New Strategies and New Data- Beyond Guidelines Anthony Maraveyas GESCAT Lisbon 13 th October 2018 G.MA.GM.XA.12.2017.1962
Conflict of Interest Statement 2 u Research Support: Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, BMS, Leo u Employee: No relevant conflicts of interest to declare u Consultant and/or Honoraria: Pfizer, BMS, Leo, Bayer u Stockholder: No relevant conflicts of interest to declare u Commissioned Talks: Bayer, Pfizer, Leo u Scientific Advisory Board: Pfizer, BMS, Leo, Bayer
Data-streams that Underpin the Emerging Practice of Using DOACs in CAT u Data behind the LMWH related guidelines u Randomised studies SELECTeD (Rivaroxaban) HOKUSAI (Edoxaban) u Early guidance (ISTH 2018) u Beyond Guidelines practice and data Patient views DOAC Vs VKA registration programmes CAT subgroup analyses Real World data Insight on how clinicians interpret data Insight on how to adapt the data to practice
LMWH in Cancer Associated Thrombosis Treatment: Efficacy and Safety Observed in the CLOT and CATCH Trial Recurrent VTE LMWH monotherapy LMWH overlapping with VKA n/n (%) n/n (%) CLOT study* 1 27/336 8.0 53/336 15.8 CATCH study #2 31/449 6.9 45/451 10.0 Meta-analysis 3 42/591 7.1 82/571 14.4 Major bleeding HR (95% CI) CLOT study* 1 19/338 5.6 12/335 3.6 Not reported CATCH study #2 12/449 2.9 11/451 2.4 Meta-analysis 3 37/556 6.7 32/536 6.0 0,1 1 10 Favours LMWH Favours VKA *Dalteparin versus VKA; in the VKA arm the estimated time in therapeutic range was 46% (30% below and 24% above); # tinzaparin versus warfarin; in the warfarin arm the time in therapeutic range was 47% (26% below and 27% above); meta-analysis included four other small studies in addition to the CLOT study; meta-analysis included three other small studies in addition to the CLOT study 1. Lee AYY et al, New Engl J Med 2003;349:146 153; 2. Lee AYY et al, JAMA 2015;314:677 686; 3. Akl EA et al, Cochrane Database Rev 2014;7:CD006650
Efficacy and Safety of LMWH versus VKA in the Treatment of Cancer Associated Thrombosis Recurrent VTE Study RR (95% CI) RR (95% CI) Meyer 0.70 (0.14 3.43) CLOT 0.51 (0.33 0.79) Hull 0.44 (0.19 0.99) Deitcher 0.66 (0.18 2.52) Romera 0.26 (0.06 1.02) CATCH 0.69 (0.45 1.07) Combined* 0.56 (0.43 0.74) Major bleeding events Study RR (95% CI) RR (95% CI) Meyer 0.44 (0.17 1.13) CLOT 1.57 (0.79 3.14) Hull 1.00 (0.38 2.64) Deitcher 3.04 (0.52 18.99) CATCH 1.09 (0.51 2.32) Combined* 1.07 (0.66 1.73) 0.01 0.1 0.2 0.5 1 2 3 0.1 0.2 0.5 1 2 5 10 100 *Random effects model Carrier M, Prandoni P, Expert Rev Hematol 2017;10:15 22 LMWH is associated with a significant reduction in the risk of recurrent VTE without a significant increase in major bleeding episodes vs VKA
Guideline Recommendations for Treatment of CAT Society Recommendations ESMO 20111 u LMWH recommended for long-term (6 months) anticoagulant therapy u Recommendations for duration of therapy depend on the type of cancer, stage of disease and cancer treatment ESC 20142 u LMWH should be considered for the first 3 6 months u LMWH or VKAs should be considered for extended anticoagulation beyond the first 3 6 months ASCO 2015 3,4 * u u u u LMWH recommended over UFH for the first 5 10 days LMWH preferred over VKAs for the first 6 months of treatment. VKAs are an acceptable alternative if LMWH is not available For extended anticoagulation (beyond 6 months) LMWH or VKAs may be considered for selected patients # with active cancer Use of NOACs is not currently recommended for patients with cancer and VTE owing to limited data ACCP 20165 u LMWH preferred over VKA or NOAC therapy u There is no preference between VKA, dabigatran, rivaroxaban, apixaban or edoxaban u Extended therapy (>3 months) recommended over 3 months of therapy for patients who do not have a high bleeding risk (suggested if bleeding risk is high) *Updated ASCO guidelines were published in 2015; reassessment of available new data did not prompt any changes from the 2013 recommendations 5 ; # such as those with metastatic disease or receiving chemotherapy 1. Mandala M et al, Ann Oncol 2011;22:vi85 vi92; 2. Konstantinides S et al, Eur Heart J 2014;35:3033 3069; 3. Lyman GH et al, J Clin Oncol 2013;17:2189 2204; 4. Lyman GH et al, J Clin Oncol 2015;33:654 656; 5. Kearon C et al, Chest 2016: doi:10.1016/j.chest.2015.11.026
select-d: Phase III Pilot Study Comparing Rivaroxaban versus Dalteparin for the Treatment of Cancer Associated Thrombosis Study design: Prospective, randomized, open-label, multicentre pilot phase III study Study population: Active cancer with symptomatic DVT and/or any PE N 530 R Rivaroxaban* 15 mg BID for 21 days followed by 20 mg OD ECOG PS 2 Stratification variables: Dalteparin 200 IU/kg OD for the first 30 days followed by 150 IU/kg OD Stage of disease Baseline platelet count Type of VTE Risk of clotting by type Open-label 6 months # *For patients with CrCl 30 49 ml/min dosing recommendations as in rivaroxaban SmPC; # The second randomization phase for extended treatment of VTE from 6 to 12 months for patients with PE as an index event or patients with Residual DVT at 5 month assessment was closed due to low recruitment. Sample size reduced from 530 to 400 patients for main trial comparison (95% CI for VTE recurrence +/-4.5%) Young A et al, Thromb Res 2016;140:S172 S173; EudraCT number: 2012-005589-37; Bach M et al, Thromb Haemost 2016;116:S24 S32; Data on File
select-d Primary Outcome: Lower Incidence of VTE Recurrence Events with Rivaroxaban Versus Dalteparin VTE recurrence (%) 40 35 30 25 20 15 10 Dalteparin Rivaroxaban Outcome at 6 months VTE recurrence, % (95% CI) Lower limb DVT/PE recurrence, % (95% CI) Rivaroxaban (n=203) Dalteparin (n=203) 4 (2 9) 11 (7 16) 3 (1-7) 9 (6-15) 5 0 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 Time from trial entry (months) Number at risk Dalteparin 203 171 139 115 Rivaroxaban 203 174 149 134 Young A et al, ASH 2017: Abstract 625; Available at: http://www.clinicaltrialresults.org/
select-d Secondary Outcome: Incidence of Major, Fatal and Clinically Relevant Non-Major Bleedings Patients (%) 20 15 10 5 0 2,9 5,4 Dalteparin 0,5 0,5 Rivaroxaban 2,9 Major bleeding Fatal Bleeding CRNMB Most Major Bleeding events were Gastrointestinal Bleeds*. No Central Nervous System Bleeding was observed in rivaroxaban and dalteparin groups. 12,3 * All bleedings events were adjudicated.overall survival at 6 months was 70%(63-76%) in the rivaroxaban group and 75%(69-81%) in the dalteparin group. Young A et al, ASH 2017: Abstract 625; Available at: http://www.clinicaltrialresults.org/
Hokusai-VTE-Cancer: Study Design Rationale: To assess the efficacy and safety of edoxaban (after 5 days of LMWH) versus dalteparin for the treatment of VTE in patients with cancer* 1 3 LMWH Edoxaban 60 mg od Study population: Patients with cancer* and acute VTE # N=1050 3 R 1:1 Day 5 Dalteparin Dalteparin Short design: Multinational, prospective, randomized, open-label, blinded endpoint (PROBE), non-inferiority trial 200 IU/kg Day 0 1 month 150 IU/kg 12 months *Cancer must be other than basal-cell or squamous cell carcinoma of the skin, be active or diagnosed within 2 years prior to randomization and objectively confirmed. Active cancer was defined as any of the following: diagnosis of cancer within the past 6 months; recurrent, regionally advanced or metastatic disease; currently receiving treatment or having received any treatment for cancer during the 6 months prior to randomization; or a haematological malignancy not in complete remission; # symptomatic or incidental VTE; dose adjustment to 30 mg od in patients with a body weight 60 kg or CrCl 30 50ml/min, or concomitant use of P-glycoprotein inhibitors 1. Daiichi Sankyo, Inc. https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/nct02073682; 2. van Es et al, Thromb Haemostat 2015;114;1268 1276; 3. Raskob GE et al, ASH 2017: Abstract LBA-6
Hokusai-VTE-Cancer Composite Primary Outcome First Recurrent VTE or Major Bleeding Event Raskob GE et al. N Engl J Med 2018;378:615-624
Hokusai VTE Cancer Recurrent VTE and Major Bleeding 12 Months Raskob GE et al. N Engl J Med 2018;378:615-624
Hokusai VTE Cancer Recurrent VTE and Major Bleeding 12 Months Outcome(%) 14 12 11,3 10 7,9 8 6,9 6 4,0 4 2 0 Recurrent VTE Major Bleeding* Edoxaban Dalteparin *GI bleeding in patients with GI cancers; # p=0.09; p=0.04 Raskob G et al, N Engl J Med 2018;378:615 624
Guidance from the SCC of the ISTH for Treatment of CAT Society Recommendations ISTH 2018 1 u The use of specific NOACs is suggested in CAT patients with low risk of bleeding u u u u u and no drug-drug interaction with current systemic therapy Rivaroxaban and Edoxaban are highlighted as the only NOACs with RCT evidence vs LMWH in CAT patients and a class effect of the NOACs should not be readily assumed LMWHs are an acceptable alternative Treatment decisions should include shared decision making with an informed patient The use of LMHW is suggested in CAT patients with high risk of bleeding (gastrointestinal cancers; at high risk of bleeding from genitourinary tract; gastrointestinal mucosal abnormalities) Rivaroxaban and Edoxaban can be considered as an alternative in the absence of drug-drug interactions with current systemic therapy and after shared decision making with an informed patient *1.Khorana, A. et al, Journal of Thrombosis and Haemostasis, 16: 1 4
What Else Do we Know that Governs Use?
Higher Persistence on Index Therapy in Cancer Patients Using Rivaroxaban or Warfarin versus LMWH Proportion of patients still on index therapy (%) 100 75 50 25 0 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 Time (months) Cohort Median treatment duration Kaplan Meier rates 6 months 12 months LMWH 3.3 37% 21% Warfarin 7.9 61% 35% Rivaroxaban 7.9 61% 36% Warfarin (n=1403) Rivaroxaban (n=709) LMWH (n=735) *Discontinuation was defined as a gap of no more than 60 days between the end of the days of supply of a dispensing and the start date of he next dispensing of the index therapy, if any Khorana AA et al, Res Pract Thromb Haemost 2017;1:14 22
Higher Risk of Discontinuation of Index Therapy on LMWH versus Rivaroxaban or Warfarin Risk of discontinuation with rivaroxaban or warfarin versus LMWH Drug HR 95% CI HR (95% CI) Rivaroxaban 0.38 0.32 0.46 Warfarin 0.33 0.28 0.38 LMWH N/A N/A 0,25 0,5 1 2 Favours rivaroxaban or warfarin Favours LMWH Khorana AA et al, Res Pract Thromb Haemost 2017;1:14 22
Patient Perspectives on LMWH Vs DOACs ØMost patients experienced unwanted effects as result of injections, but these were acceptable in context of being a cancer patient. ØTablet was seen as better but only if as effective. Obviously you're covered in bruises so you don't look great, but I'm now covered in scars and colostomy bags and that sort of things, it seems a very small price to pay. It becomes a bit relative really. - P21 SHARED DECISION MAKING ISTH 2018 If a tablet would serve the same purpose then I would certainly sooner take a tablet, but if the injections are an advantage then it s worth putting up with the discomfort. - P11 Hutchinson, A., Rees, S., Maraveyas, A., Young, A. Date, K., and Johnson, M. Patient and carer experience of oral and injected anticoagulation for cancer-associated thrombosis: select-d qualitative sub study. Palliative Medicine in Press
Can We Individualise CAT Treatment? Extracted Data from Registration Trials
NOAC Phase III VTE Trials: Inclusion of Patients with Cancer Phase III NOAC trials including more than 30,000 patients 0 10 000 20 000 30 000 Cancer No cancer 1217 patients Drug Trial name Patients with cancer n/n % Rivaroxaban 1 EINSTEIN DVT 207/3449 6.0 EINSTEIN PE 223/4832 4.6 EINSTEIN EXT 54/1196 4.5 Dabigatran 2 RE-COVER 121/2539 4.8 RE-COVER II 100/2589 3.9 RE-MEDY 119/2586 4.2 RE-SONATE N/A N/A Apixaban 1 AMPLIFY 143/5395 2.7 AMPLIFY-EXT 42/2482 1.7 Edoxaban 1 Hokusai-VTE 208/8240 2.5 1. Wharin C et al, Blood Rev 2014;28:1 4; 2. Vedovati M et al, Chest 2015;147:475 483
Efficacy and Safety of NOACs and LMWH versus VKA in the Treatment of Cancer Associated Thrombosis NOAC studies LMWH studies Recurrent VTE No. patients with event/ no. of patients NOAC VKA Relative risk (95% CI) Weight EINSTEIN 6/232 8/198 25.3% Hokusai-VTE 4/109 7/99 19.1% RE-COVER 10/173 12/162 41.6% AMPLIFY 3/81 5/78 14% Pooled, random-effects model 23/595 32/537 100% No. patients with event/ no. of patients LMWH VKA Relative risk (95% CI) Weight Meyer 2/71 3/75 3.8% Lee 27/336 53/336 68.6% Hull 6/100 10/100 12.9% Deitcher 4/61 3/30 5.2% Romera 2/36 7/33 9.5% Pooled, random-effects model 0.1 1.0 10.0 Lower risk with NOAC Higher risk with NOAC 41/604 76/574 100% Carrier M et al, Thromb Res 2014;134:1214 1219 Relative risk (95% CI) 0.64 (0.23 1.81) 0.52 (0.16 1.72) 0.78 (0.35 1.76) 0.58 (0.14 2.34) 0.66 (0.39 1.11) vs VKA Relative risk (95% CI) 0.7 (0.12 4.09) 0.51 (0.33 0.79) 0.6 (0.23 1.59) 0.66 (0.16 2.74) 0.26 (0.06 1.17) 0.52 (0.36 0.74) Major bleeding No. patients with event/ no. of patients NOAC VKA Relative risk (95% CI) Weight EINSTEIN 6/232 8/196 34.6% Hokusai-VTE 5/109 3/99 19% RE-COVER 6/159 7/152 32.9% AMPLIFY 2/87 4/80 13.5% Pooled, random-effects model 19/587 22/527 100% No. patients with event/ no. of patients LMWH VKA Relative risk (95% CI) Weight Meyer 5/71 12/75 22.3% Lee 19/338 12/335 49.2% Hull 7/100 7/100 22.8% Deitcher 6/67 1/34 5.8% Pooled, random-effects model 0.1 1.0 10.0 Lower risk with NOAC Higher risk with NOAC 37/576 32/544 100% vs VKA 0.1 1.0 10.0 0.1 1.0 10.0 Lower risk with LMWH Higher risk with LMWH Lower risk with LMWH Higher risk with LMWH Relative risk (95% CI) 0.63 (0.22 1.79) 1.51 (0.37 6.17) 0.82 (0.28 2.38) 0.46 (0.09 2.44) 0.78 (0.42 1.44) vs VKA Relative risk (95% CI) 0.4 (0.13 1.19) 1.6 (0.77 3.36) 1 (0.34 2.96) 3.25 (0.37 28.12) 1.06 (0.5 2.23) vs VKA
EINSTEIN DVT/PE: Outcomes by Cancer Status Recurrent VTE (ITT population) Major bleeding (safety population) Rate per year (%) 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 Rivaroxaban Enoxaparin/VKA 3,9 1,9 1,8 2,1 2,1 2,3 12,4 10,4 Rate per year (%) 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 Rivaroxaban Enoxaparin/VKA 1,5 1,7 0,9 0,4 4,0 1,9 7,3 3,1 0 No cancer History of cancer Diagnosed at baseline Diagnosed during study 0 No cancer History of cancer Diagnosed at baseline Diagnosed during study Active cancer (At baseline or diagnosed during study) Active cancer (At baseline or diagnosed during study) Prins MH et al, Lancet Haematol 2014;1:e37 e46
EINSTEIN PE/DVT: Effective Treatment in Patients with Active Cancer, with Significant Reduction in Major Bleeding Event in patients with active cancer* (%) 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Rivaroxaban Enoxaparin/VKA 7,0 5,0 Recurrent VTE p=0.047 5,0 2,0 Major bleeding p=0.018 13,0 7,0 n=16 n=20 n=8 n=15 n=25 n=38 Net clinical benefit # #, *At baseline or during the study period; # ITT population: N=8281; patients with active cancer, n=655; safety population: N=8246; patients with active cancer, n=651; composite of recurrent VTE and major bleeding 1. Prins MH et al, Lancet Haematol 2014;1:e37 e46 0,1 1 10 Favours Favours rivaroxaban enoxaparin/vka Efficacy # Major bleeding Net clinical benefit #
Can we Individualise CAT Treatment? Data from Real World Use
Rivaroxaban Effectiveness and Safety in VTE Patients with Active Cancer in Real-World Studies Study Type Treatment arm n Treatment duration, months, median Recurrent VTE % Major bleeding % Mortality % XALIA 1 * Prospective, observational study Rivaroxaban* 146 5.0 3.4 1.4 4.8 Early switchers # 30 6.5 3.3 0.0 0.0 Standard anticoagulation 141 7.1 4.3 5.0 4.3 Mayo 2 Prospective registry LMWH 223 5.5 4.5 3.6 24.7 Rivaroxaban 135 7.3 2.8 2.2 30 LMWH 121 5.8 1.7 5.8 41 MSK 3 (p-value) NR (0.45) (0.20) (0.047) Prospective cohort study Rivaroxaban 200 NR 4.4 2.2 17.6 *Treated with rivaroxaban alone or who received heparin or fondaparinux for 48 hours before switching to rivaroxaban; # treated with rivaroxaban who received heparin/fondaparinux for >48 hours 14 days and/or a VKA for 1 14 days before changing to rivaroxaban; initial treatment with unfractionated heparin, LMWH or fondaparinux, usually overlapping with and followed by a VKA; average follow-up 1. Ageno W et al, TH Open 2017;1:e33 e42; 2. McBane RD et al, ACC 2016: Abstract 1243M-05; 3. Mantha S et al, J Thromb Thrombolysis 2017;43:166 171
Real World Data: MSKCC Experience Quality assessment initiative u 200 patients with active cancer and CAT treated with rivaroxaban Intended to receive 6 months of therapy u Several exclusions: CrCl <30 ml/min Liver function tests >3 ULN Expected malabsorption at stomach or small bowel Active GU or GI lesions Untreated primary CNS neoplasm A body weight <50 or >150 kg Any antiplatelet agent other than ASA 81 mg daily and any significant drug interaction u Empirically dose-reduced: patients 75 years old received rivaroxaban 10 mg bid for 3 weeks followed by 15 mg od ASA, acetylsalicylic acid; CAT, cancer-associated thrombosis; CNS, central nervous system; CrCl, creatinine clearence; GI, gastrointestinal; GU, gastrouritary; MSKCC, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center; ULN, upper limit of normal Mantha S et al, J Thromb Thrombolysis 2017;43:166 171
Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer: Outcome Rates in Patients with Cancer Similar to the EINSTEIN Trials 1,2 Cumulative incidence for competing risks 1 Cumulative incidence 0.15 0.10 0.05 0 Death Recurrent VTE CRNM bleeding # Major bleeding 0 50 100 150 Time from start of rivaroxaban (days) Planned duration of at least 6 months (53% of patients were observed for the full 6 months). *Leading to discontinuation of rivaroxaban 1. Mantha S et al, J Thromb Thrombolysis 2017;43:166 171; 2. Prins MH et al, Lancet Haematol 2014;1:e37-e46 6-month cumulative incidence estimates 1 6-month cumulative incidence estimates (%) 25 20 15 10 5 0 95% CI 1.4 7.4 4,4 Recurrent VTE 95% CI 0.0 4.2 2,2 Major bleeding 95% CI 1.0 6.5 3,8 CRNM bleeding and discontinuation 95% CI 11.7 23.0 17,6 All-cause mortality
Patient Checklist LMWH or DOAC or both? Patient Preference Cancer (lesion) in situ? Chemotherapy and other Concomitant Medications Renal Function Comorbidities Cancer Type Nausea and Vomiting*? Weight? *Reiss H, Ay C; Bauersachs R et al. The Oncologist 2018; 23:1 18.
How long? Both Studies SELECTeD and HOKUSAI VTE Cancer tried to produce Data in this setting
SELECTeD: Study Design (2) Aug. 2016. Second randomization closed n=92 patients Population: PE index event or residual CUS DVT at ~5 months N=300 R Rivaroxaban Placebo Population: No residual CUS DVT at ~5 months No treatment 6 months 12 months Young A et al, ASH 2017: Abstract 625; Available at: http://www.clinicaltrialresults.org/; select-d protocol. https://warwick.ac.uk/fac/med/research/ctu/trials/cancer/select-d/selectd_protocol_v2.0_09-apr-2013.pdf [accessed 21 Mar 2018]
Treatment and 2 Prevention of VTE in Cancer u ASCO: Extended anticoagulation with LMWH or VKA may be considered beyond 6/12 for patients with metastatic disease or patients who are receiving chemotherapy. Length of secondary prophylaxis? Failed to Recruit Downscaled to a Registry LONGHEVA NCT01164046 (Netherlands) Warfarin vs LMWH (+6 m) Failed Feasibility Trial Closed without achieving endpoint-- ALICAT ISRCTN37913976 (UK)- LMWH vs No anticoagulant (+6 m) Funded by HTA NIHR
DALTECAN: Study Design and Completion Rates Rationale: To assess the safety of dalteparin between >6 12 months for cancer-associated VTE Dalteparin Study population: Patients with active cancer* and newly diagnosed VTE # N=334 55.4% (185) completed 200 IU/kg 32.6% (109) completed Therapy duration 210 days (mean) 6 months 12 months Study design: Prospective, multicentre, open-label, single-arm, long-term study Primary endpoint: Major bleeding rate (months 7 12) Other endpoints: Major bleeding rate (months 1, 2 6) and recurrent VTE rate (months 1, 2 6, 7 12) *Diagnosis (excluding basal cell or squamous cell carcinoma of the skin) within 6 months before enrolment, having received cancer therapy within the previous 6 months, or having documented recurrent or metastatic cancer; # symptomatic proximal DVT of the lower extremity, PE or both; Initial dose of 200IU/kg/day with a maximum dose of 18000IU for the first month. During months 2 12, pre-filled syringes according to the patients weight were supplied: 7500IU for body weight 56kg, 10000IU for body weight 57 68kg, 12500IU for 69 82kg, 15000IR for 83 98kg and 18000IU for >99kg Francis CW et al, Thrombosis and Haemostasis 2015;13;1028 1035
DALTECAN: Efficacy and Safety of LMHW in the Extended Treatment of Cancer Associated Thrombosis Major bleeding events Recurrent VTE Incidence (%) 4,0 3,6 3,0 2,0 1,1 1,0 0,7 Incidence (%) 6,0 5,7 5,0 4,1 4,0 3,4 3,0 2,0 1,0 0,0 Month 1 Months 2 6 Months 7 12 0,0 Month 1 Months 2 6 Months 7 12 Francis CW et al, J Thromb Haemost 2015;13:1028 1035
Rivaroxaban Ongoing Trials in Cancer Associated Thrombosis The CALLISTO Program
The CALLISTO Programme Cancer Associated thrombosis exploring solutions for patients through Treatment and prevention with rivaroxaban Novel umbrella programme that addresses multiple clinically relevant questions in cancer-associated thrombosis via multiple studies, expert recommendations and a survey, the combination of which will result in improved quality of care in oncology
CALLISTO Aims to Address the Unmet Medical Needs in CAT Prevention challenges Focus areas of CALLISTO programme Impact areas Systemic cancer therapy increases VTE risk by more than 6-fold 1 Guidelines do not recommend use of routine prophylaxis in ambulatory cancer patients, given lack of substantial evidence 2,3 Rivaroxaban prophylaxis in ambulatory patients with various cancer types on chemotherapy at high VTE risk 7 10 VTE is second leading cause of death after cancer itself 4 Studies on VTE prophylaxis to date showed decreased VTE rates but insufficient evidence of benefit/risk 2 Efficacy and safety of rivaroxaban vs LMWH in VTE treatment7 9, 11 14 Patient reported outcomes on rivaroxaban for treatment and prevention of CAT from real world practice 8,11 15 Clinical outcomes Clinical care Patient experience Cancer population health Patient safety Care coordination: clinical decisions at point of care Injectable LMWH becomes standard for VTE treatment in cancer patients 3,5 Poorer adherence to injectable anticoagulants, change to longterm VKA 6 - VKAs interact with cancer therapies A clinical pathway guideline to improve quality of care in VTE treatment 17 Practical management of anticoagulation in special clinical situations 8,15,16 Treatment challenges Expert recommendations on drug drug interactions and special clinical situations 8,15,16 1. Heit JA et al, Arch Intern Med 2000;160:809 815; 2. Di Nisio M et al, Cochrane Database Rev 2014;CD008500; 3. Lyman GH et al, J Clin Oncol 2013;17:2189 2204; 4. Khorana AA et al, J Thromb Haemost 2007;5:632 634; 5. Lyman GH et al, J Clin Oncol 2007;25:5490 5505; 6. Khorona A et al, Thromb Res 2016;145:51 53; 7. Janssen Research & Development, LLC. https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/nct02555878; 8. Bach M et al, Thromb Haemost 2016;116:S24 S32; 9. Khorana AA et al, Thromb Haemost. 2017: doi:10.1160/th17-03-0171; 10. Fadoi Foundation, Italy. https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/nct03055026; 11. EudraCT: 2012-005589-3; 12. Young A et al, Thromb Res 2016;140:S172 S173; 13. AIO-Studien-gGmbH. www.clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/nct02583191; 14. Riess H et al. Dtsch med Wochenschr 2015;140:S22 S23; 15. Bayer. https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/nct02742623; 16. http://frontline2.tri-london.ac.uk/; 17. Mantha S et al, J Thromb Thrombolyis 2016: doi:10.1007/s11239-016-1429-1
CALLISTO Aims to Address the Unmet Medical Needs in CAT Prevention challenges Focus areas of CALLISTO programme Impact areas Systemic cancer therapy increases VTE risk by more than 6-fold 1 Guidelines do not recommend use of routine prophylaxis in ambulatory cancer patients, given lack of substantial evidence 2,3 Rivaroxaban prophylaxis in ambulatory patients with various cancer types on chemotherapy at high VTE risk 7 10 VTE is second leading cause of death after cancer itself 4 Studies on VTE prophylaxis to date showed decreased VTE rates but insufficient evidence of benefit/risk 2 Efficacy and safety of rivaroxaban vs LMWH in VTE treatment7 9, 11 14 Patient reported outcomes on rivaroxaban for treatment and prevention of CAT from real world practice 8,11 15 Clinical outcomes Clinical care Patient experience Cancer population health Patient safety Care coordination: clinical decisions at point of care Injectable LMWH becomes standard for VTE treatment in cancer patients 3,5 Poorer adherence to injectable anticoagulants, change to longterm VKA 6 - VKAs interact with cancer therapies A clinical pathway guideline to improve quality of care in VTE treatment 17 Practical management of anticoagulation in special clinical situations 8,15,16 Treatment challenges Expert recommendations on drug drug interactions and special clinical situations 8,15,16 1. Heit JA et al, Arch Intern Med 2000;160:809 815; 2. Di Nisio M et al, Cochrane Database Rev 2014;CD008500; 3. Lyman GH et al, J Clin Oncol 2013;17:2189 2204; 4. Khorana AA et al, J Thromb Haemost 2007;5:632 634; 5. Lyman GH et al, J Clin Oncol 2007;25:5490 5505; 6. Khorona A et al, Thromb Res 2016;145:51 53; 7. Janssen Research & Development, LLC. https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/nct02555878; 8. Bach M et al, Thromb Haemost 2016;116:S24 S32; 9. Khorana AA et al, Thromb Haemost. 2017: doi:10.1160/th17-03-0171; 10. Fadoi Foundation, Italy. https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/nct03055026; 11. EudraCT: 2012-005589-3; 12. Young A et al, Thromb Res 2016;140:S172 S173; 13. AIO-Studien-gGmbH. www.clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/nct02583191; 14. Riess H et al. Dtsch med Wochenschr 2015;140:S22 S23; 15. Bayer. https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/nct02742623; 16. http://frontline2.tri-london.ac.uk/; 17. Mantha S et al, J Thromb Thrombolyis 2016: doi:10.1007/s11239-016-1429-1
CONKO 011: Study Design Rationale: Patient-reported treatment satisfaction measured by the Anti-Clot Treatment Scale with rivaroxaban versus standard of care 1,2 Patient population: patients with symptomatic VTE and active cancer N~450 R Rivaroxaban 15 mg twice daily for 3 weeks followed by 20 mg once daily LMWH* Brand-specific dosage 3 months Short design: Prospective, multicentre, randomized, openlabel phase III study Indication: VTE treatment in patients with cancer FPFV: Q1-16 LPLV: TBD *Standard as used in participating site 1. Riess H et al, Dtsch med Wochenschr 2015;140:S22 S23; 2. AIO-Studien-gGmbH. https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/nct02583191
COSIMO: Study Design Rationale: To assess patient-reported treatment satisfaction with regard to the ACTS burden score for the use of rivaroxaban for treatment of VTE and/or prevention of recurrent VTE in patients with active cancer changing to this therapy 1,2 Patients with active cancer* and PE/DVT and/or recurrent PE/DVT Treatment with SOC anticoagulation (LMWH/VKA) for 4 weeks prior to inclusion Decision to change to rivaroxaban N~500 ACTS Baseline DCE 4 12 weeks after start with rivaroxaban/telephone interview ACTS Month 1 (primary endpoint) Rivaroxaban Observation period: 6 months ACTS Month 3 ACTS Month 6 Short design: International, prospective, non-interventional cohort study Indication: VTE treatment and/or prevention of recurrent VTE in patients with active cancer FPFV: Q4-16 LPLV: Q3-18 *Diagnosis or treatment of cancer in the previous <6 months, or recurrent or metastatic cancer other than fully treated basal cell or squamous cell carcinoma of the skin Bayer. https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/nct02742623;
Conclusions u There are now 2 RCTs of DOACs in CAT treatment (Rivaroxaban & Edoxaban) u Patients and physicians have options but treatment decisions need care and need to be shared with informed patients ISTH guidance 2018 already produced More guidelines are expected to materialize soon u Real world data are useful as they reflect selection bias that however seems to optimize treatments with patient safety at the centre e.g. avoidance of Active GI lesions Multiple concurrent medications Poor end organ function (Liver, Kidney) u We still have questions over optimal length of treatment u 1 CALLISTO is a novel umbrella programme that involves multiple parallel clinical trials, that build on the recent advent of Rivaroxaban. 1. Bach M et al, Thromb Haemost 2016;116:S24 S32
Thank you anthony.maraveyas@hey.nhs.uk