Background: In patients with active cancer and atrial fibrillation (AF) anticoagulation, thrombotic and bleeding risk still entail uncertainty.Aim: We explored the results of an international... Show moreBackground: In patients with active cancer and atrial fibrillation (AF) anticoagulation, thrombotic and bleeding risk still entail uncertainty.Aim: We explored the results of an international survey examining the knowledge and behaviours of a large group of physicians.Methods and results: A web-based survey was completed by 960 physicians (82.4% cardiologists, 75.5% from Europe). Among the currently available anticoagulants for stroke prevention in patients with active cancer, direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) were preferred by 62.6%, with lower values for low molecular weight heparin (LMWH) (24.1%) and for warfarin (only 7.3%). About 46% of respondents considered that DOACs should be used in all types of cancers except in non-operable gastrointestinal cancers. The lack of controlled studies on bleeding risk (33.5% of respondents) and the risk of drug interactions (31.5%) were perceived as problematic issues associated with use of anticoagulants in cancer. The decision on anticoagulation involved a cardiologist in 27.8% of cases, a cardiologist and an oncologist in 41.1%, and a team approach in 21.6%. The patient also was involved in decision-making, according to similar to 60% of the respondents. For risk stratification, use of CHA2DS2-VASc and HAS-BLED scores was considered appropriate, although not specifically validated in cancer patients, by 66.7% and 56.4%, respectively.Conclusion: This survey highlights that management of anticoagulation in patients with AF and active cancer is challenging, with substantial heterogeneity in therapeutic choices. Direct oral anticoagulants seems having an emerging role but still the use of LMWH remains substantial, despite the absence of long-term data on thromboprophylaxis in AF. Show less
Acem, I.; Verhoef, C.; Rueten-Budde, A.J.; Grunhagen, D.J.; Houdt, W.J. van; Sande, M.A.J. van de; PERSARC Study Grp 2020
Purpose: No studies extensively compared the young adults (YA, 18-39 years), middle-aged (40-69 years), and elderly (>70 years) population with primary high-grade extremity soft tissue sarcoma ... Show morePurpose: No studies extensively compared the young adults (YA, 18-39 years), middle-aged (40-69 years), and elderly (>70 years) population with primary high-grade extremity soft tissue sarcoma (eSTS). This study aimed to determine whether the known effect of age on overall survival (OS) and disease progression can be explained by differences in tumour characteristics and treatment protocol among the YA, middle-aged and elderly population in patients with primary high-grade eSTS treated with curative intent.Methods: In this retrospective multicentre study, inclusion criteria were patients with primary high-grade eSTS of 18 years and older, surgically treated with curative intent between 2000 and 2016. Cox proportional hazard models and a multistate model were used to determine the association of age on OS and disease progression.Results: A total of 6260 patients were included in this study. YA presented more often after 'whoops'-surgery or for reresection due to residual disease, and with more deep-seated tumours. Elderly patients presented more often with grade III and larger (>10 cm) tumours. After adjustment for the imbalance in tumour and treatment characteristics the hazard ratio for OS of the middle-aged population is 1.47 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.23-1.76) and 3.13 (95% CI: 2.59-3.78) in the elderly population, compared with YA.Discussion: The effect of age on OS could only partially be explained by the imbalance in the tumour characteristics and treatment variables. The threefold higher risk of elderly could, at least partially, be explained by a higher other-cause mortality. The results might also be explained by a different tumour behaviour or suboptimal treatment in elderly compared with the younger population. (C) 2020 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd. Show less
Verschoor, A.J.; Speetjens, F.M.; Dijkstra, P.D.S.; Fiocco, M.; Sande, M.A.J. van de; Bovee, J.V.M.G.; Gelderblom, H. 2019
