arya, Roopen Beyer-Westendorf, Jan Douketis, James Elalamy, Ismail Imberti, Davide Zhai, Zhenguo Thromb J Review BACKGROUND: Clinical practice shows that venous thromboembolism (VTE) presents a substantial burden in medical patients, and awareness and advocacy for its primary and secondary prevention remains inadequate. Specific patient populations, such as those with cancer and the critically ill, show elevated risk for VTE, bleeding or both, and significant gaps in VTE prophylaxis and treatment exist in these groups. OBJECTIVE: To present novel insights and consolidated evidence collected from experts, clinical practice guidelines and original studies on the unmet needs in thromboprophylaxis, and on the treatment of VTE in two high-risk patient groups: patients with cancer and the critically ill. METHODOLOGY: To identify specific unmet needs in the management of VTE, a methodology was designed and implemented that assessed gaps in prophylaxis and treatment of VTE through interviews with 44 experts in the field of thrombosis and haemostasis, and through a review of current guidelines and seminal studies to substantiate the insights provided by the experts. The research findings were then analysed, discussed and consolidated by a multidisciplinary group of experts. RESULTS: The gap analysis methodology identified shortcomings in the VTE risk assessment tools, patient stratification approaches for prophylaxis, and the suboptimal use of anticoagulants for primary prophylaxis and treatment. CONCLUSIONS: Specifically, patients with cancer need better VTE risk assessment tools to tailor primary thromboprophylaxis to tumour types and disease stages, and the potential for drug–drug interactions needs to be considered. In critically ill patients, unfractionated heparin is not advised as a first-line treatment option, and the strength of evidence is increasing for direct oral anticoagulants as a treatment option over low-molecular-weight heparins. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1186/s12959-019-0196-6) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. BioMed Central 2019-04-15 /pmc/articles/PMC6466798/ /pubmed/31011294 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12959-019-0196-6 Text en © The Author(s). 2019 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
spellingShingle Review
Brenner, Benjamin
Hull, Russell
Arya, Roopen
Beyer-Westendorf, Jan
Douketis, James
Elalamy, Ismail
Imberti, Davide
Zhai, Zhenguo
Evaluation of unmet clinical needs in prophylaxis and treatment of venous thromboembolism in high-risk patient groups: cancer and critically ill
title Evaluation of unmet clinical needs in prophylaxis and treatment of venous thromboembolism in high-risk patient groups: cancer and critically ill
title_full Evaluation of unmet clinical needs in prophylaxis and treatment of venous thromboembolism in high-risk patient groups: cancer and critically ill
title_fullStr Evaluation of unmet clinical needs in prophylaxis and treatment of venous thromboembolism in high-risk patient groups: cancer and critically ill
title_full_unstemmed Evaluation of unmet clinical needs in prophylaxis and treatment of venous thromboembolism in high-risk patient groups: cancer and critically ill
title_short Evaluation of unmet clinical needs in prophylaxis and treatment of venous thromboembolism in high-risk patient groups: cancer and critically ill
title_sort evaluation of unmet clinical needs in prophylaxis and treatment of venous thromboembolism in high-risk patient groups: cancer and critically ill
topic Review
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6466798/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31011294
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12959-019-0196-6
work_keys_str_mv AT brennerbenjamin evaluationofunmetclinicalneedsinprophylaxisandtreatmentofvenousthromboembolisminhighriskpatientgroupscancerandcriticallyill
AT hullrussell evaluationofunmetclinicalneedsinprophylaxisandtreatmentofvenousthromboembolisminhighriskpatientgroupscancerandcriticallyill
AT aryaroopen evaluationofunmetclinicalneedsinprophylaxisandtreatmentofvenousthromboembolisminhighriskpatientgroupscancerandcriticallyill
AT beyerwestendorfjan evaluationofunmetclinicalneedsinprophylaxisandtreatmentofvenousthromboembolisminhighriskpatientgroupscancerandcriticallyill
AT douketisjames evaluationofunmetclinicalneedsinprophylaxisandtreatmentofvenousthromboembolisminhighriskpatientgroupscancerandcriticallyill
AT elalamyismail evaluationofunmetclinicalneedsinprophylaxisandtreatmentofvenousthromboembolisminhighriskpatientgroupscancerandcriticallyill
AT imbertidavide evaluationofunmetclinicalneedsinprophylaxisandtreatmentofvenousthromboembolisminhighriskpatientgroupscancerandcriticallyill
AT zhaizhenguo evaluationofunmetclinicalneedsinprophylaxisandtreatmentofvenousthromboembolisminhighriskpatientgroupscancerandcriticallyill