Catalogue Search | MBRL
Search Results Heading
Explore the vast range of titles available.
MBRLSearchResults
-
DisciplineDiscipline
-
Is Peer ReviewedIs Peer Reviewed
-
Item TypeItem Type
-
SubjectSubject
-
YearFrom:-To:
-
More FiltersMore FiltersSourceLanguage
Done
Filters
Reset
4
result(s) for
"KALOFONOS, CHARALAMBOS"
Sort by:
Management of Cancer-associated Thrombosis (CAT): Symptomatic or Incidental
by
ATHANASIADIS, ATHANASIOS
,
CHRISTOPOULOU, ATHINA
,
VARTHALITIS, IOANNIS
in
Anticoagulants
,
Bevacizumab
,
Bleeding
2020
Cancer-associated thrombosis (CAT), the second leading cause of death in patients with cancer can be treated with low molecular weight heparin (LMWH) according to guidelines.
A multicenter prospective observational study was carried out to record anti-thrombotic treatment practice, assess thrombosis recurrence and bleeding, and identify potential risk factors. Adult patients from 18 Oncology Departments throughout Greece were followed-up for 12 months.
A total of 120 patients with CAT receiving anticoagulant treatment were enrolled (35% incidental); 85% were treated for more than 6 months, 95.8% were treated with tinzaparin and smaller percentages with other agents. Thrombosis recurred in three patients and there was minor bleeding in four patients. Bleeding was associated with high body mass index (>35 kg/m
), trauma history, renal insufficiency and bevacizumab use.
Incidental thrombosis contributes significantly to CAT burden. Long-term use of LMWH seems to be effective and safe. Several risk factors associated with bleeding should be considered during anti-coagulation therapy planning.
Journal Article
Exploring the Dynamics of B Cell Subpopulations in Response to Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors: A Prospective Study
by
Liolis, Elias
,
Makatsoris, Thomas
,
Kalofonos, Charalambos
in
Amino acids
,
Antibodies
,
Antigens
2024
Globally, the efforts to find the best cancer treatment are demanding and very intensive. Immunotherapy has gained an important role as a second or sometimes first line of treatment for various types of cancer. PD-1/PD-L1 checkpoint inhibitors are an impending category of immunotherapy, and their mechanism, as well as their interaction with T cells, are well studied. However, our knowledge about any possible effect(s) of immunotherapy on B cells is limited. In this prospective study, we asked the question of any possible alterations of circulating B cells (numbers and subsets) occurring during immunotherapy in patients with cancer and of the potential correlation of such changes with the outcomes and with development of immune-related adverse events (irAEs). We enrolled 20 cancer patients who received PD-1 checkpoint inhibitors and 8 healthy donors (HD). Patients underwent regular clinical assessment and imaging using the iRECIST criteria for 6 months following immunotherapy. Peripheral blood samples were collected before and during PD-1 checkpoint inhibitor therapy, and flow cytometry analysis of peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMCs) was performed, evaluating various circulating B cell subset phenotypes, including mature naïve B cells, memory B cells, regulatory B cells (Bregs), antibody-secreting cells (ASCs), and age-related B cells (ABCs). Statistical analysis was employed to compare the differences of B cells between different groups and among sequential data within the same group. Total circulating CD19+ B cell counts remained stable across both groups (responders (R), nonresponders (NR)) and timepoints. However, there was a significant rise in mature naïve B cells and decline in memory B cells at the initiation of the treatment in the R group compared to healthy donors and to the NR group. Such changes were correlated with a good response to immunotherapy. On the contrary, higher numbers of ABCs at baseline were seen in the NR group and were correlated with resistance to treatment. As far as immune-related adverse events are concerned, no significant changes were recorded among the different B cell subpopulations evaluated in both groups. Our study provides preliminary data suggesting that B cell subset changes during immunotherapy may correlate with immune checkpoint inhibitor-induced clinical responses in patients with neoplasia. Further investigations to delineate the potential role(s) of B cells in patients undergoing immunotherapy are needed.
Journal Article
Prophylaxis of cancer-associated venous thromboembolism with low-molecular-weight heparin-tinzaparin: Real world evidence
by
Ardavanis, Alexandros
,
Aravantinos, Gerasimos
,
Samantas, Epameinondas
in
active cancer
,
Anticoagulants
,
Cancer
2022
Thromboprophylaxis, as a preventive measure for cancer-associated thrombosis (CAT), may be beneficial for patients with active cancer and high-risk for thrombosis. The present post hoc analysis include a total of 407 patients enrolled in the Greek Management of Thrombosis study, who received thromboprophylaxis with tinzaparin. The objectives of the present analysis were: i) To obtain sufficient evidence for the administration of prophylaxis in patients with active cancer, irrespective of Khorana risk assessment model score; ii) to identify the selection criteria for both dose and duration of tinzaparin; and iii) to evaluate the efficacy and safety of tinzaparin administered for CAT prophylaxis. The main tumor types for the patients included in the present study were as follows: Lung (25.1%), pancreatic (14.3%), breast (9.1%), stomach (8.4%), colorectal (7.9%) and ovarian (7.6%). Furthermore, metastatic disease was observed in 69.5% of the patients. High thrombotic burden agents (HTBAs) were administered to 66.3% of the patients, and 17.4% received erythropoietin. A total of 43.7% of the patients exhibited a Khorana score <2. The results of the present study demonstrated that both the presence of metastatic disease and the use of HTBAs seemed to influence oncologists' decisions for the use of thromboprophylaxis in patients with active cancer, regardless of Khorana score. Tinzaparin, in dose expressed in the standard notation for heparins, i.e., anti-Xa factor international units (Anti-Xa IU), was administered at an intermediate dose (InterD; 8,000-12,000 Anti-Xa IU; once daily) to 52.4% of patients, while the remaining patients received a prophylactic dose (ProD; ≤4,500 Anti-Xa IU; once daily). The average duration of thromoprophylaxis was 5 months. Furthermore, a total of 14 (3.4%) thrombotic events and 6 (1.5%) minor bleeding events were recorded. A total of four thrombotic events were observed following an InterD treatment of tinzaparin, while 10 thrombotic events were observed following ProD treatment. The present study also demonstrated that an InterD of tinzaparin was administered more frequently to patients with a body mass index >30 kg/m2, a history of smoking and a history of metastatic disease, along with administration of erythropoietin. InterD tinzaparin treatment was found to be potentially more efficacious and without safety concerns. The present study is a registered clinical trial (ClinicalTrials.gov code, NCT03292107; registration date, September 25, 2017).
Journal Article
Real-World Data on Thromboprophylaxis in Active Cancer Patients: Where Are We? Are We Getting There?
by
Ardavanis, Alexandros
,
Aravantinos, Gerasimos
,
Samantas, Epameinondas
in
Biomarkers
,
Body mass index
,
Breast
2020
Background: Cancer patients are at high risk for cancer-associated thrombosis (CAT). CAT is the second leading cause of death in these patients but it can be preventable with thromboprophylaxis. Patients and Methods: An observational, prospective, multicenter study aiming to record CAT management in clinical practice was conducted by the Hellenic Society of Medical Oncology (HeSMO). Results: A total of 426 active cancer patients (mean age 65.3 years, mean BMI: 26.1 kg/m2) who received thromboprophylaxis, were included from 18 oncology units. Tumor types were lung 25.1%, pancreas 13.9%, breast 8.7%, stomach 8.5%, ovarian 7.8%, and others 36%, while 69% had metastases. A total of 71% had a Khorana score ≤2 and 61% received High Thrombotic Risk Chemotherapy Agents (HTRCAs, e.g., platinum). For thromboprophylaxis patients received mainly Low Molecular Weight Heparins (LMWHs), on higher than prophylactic doses in 50% of cases. Overall, 16 (3.8%) thrombotic events and 6 (1.4%) bleeding events were recorded. Notably, patients on higher doses of LMWHs compared to patients who received standard prophylactic doses had 70% lower odds to develop thrombotic events (OR: 0.3, 95% CI: 0.10–1.0, p = 0.04). Conclusion: CAT is an important issue in oncology. Along with the Khorana score, factors as metastases and use of HTRCAs should also be taken into consideration. Thromboprophylaxis for active cancer patients with LMWHs, even on higher doses is safe and efficient.
Journal Article