Skip to main navigation Skip to search Skip to main content

Evaluating prophylactic heparin in ambulatory patients with solid tumours: a systematic review and individual participant data meta-analysis

  • Holger J. Schünemann*
  • , Matthew Ventresca
  • , Mark Crowther
  • , Matthias Briel
  • , Qi Zhou
  • , Simon Noble
  • , Fergus Macbeth
  • , Gareth Griffiths
  • , David Garcia
  • , Gary H. Lyman
  • , Marcello di Nisio
  • , Alfonso Iorio
  • , Lawrence Mbuagbaw
  • , Ignacio Neumann
  • , Nick van Es
  • , Melissa Brouwers
  • , Gordon Guyatt
  • , Michael B. Streiff
  • , Maura Marcucci
  • , Tejan Baldeh
  • Ivan D. Florez, Ozlem Gurunlu Alma, Ziad Solh, Patrick M. Bossuyt, Lara A. Kahale, Walter Ageno, George Bozas, Harry R. Büller, Bernard Lebeau, Ramon Lecumberri, Charles Loprinzi, Robert McBane, Kostandinos Sideras, Anthony Maraveyas, Uwe Pelzer, James Perry, Clara Klerk, Giancarlo Agnelli, Elie A. Akl
*Corresponding author for this work
  • McMaster University
  • University of Basel
  • Department of Endocrinology, Institute of Molecular and Experimental Medicine, Cardiff University School of Medicine, Cardiff, UK
  • Cardiff University
  • University of Southampton
  • Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center
  • University of Washington
  • Gabriele d'Annunzio University
  • University of Amsterdam
  • Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile
  • University of Ottawa
  • Johns Hopkins University
  • Universidad de Antioquia
  • Mugla Sıtkı Kocman University
  • Western University
  • American University of Beirut
  • University of Insubria
  • Hull University Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust
  • Sorbonne Université
  • University of Navarra
  • Mayo Clinic Rochester, MN
  • University of Hull
  • Charité – Universitätsmedizin Berlin
  • University of Toronto
  • Department of Internal Medicine, Dijklanderziekenhuis, Hoorn, Netherlands
  • University of Perugia

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleAcademicpeer-review

Abstract

Background: Study-level meta-analyses provide high-certainty evidence that heparin reduces the risk of symptomatic venous thromboembolism for patients with cancer; however, whether the benefits and harms associated with heparin differ by cancer type is unclear. This individual participant data meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials examines the effect of heparin on survival, venous thromboembolism, and bleeding in patients with cancer in general and by type. Methods: In this systematic review and meta-analysis we searched MEDLINE, Embase, and The Cochrane Library for randomised controlled trials comparing parenteral anticoagulants with placebo or standard care in ambulatory patients with solid tumours and no indication for anticoagulation published from the inception of each database to January 14, 2017, and updated it on May 14, 2020, without language restrictions. We calculated the effect of parenteral anticoagulant administration on all-cause mortality, venous thromboembolism occurrence, and bleeding related outcomes through multivariable hierarchical models with patient-level variables as fixed effects and a categorical trial variable as a random effect, adjusting for age, cancer type, and metastatic status. Interaction terms were tested to investigate effects in predefined subgroups. This study is registered with PROSPERO, CRD42013003526. Findings: We obtained individual participant data from 14 of 20 eligible randomised controlled trials (8278 [79%] of 10 431 participants; 4139 included in the low-molecular-weight heparin group and 4139 in the control group). Meta-analysis showed an adjusted relative risk (RR) of mortality at 1 year of 0·99 (95% CI 0·93–1·06) and a hazard ratio of 1·01 (95% CI 0·96–1·07). The number of patients with venous thromboembolic events was 158 (4·0%) of 3958 with available data in the low-molecular-weight heparin group compared with 279 (7·1%) of 3957 in the control group. Major bleeding events occurred in 71 (1·7%) of 4139 patients in the control population and 88 (2·1%) in the low-molecular-weight heparin group, and minor bleeding events in 478 (12·1%) of 3945 patients with available data in the control group and 652 (16·6%) of 3937 patients in the low-molecular-weight heparin group. The adjusted RR was 0·58 (95% CI 0·47–0·71) for venous thromboembolism, 1·27 (0·92–1·74) for major bleeding, and 1·34 (1·19–1·51) for minor bleeding. Prespecified subgroup analysis of venous thromboembolism occurrence by cancer type identified the most certain benefit from heparin treatment in patients with lung cancer (RR 0·59 [95% CI 0·42–0·81]), which dominated the overall reduction in venous thromboembolism. Certainty of the evidence for the outcomes ranged from moderate to high. Interpretation: Low-molecular-weight heparin reduces risk of venous thromboembolism without increasing risk of major bleeding compared with placebo or standard care in patients with solid tumours, but it does not improve survival. Funding: Canadian Institutes of Health Research.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)e746-e755
JournalLancet. Haematology
Volume7
Issue number10
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 1 Oct 2020

UN SDGs

This output contributes to the following UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)

  1. SDG 3 - Good Health and Well-being
    SDG 3 Good Health and Well-being

Keywords

  • Anticoagulants/adverse effects
  • Hemorrhage/chemically induced
  • Heparin/adverse effects
  • Heparin, Low-Molecular-Weight/adverse effects
  • Humans
  • Neoplasms/complications
  • Survival Analysis
  • Venous Thromboembolism/etiology

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Evaluating prophylactic heparin in ambulatory patients with solid tumours: a systematic review and individual participant data meta-analysis'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this