Project description:BackgroundHeparin-induced thrombocytopenia (HIT) is an adverse drug reaction mediated by platelet-activating antibodies that target complexes of platelet factor 4 and heparin. Patients are at markedly increased risk of thromboembolism.ObjectiveThese evidence-based guidelines of the American Society of Hematology (ASH) are intended to support patients, clinicians, and other health care professionals in their decisions about diagnosis and management of HIT.MethodsASH formed a multidisciplinary guideline panel balanced to minimize potential bias from conflicts of interest. The McMaster University GRADE Centre supported the guideline development process, including updating or performing systematic evidence reviews. The panel prioritized clinical questions and outcomes according to their importance for clinicians and patients. The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach was used to assess evidence and make recommendations, which were subject to public comment.ResultsThe panel agreed on 33 recommendations. The recommendations address screening of asymptomatic patients for HIT, diagnosis and initial management of patients with suspected HIT, treatment of acute HIT, and special situations in patients with acute HIT or a history of HIT, including cardiovascular surgery, percutaneous cardiovascular intervention, renal replacement therapy, and venous thromboembolism prophylaxis.ConclusionsStrong recommendations include use of the 4Ts score rather than a gestalt approach for estimating the pretest probability of HIT and avoidance of HIT laboratory testing and empiric treatment of HIT in patients with a low-probability 4Ts score. Conditional recommendations include the choice among non-heparin anticoagulants (argatroban, bivalirudin, danaparoid, fondaparinux, direct oral anticoagulants) for treatment of acute HIT.
Project description:BackgroundModern diagnostic strategies for venous thromboembolism (VTE) incorporate pretest probability (PTP; prevalence) assessment. The ability of diagnostic tests to correctly identify or exclude VTE is influenced by VTE prevalence and test accuracy characteristics.ObjectiveThese evidence-based guidelines are intended to support patients, clinicians, and health care professionals in VTE diagnosis. Diagnostic strategies were evaluated for pulmonary embolism (PE), deep vein thrombosis (DVT) of the lower and upper extremity, and recurrent VTE.MethodsThe American Society of Hematology (ASH) formed a multidisciplinary panel including patient representatives. The McMaster University GRADE Centre completed systematic reviews up to 1 October 2017. The panel prioritized questions and outcomes and used the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach to assess evidence and make recommendations. Test accuracy estimates and VTE population prevalence were used to model expected outcomes in diagnostic pathways. Where modeling was not feasible, management and accuracy studies were used to formulate recommendations.ResultsTen recommendations are presented, by PTP for patients with suspected PE and lower extremity DVT, and for recurrent VTE and upper extremity DVT.ConclusionsFor patients at low (unlikely) VTE risk, using D-dimer as the initial test reduces the need for diagnostic imaging. For patients at high (likely) VTE risk, imaging is warranted. For PE diagnosis, ventilation-perfusion scanning and computed tomography pulmonary angiography are the most validated tests, whereas lower or upper extremity DVT diagnosis uses ultrasonography. Research is needed on new diagnostic modalities and to validate clinical decision rules for patients with suspected recurrent VTE.
Project description:The annual meeting of the American Society of Hematology drew 25,000 attendees for the presentation of 5,633 abstracts. We review key sessions focusing on newer agents and their efficacy in high-risk leukemia and multiple myeloma populations.
Project description:BackgroundClinicians confront numerous practical issues in optimizing the use of anticoagulants to treat venous thromboembolism (VTE).ObjectiveThese evidence-based guidelines of the American Society of Hematology (ASH) are intended to support patients, clinicians and other health care professionals in their decisions about the use of anticoagulants in the management of VTE. These guidelines assume the choice of anticoagulant has already been made.MethodsASH formed a multidisciplinary guideline panel balanced to minimize potential bias from conflicts of interest. The McMaster University GRADE Centre supported the guideline development process, including updating or performing systematic evidence reviews. The panel prioritized clinical questions and outcomes according to their importance for clinicians and patients. The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach was used to assess evidence and make recommendations, which were subject to public comment.ResultsThe panel agreed on 25 recommendations and 2 good practice statements to optimize management of patients receiving anticoagulants.ConclusionsStrong recommendations included using patient self-management of international normalized ratio (INR) with home point-of-care INR monitoring for vitamin K antagonist therapy and against using periprocedural low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) bridging therapy. Conditional recommendations included basing treatment dosing of LMWH on actual body weight, not using anti-factor Xa monitoring to guide LMWH dosing, using specialized anticoagulation management services, and resuming anticoagulation after episodes of life-threatening bleeding.
Project description:BackgroundDespite an increasing incidence of venous thromboembolism (VTE) in pediatric patients in tertiary care settings, relatively few pediatric physicians have experience with antithrombotic interventions.ObjectiveThese guidelines of the American Society of Hematology (ASH), based on the best available evidence, are intended to support patients, clinicians, and other health care professionals in their decisions about management of pediatric VTE.MethodsASH formed a multidisciplinary guideline panel that included 2 patient representatives and was balanced to minimize potential bias from conflicts of interest. The McMaster University GRADE Centre supported the guideline-development process, including updating or performing systematic evidence reviews (up to April of 2017). The panel prioritized clinical questions and outcomes according to their importance for clinicians and patients. The panel used the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) approach, including GRADE Evidence-to-Decision frameworks, to assess evidence and make recommendations, which were subject to public comment.ResultsThe panel agreed on 30 recommendations, covering symptomatic and asymptomatic deep vein thrombosis, with specific focus on management of central venous access device-associated VTE. The panel also addressed renal and portal vein thrombosis, cerebral sino venous thrombosis, and homozygous protein C deficiency.ConclusionsAlthough the panel offered many recommendations, additional research is required. Priorities include understanding the natural history of asymptomatic thrombosis, determining subgroup boundaries that enable risk stratification of children for escalation of treatment, and appropriate study of newer anticoagulant agents in children.
Project description:This guideline update addresses two clinical questions: (1) What are the defining features of patients with a malignancy who are appropriate candidates for ESA treatment? (2) For patients who are appropriate candidates for treatment with ESAs, what are the optimal approaches to ESA therapy?
Project description:Effective networking and mentorship are critical determinants of career satisfaction and success in academic medicine. The American Society of Pediatric Hematology/Oncology (ASPHO) mentoring program was developed to support Early Career (EC) members. Herein, the authors report on the initial 2-year outcomes of this novel program.Mentees selected mentors with expertise in different subspecialties within the field from mentor profiles at the ASPHO Web site. Of 23 enrolled pairs, 19 mentors and 16 mentees completed electronic program feedback evaluations. The authors analyzed data collected between February 2013 and December 2014. The authors used descriptive statistics for categorical data and thematic analysis for qualitative data.The overall response rate was 76% (35/46). At the initiation of the relationship, career development and research planning were the most commonly identified goals for both mentors and mentees. Participants communicated by phone, e-mail, or met in-person at ASPHO annual meetings. Most mentor-mentee pairs were satisfied with the mentoring relationship, considered it a rewarding experience that justified their time and effort, achieved their goals in a timely manner with objective work products, and planned to continue the relationship. However, time constraints and infrequent communications remained a challenge.Participation in the ASPHO mentoring program suggests a clear benefit to a broad spectrum of ASPHO EC members with diverse personal and professional development needs. Efforts to expand the mentoring program are ongoing and focused on increasing enrollment of mentors to cover a wider diversity of career tracks/subspecialties and evaluating career and academic outcomes more objectively.
Project description:PurposeA joint American Society of Clinical Oncology, American Society for Radiation Oncology, and Society of Surgical Oncology panel convened to develop a focused update of the American Society of Clinical Oncology guideline concerning use of postmastectomy radiotherapy (PMRT).MethodsA recent systematic literature review by Cancer Care Ontario provided the primary evidentiary basis. The joint panel also reviewed targeted literature searches to identify new, potentially practice-changing data.RecommendationsThe panel unanimously agreed that available evidence shows that PMRT reduces the risks of locoregional failure (LRF), any recurrence, and breast cancer mortality for patients with T1-2 breast cancer with one to three positive axillary nodes. However, some subsets of these patients are likely to have such a low risk of LRF that the absolute benefit of PMRT is outweighed by its potential toxicities. In addition, the acceptable ratio of benefit to toxicity varies among patients and physicians. Thus, the decision to recommend PMRT requires a great deal of clinical judgment. The panel agreed clinicians making such recommendations for individual patients should consider factors that may decrease the risk of LRF, attenuate the benefit of reduced breast cancer-specific mortality, and/or increase risk of complications resulting from PMRT. When clinicians and patients elect to omit axillary dissection after a positive sentinel node biopsy, the panel recommends that these patients receive PMRT only if there is already sufficient information to justify its use without needing to know additional axillary nodes are involved. Patients with axillary nodal involvement after neoadjuvant systemic therapy should receive PMRT. The panel recommends treatment generally be administered to both the internal mammary nodes and the supraclavicular-axillary apical nodes in addition to the chest wall or reconstructed breast.