Impact of Venous Thrombosis Prevention in Ambulatory Oncology: Importance of Guideline Adherence.
prospective_cohort · Level II
Where this comes from
- Record sourced from PubMed, PMID 41941694.
- Also identified by DOI 10.1200/OP-25-01211.
- No licence information is recorded for this record.
- Because redistribution is not established, this page shows the abstract only. Follow the links below for the full text.
Abstract
Despite strong evidence and guidelines supporting prophylactic anticoagulation for ambulatory patients with cancer starting systemic cancer-directed therapy who are at high risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE), uptake in practice is limited. We evaluated the real-world impact of prophylactic anticoagulation in such patients receiving guideline-based care. We conducted an observational cohort study of patients assessed as part of a multidisciplinary VTE prevention program (the Vermont model) from 2016 to 2021. For this study, we included outpatients at high risk of VTE based on a Khorana risk score or Protecht risk score of ≥3. Based on the individualized decision making, patients either received or did not receive prophylactic anticoagulation. The primary outcome was VTE at 6 months after risk assessment. The secondary outcome was all-cause mortality at 6 months. Of 573 high-risk patients assessed during the study period, 340 (59%) received thromboprophylaxis and 233 (41%) did not. Eleven (3.2%) on thromboprophylaxis developed a VTE within 6 months, compared with 18 (7.7%) not on thromboprophylaxis. After adjusting for age, sex, BMI, cancer stage, chemotherapy, immunotherapy, distance from center, and history of VTE, thromboprophylaxis reduced VTE (adjusted odds ratio [OR], 0.36 [95% CI, 0.16 to 0.80]) compared with no thromboprophylaxis. Of deaths within 6 months, 57 (16.8%) occurred in the thromboprophylaxis group versus 73 (31.3%) in the no thromboprophylaxis group (adjusted OR, 0.46 [95% CI, 0.30 to 0.71]). Ambulatory patients with cancer at high risk of VTE who received prophylactic anticoagulation had improved clinical outcomes with fewer VTE events and less mortality. Our real-world data support available clinical trial data and underscore the importance of the provision of guideline-directed care in the cancer outpatient setting.