The Role of Direct Oral Anticoagulants in the Treatment of Cancer-Associated Venous Thromboembolism: Review by Middle East and North African Experts.

Venous thromboembolism is a leading cause of morbidity and mortality in patients with active cancer who require anticoagulation treatment. Choice of anticoagulant is based on careful balancing of the risks and benefits of available classes of treatment: vitamin K antagonists, low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH), and direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs). Results from randomized controlled trials have shown the consistent efficacy of DOACs versus LMWH in the treatment of cancer-associated venous thromboembolism (VTE). However, increased major gastrointestinal bleeding was observed for edoxaban and rivaroxaban, but not apixaban, compared with LMWH dalteparin. Most guidelines recommend DOACs for the treatment of cancer-associated VTE in patients without gastrointestinal or genitourinary cancer, and with considerations for renal impairment and drug-drug interactions. These updates represent a major paradigm shift for clinicians in the Middle East and North Africa. The decision to prescribe a DOAC for a patient with cancer is not always straightforward, particularly in challenging subgroups of patients with an increased risk of bleeding. In patients with gastrointestinal malignancies who are at high risk of major gastrointestinal bleeds, apixaban may be the preferred DOAC; however, caution should be exercised if patients have upper or unresected lower gastrointestinal tumors. In patients with gastrointestinal malignancies and upper or unresected lower gastrointestinal tumors, LMWH may be preferred. Vitamin K antagonists should be used only when DOACs and LMWH are unavailable or unsuitable. In this review, we discuss the overall evidence for DOACs in the treatment of cancer-associated VTE and provide treatment suggestions for challenging subgroups of patients with cancer associated VTE.

Patients with cancer are at risk of blood clots forming in their veins, which can cause illness and death. To prevent such blood clots, most patients with cancer need anticoagulant therapy. There are three types of anticoagulants available for the treatment of cancer-associated blood clots in a vein, namely, vitamin K antagonists, low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH), and direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs). Drug trials have shown that DOACs are more effective than LMWH; however, DOACs can have a greater risk of causing major gastrointestinal bleeding. Among DOACs, edoxaban and rivaroxaban are drugs associated with higher rates of gastrointestinal bleeding. Recently updated guidelines for doctors recommend that DOACs be used as the first treatment for patients with cancer at risk of blood clot formation in a vein. For doctors in the Middle East and North Africa, this new approach differs from existing practices. Notably, choosing a treatment also depends on the type of cancer, because gastrointestinal cancers and cancers of the genitals and urinary system have an especially high risk of gastrointestinal bleeding. The choice also depends on the presence of kidney problems, drug­drug interactions, and access to the drugs. Apixaban may be the preferred DOAC in patients with gastrointestinal cancer, but this drug should be used with care in patients with upper or unresected lower gastrointestinal tumors. For patients with upper or unresected lower gastrointestinal tumors, treatment with LMWH may be preferred. Vitamin K antagonists should be used only when DOACs and LMWH are unavailable or unsuitable.

Venous thromboembolism risk and prophylaxis in the acute hospital care setting: report from the ENDORSE study in Egypt.

BACKGROUND: Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is a leading cause of hospital-related deaths worldwide. However, the proportion of patients at risk of VTE who receive appropriate prophylaxis in Egypt is unknown. The ENDORSE study in Egypt is part of a global initiative to uncover the incidence of high-risk surgical and medical patients and determine what proportion of these patients receive appropriate VTE prophylaxis. METHODS: Ten Egyptian hospitals participated in this observational study, enrolling all surgical and medical patients that met the study criteria. This resulted in a cohort of 1,008 patients in acute care facilities who underwent a retrospective chart review. Each patient's VTE risk status and the presence or absence of appropriate prophylactic care was assessed according to the American College of Chest Physicians (ACCP) guidelines 2004. RESULTS: Of the 1,008 patients enrolled, 395 (39.2%) were found to be at high-risk for VTE. Overall, 227 surgical patients were at high-risk, although only 80 (35.2%) received ACCP-recommended prophylaxis. Similarly, 55/268 (32.75%) of high-risk medical patients received appropriate VTE prophylaxis. Low molecular weight heparin was the most commonly used anticoagulant, while mechanical prophylactic use was quite low (1.5%) in high-risk patients. CONCLUSIONS: In Egypt, more than one-third of all patients hospitalized for surgery or acute medical conditions are at high risk for developing VTE. However, only a small fraction of these patients receive appropriate VTE prophylaxis. Corrective measures are necessary for preventing VTE morbidity and mortality in these high risk patients.