Underrepresentation of genitourinary cancers in studies of venous thromboembolism (VTE) prophylaxis.

Authors

null

Max S Perlmutt

St. George's University, St. George's, Grenada

Max S Perlmutt , Tracy L Rose , Vaibhav Kumar , Matthew I. Milowsky

Organizations

St. George's University, St. George's, Grenada, The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill (UNC-CH) School of Medicine and UNC Lineberger Comprehensive Cancer Center, Chapel Hill, NC, UNC Hospitals, Chapel Hill, NC, University of North Carolina Department of Medicine, Division of Hematology/Oncology, Chapel Hill, NC

Research Funding

No funding received
None

Background: Significant advances in the management of VTE in cancer have led to a recent ASCO clinical practice update for VTE prophylaxis and treatment in patients with cancer. Genitourinary (GU) cancers (including bladder, kidney, prostate, testicular) have a high incidence of VTE, but also frequent bleeding complications, and it is not clear if patients with GU cancers are adequately represented in studies of VTE prophylaxis. We sought to determine the frequency of inclusion of patients with GU cancers in prospective studies of VTE prophylaxis. Methods: A systematic review of the literature using MEDLINE (inception to January 2020) was conducted. We included randomized controlled trials that compared thromboprophylaxis to placebo or best supportive care in patients with an established diagnosis of cancer. Observational studies, case series, and case reports were excluded. The primary outcome was proportion of patients with GU malignancies included within the trials. Results: A total of 137 articles were identified under the original search and 7 underwent full text review. A total of 6066 patients were included in 7 thromboprophylaxis trials, of which only 119 (2.0%) had a defined GU malignancy (Table). Given the heterogeneity of the GU cancers represented in each study, and the small numbers of patients included with GU cancers, a patient-level meta-analysis among GU patients in this population was not performed. Conclusions: In spite of the high risk for VTE in GU cancers, in particular bladder and testicular cancer, GU cancers are underrepresented in prospective randomized trials investigating VTE prophylaxis. To ensure appropriate decision making for each individual patient, future prospective trials must ensure adequate representation of patients with GU cancers to better understand the potential role for VTE prophylaxis in this high-risk population.

Trial NameTreatmentTotal NGU Patient N
SAVE-ONCOSemuloparin321263 bladder (2.0%)
PROTECHTNadroparin11500 GU (0.0%)
CASSINIRivaroxaban84132 non-prostate GU (3.8%)
AVERTApixaban5745 bladder, 3 testicular, 1 prostate (1.6%)
PHACSDalteparin982 non-specific GU (2.0%)
MICROTECEnoxaparin660 GU (0.0%)
ADVOCATEApixaban12513 prostate (10.4%)

Disclaimer

This material on this page is ©2024 American Society of Clinical Oncology, all rights reserved. Licensing available upon request. For more information, please contact licensing@asco.org

Abstract Details

Meeting

2020 ASCO Virtual Scientific Program

Session Type

Publication Only

Session Title

Publication Only: Genitourinary Cancer—Kidney and Bladder

Track

Genitourinary Cancer—Kidney and Bladder

Sub Track

Other GU Kidney and Bladder Cancer

Citation

J Clin Oncol 38: 2020 (suppl; abstr e17115)

DOI

10.1200/JCO.2020.38.15_suppl.e17115

Abstract #

e17115

Abstract Disclosures

Similar Abstracts

First Author: Hannah Dysinger McLaughlin

First Author: Jorge Hernando