多发性骨髓瘤患者使用抗凝剂预防血栓形成的出血风险:MarketScan 分析

IF 3.4 3区 医学 Q2 HEMATOLOGY Research and Practice in Thrombosis and Haemostasis Pub Date : 2024-05-01 DOI:10.1016/j.rpth.2024.102418
Diego Adrianzen-Herrera , Katherine Giorgio , Rob F. Walker , Andrew D. Sparks , Mansour Gergi , Neil A. Zakai , Pamela L. Lutsey
{"title":"多发性骨髓瘤患者使用抗凝剂预防血栓形成的出血风险:MarketScan 分析","authors":"Diego Adrianzen-Herrera ,&nbsp;Katherine Giorgio ,&nbsp;Rob F. Walker ,&nbsp;Andrew D. Sparks ,&nbsp;Mansour Gergi ,&nbsp;Neil A. Zakai ,&nbsp;Pamela L. Lutsey","doi":"10.1016/j.rpth.2024.102418","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><p>Multiple myeloma (MM) is associated with high risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE). Anticoagulant prophylaxis is frequently recommended but underutilized partly due to the absence of studies assessing bleeding risk.</p></div><div><h3>Objectives</h3><p>To determine the rate of severe (hospitalized) bleeding from thromboprophylaxis in patients treated for MM and identify clinical risk factors for bleeding in this population.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>Using the MarketScan database, we analyzed 6656 patients treated for MM between 2013 and 2021. Concomitant thromboprophylaxis was defined using prescription claims. Hospitalized bleeding was identified through the Cunningham algorithm. Bleeding rates were compared by thromboprophylaxis status, and Cox regression identified risk factors for bleeding.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>Anticoagulant thromboprophylaxis was used in 6.6% (436) patients treated for MM. Patients on thromboprophylaxis had a higher rate of immunomodulatory-based therapy (63.8% vs 46.7%; <em>P</em> &lt; .01) and lower rate of antiplatelet use (2.1% vs 4.7%; <em>P</em> &lt; .01). Bleeding occurred in 1.4% of them during median follow-up of 1.3 years. Rate of severe bleeding was not different between those on prophylaxis (7.8 per 1000 person-years) and those not on prophylaxis (10.1 per 1000 person-years). No association was identified between thromboprophylaxis and bleeding. Factors associated with increased bleeding included age (hazard ratio [HR], 1.38 per 10 years increase in age), comorbidity index (HR, 1.18 per SD increase), history of bleeding (HR, 1.54), hypertension (HR, 1.87), and renal disease (HR, 1.56).</p></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><p>Risk of serious bleeding from thromboprophylaxis in patients treated for MM was low, and concomitant anticoagulant therapy did not result in increased bleeding risk. Clinical risk factors for bleeding included age, comorbidity index, bleeding history, hypertension, and renal disease.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":20893,"journal":{"name":"Research and Practice in Thrombosis and Haemostasis","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2475037924001079/pdfft?md5=a83bc79fafa654e6a96762e0139a1717&pid=1-s2.0-S2475037924001079-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Bleeding risk from anticoagulant thromboprophylaxis in patients with multiple myeloma: a MarketScan analysis\",\"authors\":\"Diego Adrianzen-Herrera ,&nbsp;Katherine Giorgio ,&nbsp;Rob F. Walker ,&nbsp;Andrew D. Sparks ,&nbsp;Mansour Gergi ,&nbsp;Neil A. Zakai ,&nbsp;Pamela L. Lutsey\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.rpth.2024.102418\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Background</h3><p>Multiple myeloma (MM) is associated with high risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE). Anticoagulant prophylaxis is frequently recommended but underutilized partly due to the absence of studies assessing bleeding risk.</p></div><div><h3>Objectives</h3><p>To determine the rate of severe (hospitalized) bleeding from thromboprophylaxis in patients treated for MM and identify clinical risk factors for bleeding in this population.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>Using the MarketScan database, we analyzed 6656 patients treated for MM between 2013 and 2021. Concomitant thromboprophylaxis was defined using prescription claims. Hospitalized bleeding was identified through the Cunningham algorithm. Bleeding rates were compared by thromboprophylaxis status, and Cox regression identified risk factors for bleeding.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>Anticoagulant thromboprophylaxis was used in 6.6% (436) patients treated for MM. Patients on thromboprophylaxis had a higher rate of immunomodulatory-based therapy (63.8% vs 46.7%; <em>P</em> &lt; .01) and lower rate of antiplatelet use (2.1% vs 4.7%; <em>P</em> &lt; .01). Bleeding occurred in 1.4% of them during median follow-up of 1.3 years. Rate of severe bleeding was not different between those on prophylaxis (7.8 per 1000 person-years) and those not on prophylaxis (10.1 per 1000 person-years). No association was identified between thromboprophylaxis and bleeding. Factors associated with increased bleeding included age (hazard ratio [HR], 1.38 per 10 years increase in age), comorbidity index (HR, 1.18 per SD increase), history of bleeding (HR, 1.54), hypertension (HR, 1.87), and renal disease (HR, 1.56).</p></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><p>Risk of serious bleeding from thromboprophylaxis in patients treated for MM was low, and concomitant anticoagulant therapy did not result in increased bleeding risk. Clinical risk factors for bleeding included age, comorbidity index, bleeding history, hypertension, and renal disease.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":20893,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Research and Practice in Thrombosis and Haemostasis\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-05-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2475037924001079/pdfft?md5=a83bc79fafa654e6a96762e0139a1717&pid=1-s2.0-S2475037924001079-main.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Research and Practice in Thrombosis and Haemostasis\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2475037924001079\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"HEMATOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Research and Practice in Thrombosis and Haemostasis","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2475037924001079","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"HEMATOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景多发性骨髓瘤(MM)与静脉血栓栓塞症(VTE)的高风险相关。方法利用 MarketScan 数据库,我们分析了 2013 年至 2021 年间接受治疗的 6656 例多发性骨髓瘤患者。根据处方索赔确定是否同时使用血栓预防药物。住院出血通过坎宁安算法确定。根据血栓预防状态比较出血率,并通过 Cox 回归确定出血风险因素。接受血栓预防治疗的患者接受免疫调节治疗的比例更高(63.8% vs 46.7%; P <.01),使用抗血小板治疗的比例更低(2.1% vs 4.7%; P <.01)。中位随访 1.3 年期间,1.4% 的患者发生了出血。接受预防性治疗的患者(每千人年 7.8 例)和未接受预防性治疗的患者(每千人年 10.1 例)的严重出血率没有差异。未发现血栓预防与出血之间存在关联。与出血增加相关的因素包括年龄(危险比 [HR],年龄每增加 10 岁,危险比为 1.38)、合并症指数(HR,每增加 SD,危险比为 1.18)、出血史(HR,1.54)、高血压(HR,1.87)和肾脏疾病(HR,1.56)。出血的临床风险因素包括年龄、合并症指数、出血史、高血压和肾病。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Bleeding risk from anticoagulant thromboprophylaxis in patients with multiple myeloma: a MarketScan analysis

Background

Multiple myeloma (MM) is associated with high risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE). Anticoagulant prophylaxis is frequently recommended but underutilized partly due to the absence of studies assessing bleeding risk.

Objectives

To determine the rate of severe (hospitalized) bleeding from thromboprophylaxis in patients treated for MM and identify clinical risk factors for bleeding in this population.

Methods

Using the MarketScan database, we analyzed 6656 patients treated for MM between 2013 and 2021. Concomitant thromboprophylaxis was defined using prescription claims. Hospitalized bleeding was identified through the Cunningham algorithm. Bleeding rates were compared by thromboprophylaxis status, and Cox regression identified risk factors for bleeding.

Results

Anticoagulant thromboprophylaxis was used in 6.6% (436) patients treated for MM. Patients on thromboprophylaxis had a higher rate of immunomodulatory-based therapy (63.8% vs 46.7%; P < .01) and lower rate of antiplatelet use (2.1% vs 4.7%; P < .01). Bleeding occurred in 1.4% of them during median follow-up of 1.3 years. Rate of severe bleeding was not different between those on prophylaxis (7.8 per 1000 person-years) and those not on prophylaxis (10.1 per 1000 person-years). No association was identified between thromboprophylaxis and bleeding. Factors associated with increased bleeding included age (hazard ratio [HR], 1.38 per 10 years increase in age), comorbidity index (HR, 1.18 per SD increase), history of bleeding (HR, 1.54), hypertension (HR, 1.87), and renal disease (HR, 1.56).

Conclusion

Risk of serious bleeding from thromboprophylaxis in patients treated for MM was low, and concomitant anticoagulant therapy did not result in increased bleeding risk. Clinical risk factors for bleeding included age, comorbidity index, bleeding history, hypertension, and renal disease.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
5.60
自引率
13.00%
发文量
212
审稿时长
7 weeks
期刊最新文献
The risk of venous thromboembolism in primary central nervous system lymphoma: a systematic review and meta-analysis Is lupus anticoagulant testing with dilute Russell’s viper venom clotting times reliable in the presence of inflammation? Pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of low doses of recombinant tissue plasminogen activator to establish a model for biosimilarity comparisons Physician practice patterns on the use of inferior vena cava filters in venous thromboembolism Erratum to ‘Performance of Risk Scores in Predicting Major Bleeding in Left Ventricular Assist Device (LVAD) Recipients: a Comparative External Validation. ’[Res Pract Thromb Haemost. 2024;8:e102437]
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1