Direct oral anticoagulants vs. low-molecular-weight heparin for pulmonary embolism in patients with glioblastoma
Daniel Dubinski, Sae‐Yeon Won, Martin Voß, Fee Keil, Wolfgang Miesbach, Bedjan Behmanesh, Max Dosch, Peter Baumgarten, Joshua D. Bernstock, Volker Seifert, Thomas M. Freiman, Florian Geßler
Abstract
Glioblastoma (GBM) is a cancer type with high thrombogenic potential and GBM patients are therefore at a particularly high risk for thrombotic events. To date, only limited data on anticoagulation management after pulmonary embolism (PE) in GBM is available and the sporadic use of DOACs remains off-label. A retrospective cohort analysis of patients with GBM and postoperative, thoracic CT scan confirmed PE was performed. Clinical course, follow-up at 6 and 12 months and the overall survival (OS) were evaluated using medical charts and neuroradiological data. Out of 584 GBM patients, 8% suffered from postoperative PE. Out of these, 30% received direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) and 70% low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) for therapeutic anticoagulation. There was no significant difference in major intracranial hemorrhage (ICH), re-thrombosis, or re-embolism between the two cohorts. Although statistically non-significant, a tendency to reduced mRS at 6 and 12 months was observed in the LMWH cohort. Furthermore, patients receiving DOACs had a statistical benefit in OS. In our analysis, DOACs showed a satisfactory safety profile in terms of major ICH, re-thrombosis, and re-embolism compared to LMWH in GBM patients with postoperative PE. Prospective, randomized trials are urgent to evaluate DOACs for therapeutic anticoagulation in GBM patients with PE.