Anticoagulant-induced Bleeding

PANTHER-GI Pilot Study will assess the feasibility of a full-scale multicentre cohort management study evaluating the safety of a standardized strategy for resuming direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) after major DOAC-related gastrointestinal (GI) bleeding among patients at moderate to high risk of re-bleeding and thrombosis. A parallel registry will assess whether eligible patients who are not enrolled in the PANTHER-GI Pilot Study are systematically different than enrolled patients and to explore barriers to enrolment.

The clinical significance of pulmonary embolism (PE) limited to the subsegmental pulmonary arteries, so called isolated subsegmental pulmonary embolism (SSPE), remains controversial. Whether isolated SSPE represents "true" PE, a clinically more benign form of PE, a physiologic lung clearing process, or a false positive result (artifact) is currently unclear and hence, whether patients with isolated SSPE benefit from anticoagulant treatment is uncertain. Despite growing evidence from observational studies that withholding anticoagulation may be a safe option in selected patients with isolated SSPE (i.e., those without concomitant deep vein thrombosis, cancer, etc.), most patients with isolated SSPE receive anticoagulant treatment, which is associated with an increased risk of bleeding. The overall objective of the randomized controlled SAFE-SSPE trial is to evaluate the efficacy and safety of clinical surveillance without anticoagulation compared to anticoagulation treatment in low-risk patients with isolated SSPE.

The peri-procedural management of direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) in persons with cancer (PWC) undergoing tunneled or port central venous catheter (CVC) insertion is a common but understudied clinical problem, with conflicting management advice from guidelines and resultant uncertainty for best practices. Data from prospective studies assessing peri-procedural DOAC management exist; however, these data pertain to procedures in the general population. These management strategies may not be applicable to PWC because (1) although CVC insertion is a low risk, image-guided specialized procedure, (2) PWC are at considerably higher risk of peri-procedural bleeding and thrombosis than non-PWC. It is not surprising, therefore, that guideline recommendations and current practices vary widely. To resolve management uncertainty and establish a standard-of-care, the VENOCAT pilot randomized controlled trial (RCT) is a first step that will assess the feasibility of a definitive trial comparing continued vs. interrupted DOAC management in PWC undergoing tunneled or port CVC insertion. Evidence is needed to standardize clinical practice and reduce the risk of bleeding and thrombotic complications.

There's no unified recommendation in clinical practice regarding adjusting dosages for different patient types, especially when adverse events occur. While rivaroxaban typically doesn't require coagulation monitoring, in elderly patients, particularly those with multiple medications, finding appropriate lab indicators becomes crucial to gauge its anticoagulant effect. This aids in evaluating precise rivaroxaban dosing for the elderly, balancing bleeding risks and recurrence. Clinical pharmacological studies suggest that drug pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics in different populations can guide dosage optimization. Hence, this study aims to provide a basis for optimizing dosing regimens in high-risk elderly patients in China by exploring pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic indicators in clinical practice.