Search Results

You are looking at 1 - 6 of 6 items for

  • Author: Amro Elshoury x
  • Refine by Access: All x
Clear All Modify Search
Full access

Jordan K. Schaefer, Amro Elshoury, Victoria R. Nachar, Michael B. Streiff, and Ming Y. Lim

Venous thromboembolic disease can be a fatal complication of cancer. Despite advances in prevention, thousands of patients require treatment of cancer-associated thrombosis (CAT) each year. Guidelines have advocated low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) as the preferred anticoagulant for CAT for years, based on clinical trial data showing LMWH to be associated with a lower risk of recurrent thrombosis when compared with vitamin K antagonists. However, the potentially painful, subcutaneously administered LMWH injections can be expensive, and clinical practice has not been consistent with guideline recommendations. Recently, studies have compared LMWH to the direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) for the management of CAT. Based on promising trial results outlined in this review, DOACs are now preferred anticoagulants for CAT occurring in patients without gastric or gastroesophageal lesions. For patients with gastrointestinal cancers, who may be at higher risk of hemorrhage with the DOACs, LMWH remains the anticoagulant of choice. Applying the latest data from this rapidly evolving field to care for diverse patient groups can be challenging. This article provides an evidence-based review of outpatient anticoagulant selection for lower-extremity deep vein thrombosis or pulmonary embolism in the setting of cancer, and takes into account special populations with cancer.

Full access

Amro Elshoury, Jordan K. Schaefer, Ming Y. Lim, Deidre P. Skalla, and Michael B. Streiff

Patients with cancer are at high risk of developing arterial and venous thromboembolism (VTE). They constitute 15% to 20% of the patients diagnosed with VTE. Depending on the type of tumor, cancer therapy, and presence of other risk factors, 1% to 25% of patients with cancer will develop thrombosis. The decision to start patients with cancer on primary thromboprophylaxis depends on patient preference, balancing risk of bleeding versus risk of thrombosis, cost, and adequate organ function. Currently, guidelines recommend against the use of routine primary thromboprophylaxis in unselected ambulatory patients with cancer. Validated risk assessment models can accurately identify patients at highest risk for cancer-associated thrombosis (CAT). This review summarizes the recently updated NCCN Guidelines for CAT primary prophylaxis, with a primarily focus on VTE prevention. Two main clinical questions that providers commonly encounter will also be addressed: which patients with cancer should receive primary thromboprophylaxis (both surgical and medical oncology patients) and how to safely choose between different anticoagulation agents.

Full access

Michael B. Streiff, Bjorn Holmstrom, Dana Angelini, Aneel Ashrani, Amro Elshoury, John Fanikos, Kleber Yotsumoto Fertrin, Annemarie E. Fogerty, Shuwei Gao, Samuel Z. Goldhaber, Krishna Gundabolu, Ibrahim Ibrahim, Eric Kraut, Andrew D. Leavitt, Alfred Lee, Jason T. Lee, Ming Lim, Janelle Mann, Karlyn Martin, Brandon McMahon, John Moriarty, Colleen Morton, Thomas L. Ortel, Rita Paschal, Jordan Schaefer, Sanford Shattil, Tanya Siddiqi, Deepak Sudheendra, Eliot Williams, Liz Hollinger, and Mai Q. Nguyen

NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology (NCCN Guidelines) for Cancer-Associated Venous Thromboembolic Disease focus on the prevention, diagnosis, and treatment of patients with cancer who have developed or who are at risk for developing venous thromboembolism (VTE). VTE is a significant concern among cancer patients, who are at heightened risks for developing as well as dying from the disease. The management of patients with cancer with VTE often requires multidisciplinary efforts at treating institutions. The NCCN panel comprises specialists from various fields: cardiology, hematology/hematologic oncology, internal medicine, interventional radiology, medical oncology, pharmacology/pharmacy, and surgery/surgical oncology. This article focuses on VTE prophylaxis for medical and surgical oncology inpatients and outpatients, and discusses risk factors for VTE development, risk assessment tools, as well as management methods, including pharmacological and mechanical prophylactics. Contraindications to therapeutic interventions and special dosing, when required, are also discussed.

Full access

Aaron T. Gerds, Jason Gotlib, Prithviraj Bose, Michael W. Deininger, Andrew Dunbar, Amro Elshoury, Tracy I. George, Ivana Gojo, Krishna Gundabolu, Elizabeth Hexner, Gabriela Hobbs, Tania Jain, Catriona Jamieson, Andrew T. Kuykendall, Brandon McMahon, Sanjay R. Mohan, Vivian Oehler, Stephen Oh, Animesh Pardanani, Nikolai Podoltsev, Erik Ranheim, Lindsay Rein, Rachel Salit, David S. Snyder, Brady L. Stein, Moshe Talpaz, Swapna Thota, Pankit Vachhani, Martha Wadleigh, Katherine Walsh, Dawn C. Ward, Mary Anne Bergman, and Hema Sundar

Eosinophilic disorders and related syndromes represent a heterogeneous group of neoplastic and nonneoplastic conditions, characterized by more eosinophils in the peripheral blood, and may involve eosinophil-induced organ damage. In the WHO classification of myeloid and lymphoid neoplasms, eosinophilic disorders characterized by dysregulated tyrosine kinase (TK) fusion genes are recognized as a new category termed, myeloid/lymphoid neoplasms with eosinophilia and rearrangement of PDGFRA, PDGFRB or FGFR1 or with PCM1-JAK2. In addition to these aforementioned TK fusion genes, rearrangements involving FLT3 and ABL1 genes have also been described. These new NCCN Guidelines include recommendations for the diagnosis, staging, and treatment of any one of the myeloid/lymphoid neoplasms with eosinophilia (MLN-Eo) and a TK fusion gene included in the 2017 WHO Classification, as well as MLN-Eo and a FLT3 or ABL1 rearrangement.

Full access

Aaron T. Gerds, Jason Gotlib, Haris Ali, Prithviraj Bose, Andrew Dunbar, Amro Elshoury, Tracy I. George, Krishna Gundabolu, Elizabeth Hexner, Gabriela S. Hobbs, Tania Jain, Catriona Jamieson, Paul R. Kaesberg, Andrew T. Kuykendall, Yazan Madanat, Brandon McMahon, Sanjay R. Mohan, Kalyan V. Nadiminti, Stephen Oh, Animesh Pardanani, Nikolai Podoltsev, Lindsay Rein, Rachel Salit, Brady L. Stein, Moshe Talpaz, Pankit Vachhani, Martha Wadleigh, Sarah Wall, Dawn C. Ward, Mary Anne Bergman, and Cindy Hochstetler

The classic Philadelphia chromosome–negative myeloproliferative neoplasms (MPN) consist of myelofibrosis, polycythemia vera, and essential thrombocythemia and are a heterogeneous group of clonal blood disorders characterized by an overproduction of blood cells. The NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology (NCCN Guidelines) for MPN were developed as a result of meetings convened by a multidisciplinary panel with expertise in MPN, with the goal of providing recommendations for the management of MPN in adults. The Guidelines include recommendations for the diagnostic workup, risk stratification, treatment, and supportive care strategies for the management of myelofibrosis, polycythemia vera, and essential thrombocythemia. Assessment of symptoms at baseline and monitoring of symptom status during the course of treatment is recommended for all patients. This article focuses on the recommendations as outlined in the NCCN Guidelines for the diagnosis of MPN and the risk stratification, management, and supportive care relevant to MF.

Full access

John A. Thompson, Bryan J. Schneider, Julie Brahmer, Amaka Achufusi, Philippe Armand, Meghan K. Berkenstock, Shailender Bhatia, Lihua E. Budde, Saurin Chokshi, Marianne Davies, Amro Elshoury, Yaron Gesthalter, Aparna Hegde, Michael Jain, Benjamin H. Kaffenberger, Melissa G. Lechner, Tianhong Li, Alissa Marr, Suzanne McGettigan, Jordan McPherson, Theresa Medina, Nisha A. Mohindra, Anthony J. Olszanski, Olalekan Oluwole, Sandip P. Patel, Pradnya Patil, Sunil Reddy, Mabel Ryder, Bianca Santomasso, Scott Shofer, Jeffrey A. Sosman, Yinghong Wang, Vlad G. Zaha, Megan Lyons, Mary Dwyer, and Lisa Hang

The aim of the NCCN Guidelines for Management of Immunotherapy-Related Toxicities is to provide guidance on the management of immune-related adverse events resulting from cancer immunotherapy. The NCCN Management of Immunotherapy-Related Toxicities Panel is an interdisciplinary group of representatives from NCCN Member Institutions, consisting of medical and hematologic oncologists with expertise across a wide range of disease sites, and experts from the areas of dermatology, gastroenterology, endocrinology, neurooncology, nephrology, cardio-oncology, ophthalmology, pulmonary medicine, and oncology nursing. The content featured in this issue is an excerpt of the recommendations for managing toxicities related to CAR T-cell therapies and a review of existing evidence. For the full version of the NCCN Guidelines, including recommendations for managing toxicities related to immune checkpoint inhibitors, visit NCCN.org.