ALL Metrics
-
Views
-
Downloads
Get PDF
Get XML
Cite
Export
Track
Clinical Practice Article

Thromboembolic events during neoadjuvant chemotherapy in muscle invasive bladder cancer – any correlation to the central venous access? A clinical practice article

[version 1; peer review: 1 approved with reservations]
PUBLISHED 13 Jan 2022
Author details Author details
OPEN PEER REVIEW
REVIEWER STATUS

This article is included in the Oncology gateway.

Abstract

Patients with muscle invasive bladder cancer have a generally known 5-year overall survival of approximately 58% with neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC). During the last decades, addition of Cisplatinum-based NAC in fit patients prior to radical cystectomy (RC), has significantly improved OS, compared to RC only. However, some published studies following NAC addition, describe an intermediate risk increase of thromboembolic events (TEEs). Placement of central venous access (CVA) before NAC has also been suggested as being a potential risk factor for thrombosis. We present a combination of images and cases from the Northern Swedish health region where three patients developed venous TEE after CVA placement for NAC-administration and found that the time until curable RC was prolonged circa one month each, with an addition of one RC cancelled. These are serious events and to our knowledge, there are no current guidelines on prevention of TEE before RC. The aim with this report was to provide examples of these events and conclude that further prospective trials are warranted on prevention and future guidelines regarding venous anticoagulant treatment for TEE that occur pre-RC in NAC-patients.

Keywords

Cystectomy, Thromboembolism, Urinary Bladder Neoplasm, Neoadjuvant Therapy, Central Venous Access

Introduction

Muscle invasive bladder cancer (MIBC) accounts for circa 25% of all urinary bladder cancer. The 5-year overall survival (OS) is approximately 58% after three cycles of cisplatin-based neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) and radical cystectomy (RC).1 Both NAC and the risk of thromboembolic events (TEEs) has increased during the last decades. Evidence suggests that chemotherapy, in combination with the already hypercoagulable state induced by cancer, could contribute to thrombosis.2,3 It has also been suggested that placement of central venous access (CVA) before NAC could initiate thrombosis as well, with the potential mechanism being endothelial injury of veins.4 In a recent randomized controlled trial, it is also suggested that a much smaller caliber vein, where a CVA in the form of a peripherally inserted central catheter-line (PICC) is inserted, could be related to the risk of the device causing venous thrombosis. A five times higher risk (11%) of thrombosis from PICC-line was seen compared to (2%) the risk from totally implanted (PORTs), which are directly inserted in larger vessel, either the jugular or subclavian vein.5 To our knowledge, there are no clear guidelines on prevention of venous TEE during NAC before cystectomy. We report on three male patients with MIBC from the Swedish Northern health region, who all developed venous TEE after CVA placement, during NAC. The uniqueness of the report includes a combination of clinical information, images and existing sources on the subject presented here in a combined format.

Case 1

A 71-year-old Caucasian, male patient presented with gross hematuria. His medical history included ischemic heart disease, anti-platelet medication and prostatectomy due to prostate cancer 10 years prior to the hematuria. His previous occupation was a laborer within the steel industry before retirement. He was staged cT3N0M0 after transurethral resection of bladder (TURB) and received a PICC-line via the basilic vein in the right arm, prior to first NAC-cycle with methotrexate/vinblastine/Adriamycin/cisplatin (MVAC). Within two weeks he developed neutropenic fever, septic infection and chest pain correlated to deep breathing. A computed tomography (CT) pulmonary angiogram (CTPA) displayed multiple pulmonary embolism (PE) on a lobar artery level, to the right middle and inferior lobe (Figure 1A,B). Physical examination showed no sign of swelling in upper or lower extremities and he remained respiratory and circulatory stable. He received venous anticoagulant treatment with anti-Xa; Tinzaparin, with a daily dosage of 16000 IE (equivalent to 144 mg) for a predetermined period of six months. He received the last NAC-cycle and the RC one month delayed (Table 1). According to the most recent follow-up the patient remains in remission (Table 1).

e2f78c28-6990-4361-8956-90de5919bde8_figure1.gif

Figure 1. Image of pulmonary embolism (PE) in computed tomography pulmonary angiogram (CTPA).

(A) CTPA of our first patient. PE was seen in the right lung on a lobar artery level, to the middle and inferior lobe. (B) Enhancement of PE in (A).

Table 1. Basic descriptive information of each patient.

Date of diagnosis; muscle invasive bladder cancer. Age of diagnosis. cTNM stage (clinical tumor-node-metastasis). Histopathology of tumor. Smoking history in pack-years. Types of neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC); methotrexate/vinblastine/Adriamycin/cisplatin (MVAC), fluorouracil/mitomycin (FUMI). Number of NAC-cycles. Time from first cycle to thromboembolic event (TEE). Type of TEE. Anti-Xa Treatment; type of antithrombotic medication. Time from first NAC-cycle to radical cystectomy (RC). Radical cystectomy (RC) delayed due to TEE. pTNM stage (pathological tumor-node-metastasis: response outcome of primary tumor; stable disease; pT2-T4aN0M0, partial response; pTa, pTis, pT1.

Patient 1Patient 2Patient 3
Age at diagnosis717469
cTNM stageT3N0M0T2N0M0T2N0M0
HistopathologyUrothelial, nested variantUrothelialUrothelial, papillary
Smoking history25 pack yrs40 pack yrs40 pack yrs
Type of NAC regimenMVACMVAC + FUMIMVAC
Number of NAC-cycles32+13
Time 1st NAC ---> TEE12 days22 days30 days
Type of TEEPEPEPE
Anti-Xa Treatment16000 IE12000 IE12000 IE
Time 1st NAC---> RC3 monthsNo RC4 months
RC delayed due to TEEYesCancelledYes
pTNM post RCStable disease (pT2bN0M0)------Partial response (pT1N0M0)

Case 2

A Caucasian, male patient aged 74, also presenting with gross hematuria, had anti-platelet medication due to ischemic stroke in 2018, and a well-treated HIV-infection. Before retirement, he had worked for a large telephone company. The tumor was staged cT2N0M0 and he also received PICC-line via the right basilic vein and MVAC. A routine CT-scan after two cycles displayed multiple PE in the right lung (Figure 2A). The patient had symptoms of fatigue and shortness of breath, but he was respiratory and circulatory stable and physical examinations showed no signs of swelling in upper or lower extremities. He received treatment with anti-Xa; Tinzaparin at the dosage of 16000 IE to be evaluated during a period of six months. Due to deteriorated health, RC was cancelled and alternative curable treatment was recommended from a multidisciplinary conference, including urologist and oncologist. The last MVAC cycle was replaced by fluorouracil/mitomycin to be followed by radical radiotherapy. Initial dosage was 2 Gray, increased gradually to target dose of 68 Gray during 34 sessions under a period of 50 days. Follow-up CTPA after two months detected no residual PE, but the initial symptoms persisted up to a year post-TEE. According to the most recent follow-up the patient remains in remission (Table 1).

e2f78c28-6990-4361-8956-90de5919bde8_figure2.gif

Figure 2. Image of pulmonary embolism (PE) in computed tomography (CT) chest with intravenous contrast.

(A) CT chest of our second patient, with PE displayed in the right lung. (B) CT chest of our third patient, with a saddle PE displayed centrally, peripherally.

Case 3

A Caucasian male aged 69, was admitted due to suspected prostate cancer, but TURB revealed MIBC stage cT3N0M0. He had type 2 diabetes and essential hypertension. He worked in agriculture prior to retirement. The patient also received PICC-line via the right basilic vein and MVAC. After the second cycle, he developed neutropenic fever and back pain. CT scan displayed a centrally peripheral saddle PE (Figure 2B). Physical examination showed no sign of swelling in upper or lower extremities and besides symptoms such as fever, fatigue and pain, he was respiratory and circulatory stable. He received treatment with anti-Xa; Tinzaparin with the dosage of 12000 IE (equivalent to 192 mg) for a predetermined period of six months. He was fit to continue his third MVAC cycle one week post-TEE but RC was ultimately delayed one month. According to the most recent follow-up the patient remains in remission (Table 1).

Discussion

Our patients all received TEE of venous type; PE within 12-30 days after CVA (Table 1). Evidence that NAC could be a contributing factor for thrombosis has been suggested.2,3 Significant higher TEE ORs before RC were seen in NAC-patients compared to NAC-eligible NAC-naïve.4 In Zareba et al, TEEs had connection with CVA and preoperative TEE was associated with shorter OS (Hazard ratio 3.26; 95% confidence interval:1.12–9.44; p = 0.03). NAC-patients also had a 3-fold higher incidence of TEE than NAC-naïve.3 In addition, there is a 70-fold higher risk of TEE during cancer in general.2 A potential connection between TEE and the placement of CVA with following endothelial damage has also been proposed by previous studies.3,4 In a recent randomized controlled trial, it is also suggested that a smaller caliber vein, where PICC-line is inserted, could be related to a five times higher risk of having venous thrombosis from the device, compared to from a CVA of totally implanted (PORTs), which are directly inserted in larger vessel. Recommendations are to use PORTs rather than PICC-line on NAC-patients. PICC-line is however less staff-demanding and more common.5 To our knowledge, there are no current guidelines on prevention of TEE before RC, even though evidence suggests that incidental TEE of venous origin can cause significant mortality and morbidity without proper treatment. The time from diagnosis to RC was significantly longer among NAC-patients compared to NAC-naïve (p < 0.001).3 Our patients had similar delays, including one cancelled RC (Table 1). Prolonged time from diagnosis to RC could potentially allow metastatic dissemination. Our first and second patient had anti-platelet medication prior to diagnosis, but none had specific venous anticoagulants such as anti-Xa. Studies on whether prophylaxis on thrombosis during NAC can reduce the risk of TEE or not, have shown conflicting results.2,3 But in patients with pancreatic cancer, dalteparin achieved an 85% risk-reduction from a 23% TEE incidence rate to 3.4%.2

Conclusion

Evidence from literature suggests that NAC and malignancy increase the risk for TEE in MIBC-patients. CVA induced thrombosis during NAC, from endothelial damage or insertion in small caliber veins, has also been suggested as a potential mechanism for TEE. There are no current guidelines on prophylactic venous anticoagulation treatment and results from previous studies are conflicting. Time before curable operation can be prolonged if TEE arises. Further prospective trials are warranted on prevention and for developing future guidelines pre-RC regarding TEE in NAC-patients.

Data availability

All data underlying the results are available as part of the article and no additional source data are required.

Consent

Written informed consent for publication of clinical details and images were specifically obtained from the patients included in this report.

Comments on this article Comments (0)

Version 1
VERSION 1 PUBLISHED 13 Jan 2022
Comment
Author details Author details
Competing interests
Grant information
Copyright
Download
 
Export To
metrics
Views Downloads
F1000Research - -
PubMed Central
Data from PMC are received and updated monthly.
- -
Citations
CITE
how to cite this article
Eriksson V, Eriksson E and Sherif A. Thromboembolic events during neoadjuvant chemotherapy in muscle invasive bladder cancer – any correlation to the central venous access? A clinical practice article [version 1; peer review: 1 approved with reservations]. F1000Research 2022, 11:40 (https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.75922.1)
NOTE: If applicable, it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in all citations of this article.
track
receive updates on this article
Track an article to receive email alerts on any updates to this article.

Peer review discontinued

Peer review at F1000Research is author-driven. Currently no reviewers are being invited. What does this mean?
Version 1
VERSION 1
PUBLISHED 13 Jan 2022
Views
13
Cite
Reviewer Report 12 Jul 2022
Katsuhiro Ito, The Department of Urology, Kyoto University, Kyoto, Japan 
Approved with Reservations
VIEWS 13
This is a case series to report the three patients with pulmonary thrombosis during neoadjuvant chemotherapy for urothelial carcinoma. All three patients had a central venous catheter, which the authors considered to be the cause of the emboli. This is ... Continue reading
CITE
CITE
HOW TO CITE THIS REPORT
Ito K. Reviewer Report For: Thromboembolic events during neoadjuvant chemotherapy in muscle invasive bladder cancer – any correlation to the central venous access? A clinical practice article [version 1; peer review: 1 approved with reservations]. F1000Research 2022, 11:40 (https://doi.org/10.5256/f1000research.79861.r143992)
NOTE: it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in all citations of this article.

Comments on this article Comments (0)

Version 1
VERSION 1 PUBLISHED 13 Jan 2022
Comment
Alongside their report, reviewers assign a status to the article:
Approved - the paper is scientifically sound in its current form and only minor, if any, improvements are suggested
Approved with reservations - A number of small changes, sometimes more significant revisions are required to address specific details and improve the papers academic merit.
Not approved - fundamental flaws in the paper seriously undermine the findings and conclusions
Sign In
If you've forgotten your password, please enter your email address below and we'll send you instructions on how to reset your password.

The email address should be the one you originally registered with F1000.

Email address not valid, please try again

You registered with F1000 via Google, so we cannot reset your password.

To sign in, please click here.

If you still need help with your Google account password, please click here.

You registered with F1000 via Facebook, so we cannot reset your password.

To sign in, please click here.

If you still need help with your Facebook account password, please click here.

Code not correct, please try again
Email us for further assistance.
Server error, please try again.