Next Article in Journal
Incidence and Risk Factors for Low Anterior Resection Syndrome following Trans-Anal Total Mesorectal Excision
Next Article in Special Issue
Clinical Correlates of In-Hospital Mortality in Patients Undergoing Inferior Vena Cava Filter Placement for Acute Deep Vein Thrombosis
Previous Article in Journal
Diagnostic Infrared Thermography of the Tongue and Taste Perception in Patients with Oral Lichen Planus: Case-Control Study
Previous Article in Special Issue
Survival Outcomes after Placement of Inferior Vena Cava Filters in Cancer Patients: Insights from a Comprehensive Cancer Center’s Experience
 
 
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

The Application of Existing Risk Assessment Models (RAMS) to Predict the Occurrence of Venous Thromboembolic Events among Patients with Classic Hodgkin Lymphoma

1
Department of Internal Medicine, King Hussein Cancer Center, Amman 11941, Jordan
2
School of Medicine, The University of Jordan, Amman 11942, Jordan
3
Department of Radiation Oncology, King Hussein Cancer Center, Amman 11941, Jordan
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
J. Clin. Med. 2024, 13(2), 436; https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm13020436
Submission received: 14 October 2023 / Revised: 6 December 2023 / Accepted: 25 December 2023 / Published: 12 January 2024
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Thromboembolic Disease and Its Complications)

Abstract

:
Background: A majority of patients included in risk assessment models (RAMs) developed to predict venous thromboembolic events (VTE) in lymphoma were non-Hodgkin lymphoma. Our study aims to evaluate the incidence and predictors of VTE, utilizing different RAMs, in patients with classic Hodgkin lymphoma (cHL) treated with adriamycin, bleomycin, vinblastine, and dacarbazine (ABVD). Methods: Adult patients with cHL, treated and followed at our center, were included. Correlations between different variables, Khorana score, and thrombosis in lymphoma (ThroLy) RAMs with VTE were examined using Fisher’s exact test and logistic regression analysis. Results: A total of 321 patients were included, with a median age of 29 (range: 18–83) years. Of them, 169 (52.6%) had advanced-stage disease. Combined modality treatment was given to 169 (52.6%) patients. A total of 52 (16.2%) patients had relapsed or refractory disease. VTE were reported in 15 (4.7%) patients and were mostly during the administration of first-line (n = 8, 53.3%), or salvage chemotherapy (n = 6, 40.0%). There was no correlation between a Khorana score > 2 (p = 0.689) or ThroLy score > 3 (p = 0.335) and VTE. Older age (p = 0.014) and relapsed or refractory disease (p = 0.003) significantly correlated with VTE. Conclusions: VTE are uncommon in cHL. The commonly used RAMs failed to predict VTE. However, older age and relapsed or refractory disease significantly increased this risk.

1. Introduction

Venous thromboembolic events (VTE) are commonly encountered in patients with cancer [1]. Several studies have shown that lymphoma patients undergoing active chemotherapy are at an even higher risk of developing VTE [2,3]. Such episodes can be fatal, may delay chemotherapy and important invasive interventions, and may lead to immediate and delayed complications that may negatively affect the quality of life (QoL) of survivors [4].
Thromboprophylaxis for surgical and medical patients, including those with cancer, admitted to the hospital with acute medical problems or for surgical intervention is widely practiced and improving [5]. However, patients with cancer, even those receiving infusional chemotherapy, are treated in the outpatient settings. Many studies have shown that a majority of cancer patients develop their VTE while in ambulatory settings where VTE prophylaxis is not routinely practiced [6].
Lymphoma is classified among the high-risk cancer sites for development of VTE [7]. The incidence of VTE is lower in patients with classic Hodgkin lymphoma (cHL) than in non-Hodgkin lymphoma [8,9] with reported rates in the range of 3–20% [8,9,10,11,12].
Several risk assessments models (RAMs) for chemotherapy-associated thrombosis attempted to identify higher-risk patients for VTE [7,13,14,15]. Due to poor discriminatory performance, particularly when studied on a single cancer cohort, most such models have proven to be of limited clinical utility [16,17,18,19].
Given these limitations, Antic et al. developed and validated a new model, known as the thrombosis in lymphoma (ThroLy) score, to predict thromboembolic events in lymphoma patients [8,20]. Although it was validated in patients included in the German Hodgkin Study Group (GHSG) HD13–HD15 trials [21] and in two other studies [10,11], its clinical application is complex and failed to predict VTE in a follow-up study [9].
Moreover, in a comprehensive analysis of VTE in three GHSG HD13–HD15 trials, the incidence of VTE was higher in patients treated with dose-dense regimens [12].
Our study aims to evaluate the incidence and predictors, including commonly used RAMs of VTE in HL patients treated with adriamycin, bleomycin, vinblastine and dacarbazine (ABVD).

2. Materials and Methods

Adult patients (≥18 years) with pathologically-confirmed cHL and diagnosed, treated, and followed-up at our institution from 2014 till 2019 were identified. Data were retrospectively collected from the hospital-based cancer registry and patients’ electronic medical records.
Different clinical-, laboratory-, imaging-, and therapy-related variables including age, performance status (PS), personal history of VTE, myocardial infarction or stroke, smoking history, complete blood count, serum albumin, initial stage, mediastinal involvement, response to initial treatment, and salvage chemotherapy were collected.
The disease stage and response to treatment were determined according to the Lugano criteria [22]. Patients with stage I or II were defined as early-stage disease, while patients with stage III and IV were defined as advanced-stage disease. Bulky disease was defined as a tumor mass of more than 10 cm on the initial CT scan. Please change this paragraph to:
The Khorana RAM was calculated by adding one point attributed to the diagnosis of lymphoma to the platelet count ≥ 350 × 103/µL (1 point) or hemoglobin level < 10 g/dL or using erythrocyte growth factors (1 point) or, leukocyte count > 11 × 103/µL (1 point), and the body mass index (BMI) ≥ 35 kg/m2 (1 point). [7]. The ThroLy RAM score was calculated as previously described (Supplementary Table S1) [15].
No routine imaging studies to screen for VTE were performed. The diagnosis of VTE was radiologically confirmed with doppler ultrasound for deep vein thrombosis (DVT), and computed tomography (CT) angiography for pulmonary embolism (PE) for symptomatic patients. Details of thrombotic events were retrieved from radiology reports.
VTE were considered chemotherapy-related if diagnosed any time after the first dose of chemotherapy and up to 4 weeks after the last, and were considered ambulatory if the patients were not admitted to the hospital during the 30 days prior to VTE diagnosis. Major bleeding, as a complication of anticoagulation, was defined as fatal bleeding and/or symptomatic bleeding in a critical organ and/or bleeding causing a fall in hemoglobin level of ≥2.0 g/dL, or leading to the transfusion of two or more units of red blood cells.
Descriptive statistics were used to characterize patients at the baseline. Continuous variables were presented as median (range), and categorical variables were expressed as numbers (percentages). Patients’ characteristics and VTE were compared using Fisher’s exact test for categorical variables and the Mann–Whitney U test for continuous variables. Multivariate logistic regression analysis was performed for significant variables in univariate analysis. Survival outcomes were calculated using the Kaplan–Meier method. The p-values are two-sided and considered significant when <0.05. Due to the retrospective nature of the study, written informed consent was waived and the data were anonymized and maintained with confidentiality. The study was approved by the King Hussein Cancer Center Institutional Review Board (IRB).

3. Results

3.1. Patients’ Characteristics

A total of 321 patients with a pathological diagnosis of cHL were included with a median age of 29 (18–83) years and almost equal gender distribution. At the time of diagnosis, only 11 (3.4%) patients had an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) PS > 1, 169 (52.6%) patients had advanced-stage (stage III–IV) disease, 91 (28.3%) had bulky disease, and 250 (77.9%) had mediastinal involvement.
Most of our patients (n = 267, 83.2%) were treated with more than four cycles of ABVD. Consolidative radiotherapy was given to 169 (52.6%) patients, among which 127 (75.1%) had early-stage disease. After the completion of first-line treatment, 289 (90.0%) achieved a complete response (CR), 32 (10.0%) had refractory disease, and 20 (6.2%) had a relapse. Patients’ characteristics are detailed in Table 1.

3.2. Venous Thromboembolism

VTE were reported in 15 (4.7%) patients; a majority (n = 10, 66.7%) were ambulatory, and 11 (73.3%) were chemotherapy related. The median time from the diagnosis of cHL to the development of VTE was 6.9 (range: 0.3–42.1) months.
VTE were diagnosed most in the upper extremities (n = 12, 80.0%), followed by PE alone (n = 2, 13.3%) and the lower extremities (n = 1, 6.7%).
Among the upper-limb VTE, eight (66.7%) were right-sided, three (25%) were left-sided, and one (8.3%) was on both sides (extensive catheter-related thrombus). VTE location was the superior vena cava in five (41.7%) (all were catheter-related), in basilic, cephalic, cubital, and radial veins in four (33.3%), which was possibly related to chemotherapy, and three (25%) were possibly related to the compressive effects of lymph nodes: internal jugular vein compression caused by a mediastinal mass, supraclavicular vein compression caused by a supraclavicular mass, and axillary vein compression caused by an axillary mass.
At the time of VTE diagnosis, a majority (n = 13, 86.7%) had active disease, 11 (73.3%) had mediastinal involvement and only 5 (33.3%) patients had a central venous catheter (CVC).
VTE were treated with low-molecular weight heparin (LMWH) for a median duration of 6 (range: 3–12) months. While on anticoagulants, no episodes of major bleeding were reported. Recurrent VTE, however, were reported in one patient who developed PE four months after an upper-extremity DVT, while on therapeutic doses of LMWH.

3.3. Risk Factors for VTE

Among the continuous variables evaluated, age is the only variable that was significantly different between the group of patients with VTE compared to those without it (p = 0.011; Table 2). Among the categorical variables, failure to achieve CR after frontline treatment (p = 0.002) and no radiotherapy (p = 0.039) were found to be more frequent in patients with VTE (Table 3). In multivariate analysis, only older age (p = 0.014) and failure to achieve a CR after initial therapy (p = 0.004) were significantly associated with VTE (Table 4).
As 77.1% of VTE were reported in patients with mediastinal involvement (n = 250), we performed a separate analysis for potential variables that may correlate with VTE. In the univariate analysis, VTEs were more frequent in patients with refractory disease (p = 0.006), radiotherapy (p = 0.028), and age (p = 0.002). In multivariate analysis, refractory disease (p = 0.009) and age (p = 0.004) independently correlated with VTE.

3.4. Risk Assessment Models

According to the Khorana RAM, 266 (29.9%) patients had an intermediate-risk (score 1–2) and 55 (17.1%) others had a high-risk score (>2). Rates of VTE were not significantly different between the high-risk group (n = 2, 3.6%) and the intermediate-risk group (n = 13, 4.9%) (p = 0.689, Table 3). The Khorana risk score was also assessed as a continuous variable, and the mean score was not different between patients who had VTE vs. no VTE (1.67 vs. 1.78, p = 0.56; Table 2).
When patients were risk-stratified according to ThroLy RAM, 30 (9.3%) patients had a low-risk score (0–1), 198 (61.7%) patients had an intermediate-risk score (2–3), and 93 (29.0%) others had a high-risk score (>3). Although rates of VTE increased with higher-risk score, with n = 0 (0%), n = 9 (4.9%), and n = 6 (6.5%) in the low-risk, intermediate-risk, and high-risk groups, respectively, the difference was not statistically significant (p = 0.343; Table 3). In addition, we compared rates of VTE between patients with ThroLy risk scores ≤ 2 (n = 145, 45.2%) vs. >2 (n = 176, 54.8%), and there was no significant difference between the two groups (VTE n = 5, 3.4% vs. 10, 5.7%, p = 0.335; Table 3).
Even when the ThroLy risk score was evaluated as a continuous variable, the mean ThroLy score was higher in patients with VTE compared to those with no VTE (3.4 vs. 2.7); however, the difference was not statistically significant (p = 0.07; Table 2).

3.5. Survival Outcomes

At a median follow-up of 45 (range: 5–100) months, the five-year overall survival (OS) rate for the whole group was 96% (Figure 1a). However, compared to patients with no VTE, patients with VTE had a significantly lower OS (78% versus 97%, p < 0.001; Figure 1b).

4. Discussion

This study provides additional evidence that the universal application of RAMs used to predict VTE may not be suitable in a specific cancer. Even among lymphomas, different lymphoma subtypes have significant differences in the incidence and predictors of VTE. Patients with cHL were underrepresented in most studies that evaluated the risk of VTE in lymphoma. For example, only 15% of patients included in the Antic et al. study had cHL [8,20]. Moreover, when the ThroLy RAM was validated in cHL treated in the GHSG HD13–HD15 trials [21], the validation cohort included patients treated with heterogeneous chemotherapeutic regimens according to the trial design.
The overall rate (4.9%) and the median time from diagnosis to VTE (6.9 months) in our study are almost similar to what was reported in most previous studies and a meta-analysis [3,8]. In addition, the incidence of VTE in 6.9% in patients with advanced-stage disease is in line with high-risk cancer patients defined by Khorana et al. [7].
Most of the VTE reported in our study were in ambulatory patients, having active disease and while receiving chemotherapy, which is consistent with the previous studies about VTE in cancer patients [6] as well lymphoma patients [3]. More interestingly, 80% of encountered VTE were in the upper extremity (UEDVT); only 5, less than 50%, could be attributed to CVC. The predominance of UEDVT is consistent with the previous reports [10,12]. Factors that may have contributed to the development of UEDVT were the presence of CVC, irritation and inflammation related to chemotherapy administration in the upper limbs, and compressive effects of enlarged lymph nodes.
Although patients older than 50 years represent only 6.5% of our patients, older age, when evaluated as a continuous variable, was independently associated with increased risk for VTE. Borchmann et al. analyzed the thrombotic events in cHL treated in GHSG HD13–HD15 trials that excluded patients older than 60 years in the HD14 and HD15 trials, and reported a similar age association, with almost identical odds ratios, of 1.047 and 1.02, respectively [12].
In our study, failure to achieve a complete response after frontline treatment, which indicates the over-all aggressiveness of the disease and the need for more intensive, platinum-based salvage chemotherapy, had the strongest correlation with VTE. On the other hand, other variables previously reported to be associated with VTE in lymphoma including advanced-stage disease, mediastinal involvement, extranodal involvement, and a higher number of chemotherapy cycles, had no correlation. This can be explained by the relatively low number of VTE, and the fact that the achievement of complete response in cHL is a robust indicator of survival that outperforms other clinical and laboratory variables [23].
Failure of the Khorana RAM to predict VTE in cHL was also reported in two other studies [11,12]. According to the Khorana RAM, lymphoma patients are either classified as intermediate- or high-risk, and this may result in poor discrimination between the two groups. Interestingly, we found that 13 out of 15 (86.6%) VTE were reported in the intermediate-risk group, which is in line with the results of a recent meta-analysis that included 27,849 cancer patients and found that 76.6% of VTE were reported outside the high-risk group [24].
The original ThroLy RAM included a diverse group of lymphoma patients, of whom most were NHL, who are at a higher risk of VTE. Similar to the Khorana RAM, the score performance is limited by the high number of VTE outside the high-risk group [25]. In the validation study by Rupa-Matyesk et al., 48% of VTE were reported in the low-risk group, among which cHL represented 61% of patients [9]. In our study, 9 out 15 (60%) VTE were reported outside the high-risk group. Moreover, when the ThroLy RAM was validated in the GHSG HD13–HD15 trials, its sensitivity and specificity were 45% and 65%, respectively [21].
Although the ThroLy RAM includes variables that are more relevant to predict VTE in lymphoma patients, a previous history of VTE (2 points), reduced mobility (1 point), a previous history of myocardial infarction or stroke (2 points), and neutropenia (1 point), representing 6 out of 12 possible points, are rare in cHL patients because they are generally younger and rarely have pre-existing comorbidities. The limited contribution of these variables to the ThroLy score in cHL, added to the weak association of other variables with VTE, may have contributed to the lack of a significant association between the ThroLy score and VTE in our study.
We previously validated the ThroLy RAM in diffuse large B cell lymphoma (DLBCL) [26]. The main components of the ThroLy RAM that were associated with VTE were a previous history of thrombosis, reduced mobility, and low hemoglobin. Compared to DLBCL patients included in the validation study, cHL patients included in this study had a relatively lower frequency of these components (3.1% vs. 8.6% and 3.4% vs. 16.2%, respectively), possibly because the median age of DLBCL patients was 20 years older (49 vs. 29 years). In addition, the lower incidence of VTE in cHL (4.7% vs. 13.5%) may have contributed to the lack of a significant correlation between the ThroLy score and VTE in cHL.
Cancer-associated thrombosis is a leading cause of death in cancer patients [4,27]. Previous studies in lymphoma confirmed the negative impact of VTE on mortality [10,28]. The increased mortality rate in patients with VTE in our study can be explained by their association with the refractory disease, which is known to be associated with worse survival in cHL. The abundant cellular, humoral, and inflammatory infiltrates in cHL play a pivotal role in enhancing the survival of Reed–Sternberg cells, resulting in a lack of response to treatment [29]. Local tumor inflammation has been implicated in the pathophysiology of VTE in cHL as well [12], and may explain the association of VTE with a lack of response to treatment and increased mortality.
The retrospective design of the study, and the inclusion of patients from a single center, are among the study limitations. However, the inclusion of a relatively high number of cHL patients treated with a uniform chemotherapy regimen, commonly used in the frontline treatment of cHL, adds to the value of our study.

5. Conclusions

Khorana and ThroLy RAMs failed to predict VTE in cHL treated with ABVD. Older age and a lack of achievement of a complete response to frontline treatment were the main predictors of VTE. Such patients may be considered for prophylactic anticoagulation in a prospective study.

Supplementary Materials

The following supporting information can be downloaded at: https://www.mdpi.com/article/10.3390/jcm13020436/s1, Table S1: ThroLy risk assessment model.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, H.A.-R. and M.M.; methodology, H.A.-R. and M.M.; validation, A.A., S.A.-R. and K.H.; formal analysis, M.M.; data curation, D.A., R.G., S.A.-R., E.A., F.A.R. and Y.A.; writing—original draft preparation, M.M; writing—review and editing, H.A.-R., S.A.-R. and M.M.; supervision, H.A.-R. and M.M.; project administration, H.A.-R. and M.M. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research received no external funding.

Institutional Review Board Statement

The study was conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki, and approved by the Institutional Review Board (or Ethics Committee) of King Hussein Cancer Center (protocol code 20 KHCC 113 and date of approval 28 July 2020) for studies involving humans.

Informed Consent Statement

Patient consent was waived due to the retrospective nature of this study.

Data Availability Statement

The data presented in this study are available upon request from the corresponding author.

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to acknowledge Khaled Jamal from the KHCC Cancer Registry, Alice Haddadin, of the KHCC library, and Mohammad Alqaisieh, Department of Internal Medicine, KHCC for their great support in conducting this study.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

References

  1. Timp, J.F.; Braekkan, S.K.; Versteeg, H.H.; Cannegieter, S.C. Epidemiology of cancer-associated venous thrombosis. Blood 2013, 122, 1712–1723. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  2. Falanga, A.; Marchetti, M. Venous thromboembolism in the hematologic malignancies. J. Clin. Oncol. 2009, 27, 4848–4857. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  3. Caruso, V.; Di Castelnuovo, A.; Meschengieser, S.; Lazzari, M.A.; De Gaetano, G.; Storti, S.; Iacoviello, L.; Donati, M.B. Thrombotic complications in adult patients with lymphoma: A meta-analysis of 29 independent cohorts including 18 018 patients and 1149 events. Blood 2010, 115, 5322–5328. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  4. Khorana, A.A.; Francis, C.W.; Culakova, E.; Kuderer, N.M.; Lyman, G.H. Thromboembolism is a leading cause of death in cancer patients receiving outpatient chemotherapy. J. Thromb. Haemost. 2007, 5, 632–634. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  5. Abdel-Razeq, H.; Albadainah, F.; Hijjawi, S.; Mansour, A.; Treish, I. Venous Thromboembolism (VTE) in Hospitalized Cancer Patients: Prophylaxis Failure or Failure to Prophylax. J. Thromb. Thrombolysis 2011, 3, 107–112. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  6. Abdel-Razeq, H.; Mansour, A. Venous thromboembolism prophylaxis for ambulatory cancer patients, can we do better? J. Thromb. Thrombolysis 2017, 44, 399–405. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  7. Khorana, A.A.; Kuderer, N.M.; Culakova, E.; Lyman, G.H.; Francis, C.W. Development and validation of a predictive model for chemotherapy-associated thrombosis. Blood 2008, 111, 4902–4907. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Antic, D.; Milic, N.; Nikolovski, S.; Todorovic, M.; Bila, J.; Djurdjevic, P.; Andjelic, B.; Djurasinovic, V.; Sretenovic, A.; Vukovic, V.; et al. Development and validation of multivariable predictive model for thromboembolic events in lymphoma patients. Am. J. Hematol. 2016, 91, 1014–1019. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Rupa-Matysek, J.; Brzeźniakiewicz-Janus, K.; Gil, L.; Krasiński, Z.; Komarnicki, M. Evaluation of the ThroLy score for the prediction of venous thromboembolism in newly diagnosed patients treated for lymphoid malignancies in clinical practice. Cancer Med. 2018, 7, 2868–2875. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Kirkizlar, O.; Kirkizlar, T.A.; Umit, E.G.; Asker, I.; Baysal, M.; Bas, V.; Gulsaran, S.K.; Demirci, U.; Demir, A.M. The Incidence of Venous Thromboembolism and Impact on Survival in Hodgkin Lymphoma. Clin. Lymphoma Myeloma Leuk. 2020, 20, 542–547. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Assanto, G.M.; Salvatori, M.; Pontecorvo, S.; Cenfra, N.; D’elia, G.M.; Annechini, G.; Martelli, M.; Pulsoni, A.; Del Giudice, I.; Chistolini, A. Venous Thromboembolism (VTE) in Patients with Hodgkin Lymphoma: Retrospective Evaluation of Throly and Khorana Risk Scores. Blood 2022, 140 (Suppl. S1), 12018–12019. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Borchmann, S.; Müller, H.; Hude, I.; Fuchs, M.; Borchmann, P.; Engert, A. Thrombosis as a treatment complication in Hodgkin lymphoma patients: A comprehensive analysis of three prospective randomized German Hodgkin Study Group (GHSG) trials. Ann. Oncol. 2019, 30, 1329–1334. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  13. Ay, C.; Dunkler, D.; Marosi, C.; Chiriac, A.-L.; Vormittag, R.; Simanek, R.; Quehenberger, P.; Zielinski, C.; Pabinger, I. Prediction of venous thromboembolism in cancer patients. Blood 2010, 116, 5377–5382. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  14. Gerotziafas, G.T.; Taher, A.; Abdel-Razeq, H.; AboElnazar, E.; Spyropoulos, A.C.; El Shemmari, S.; Larsen, A.K.; Elalamy, I.; Gligorov, J.; COMPASS–CAT Working Group; et al. A predictive score for thrombosis associated with breast, colorectal, lung, or ovarian cancer: The prospective COMPASS-cancer-associated thrombosis study. Oncologist 2017, 22, 1222–1231. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  15. Kuderer, N.M.; Culakova, E.; Lyman, G.H.; Francis, C.; Falanga, A.; Khorana, A.A. A validated risk score for venous thromboembolism is predictive of cancer progression and mortality. Oncologist 2016, 21, 861–867. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  16. Mansfield, A.S.; Tafur, A.J.; Wang, C.E.; Kourelis, T.V.; Wysokinska, E.M.; Yang, P. Predictors of active cancer thromboembolic outcomes: Validation of the Khorana score among patients with lung cancer. J. Thromb. Haemost. 2016, 14, 1773–1778. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  17. Van Es, N.; Franke, V.F.; Middeldorp, S.; Wilmink, J.W.; Buller, H.R. The Khorana score for the prediction of venous thromboembolism in patients with pancreatic cancer. Thromb. Res. 2017, 150, 30–32. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  18. Wang, Y.; Attar, B.M.; Fuentes, H.E.; Yu, J.; Zhang, H.; Tafur, A.J. Performance of Khorana risk score for prediction of venous thromboembolism in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma. Clin. Appl. Thromb. Hemost. 2018, 24, 471–476. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  19. Abdel-Razeq, H.; Mansour, A.; Saadeh, S.S.; Abu-Nasser, M.; Makoseh, M.; Salam, M.; Abufara, A.; Ismael, Y.; Ibrahim, A.; Khirfan, G.; et al. The Application of Current Proposed Venous Thromboembolism Risk Assessment Model for Ambulatory Patients with Cancer. Clin. Appl. Thromb. Hemost. 2018, 24, 429–433. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Antic, D.; Jelicic, J.; Vukovic, V.; Nikolovski, S.; Mihaljevic, B. Venous thromboembolic events in lymphoma patients: Actual relationships between epidemiology, mechanisms, clinical profile and treatment. Blood Rev. 2017, 32, 144–158. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Antic, D.; Otasevic, V.; Borchmann, S.; Muller, H.; Vukovic, V.; Djurasinovic, V.; Tomic, K.; Mihaljevic, B.; Gerotziafas, G.; Engert, A.; et al. Throly Score Successfully Classifies Hodgkin Lymphoma Patients at Risk of Thromboembolic Complication. Blood 2020, 136, 8. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Cheson, B.D.; Fisher, R.I.; Barrington, S.F.; Cavalli, F.; Schwartz, L.H.; Zucca, E.; Lister, T.A. Recommendations for initial evaluation, staging, and response assessment of Hodgkin and non-Hodgkin lymphoma: The Lugano classification. J. Clin. Oncol. 2014, 32, 3059–3068. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  23. Gallamini, A.; Hutchings, M.; Rigacci, L.; Specht, L.; Merli, F.; Hansen, M.; Patti, C.; Loft, A.; Di Raimondo, F.; D’Amore, F.; et al. Early interim 2-[18F] fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose positron emission tomography is prognostically superior to international prognostic score in advanced-stage Hodgkin’s lymphoma: A report from a joint Italian-Danish study. J. Clin. Oncol. 2007, 25, 3746–3752. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  24. Mulder, F.I.; Candeloro, M.; Kamphuisen, P.; Di Nisio, M.; Bossuyt, P.M.; Guman, N.; Smit, K.; Büller, H.R.; Van Es, N. The Khorana score for prediction of venous thromboembolism in cancer patients: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Haematologica 2019, 104, 1277–1287. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  25. Hohaus, S.; Bartolomei, F.; Cuccaro, A.; Maiolo, E.; Alma, E.; D’alò, F.; Bellesi, S.; Rossi, E.; De Stefano, V. Venous Thromboembolism in Lymphoma: Risk Stratification and Antithrombotic Prophylaxis. Cancers 2020, 12, 1291. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  26. Abdel-Razeq, H.; Ma’koseh, M.; Mansour, A.; Bater, R.; Amarin, R.; Abufara, A.; Halahleh, K.; Manassra, M.; Alrwashdeh, M.; Almomani, M.; et al. The Application of the ThroLy Risk Assessment Model to Predict Venous Thromboembolism in Patients with Diffuse Large B-Cell Lymphoma. Clin. Appl. Thromb. Hemost. 2021, 27, 10760296211045908. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Sørensen, H.T.; Pedersen, L.; van Es, N.; Büller, H.R.; Horváth-Puhó, E. Impact of venous thromboembolism on the mortality in patients with cancer: A population-based cohort study. Lancet Reg. Health Eur. 2023, 34, 100739. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  28. Rupa-Matysek, J.; Gil, L.; Kaźmierczak, M.; Barańska, M.; Komarnicki, M. Prediction of venous thromboembolism in newly diagnosed patients treated for lymphoid malignancies: Validation of the Khorana Risk Score. Med. Oncol. 2017, 35, 5. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Calabretta, E.; d’Amore, F.; Carlo-Stella, C. Immune and Inflammatory Cells of the Tumor Microenvironment Represent Novel Therapeutic Targets in Classical Hodgkin Lymphoma. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2019, 20, 5503. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Figure 1. Overall survival (OS) for all patients enrolled (a), and in relation to the presence or absence of VTE (b).
Figure 1. Overall survival (OS) for all patients enrolled (a), and in relation to the presence or absence of VTE (b).
Jcm 13 00436 g001
Table 1. Patients’ characteristics.
Table 1. Patients’ characteristics.
CharacteristicNumberPercentage
Age (years)Median
Range
29
18–83
GenderMale
Female
163
158
50.8
49.2
ECOG performance status>1
0–1
11
310
3.4
96.6
BMI (kg/m2)BMI > 30
BMI > 35
93
36
29.0
11.2
Smoking historyCurrent smoker
Prior smoker
Never smoked
130
25
176
37.4
7.8
54.8
Prior VTEYes
No
10
311
3.1
96.9
HistologyNodular sclerosis
Mixed cellularity
Lymphocyte-depleted
Lymphocyte-rich
Classical (NOS)
243
44
1
2
31
75.7
13.7
0.3
0.6
9.7
StagingBulky disease
Mediastinal involvement
Extranodal involvement
Early stage
Advanced stage
Stage IV
B-symptoms
91
250
119
152
169
75
174
28.3
77.9
37.1
47.4
52.6
23.4
54.2
Blood countHemoglobin < 10 gm/dL
WBC count > 11 × 103/µL
Platelet count > 350 × 103/µL
Neutrophil count < 1 × 103/µL
57
137
156
3
17.8
42.7
48.6
0.93
Serum albuminLow
Normal
116
205
36.1
63.9
Number of ABVD cycles2–4 cycles
>4 cycles
53
267
16.5
83.2
RadiotherapyConsolidation
No consolidation
169
152
52.6
47.4
Response to initial treatmentComplete response
Refractory
289
32
90.0
10.0
Salvage chemotherapyYes
No
39
282
12.1
87.9
Khorana score>1
>2
191
55
59.5
17.1
ThroLy score0–1
2–3
>3
0–2
>2
30 (9.3%)
198
93
145
176
9.3
61.7
29.0
45.2
45.8
ECOG: Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group; BMI: body mass index; VTE: venous thromboembolism; NOS: not otherwise specified; WBC: white blood cells; ABVD: adriamycin, bleomycin, vinblastine, and dacarbazine.
Table 2. Correlation between continuous variables and VTE.
Table 2. Correlation between continuous variables and VTE.
VariablePatients with No VTE
(Mean)
SDPatients with VTE
(Mean)
SDp-Value95% CI
Age (years)30.811.2138.414.950.0121.69–13.56
BMI (kg/m2)26.86.0728.36.050.33−1.6–4.7
Hemoglobin (gram/dL)12.22.2412.51.980.58−1.85–4.94
WBC count (×103/µL)11.56.2124.570.78−2.67–3.53
Neutrophil count (×103/µL)7.45.789.24.780.22−1.13–4.83
Lymphocyte count (×103/µL)1.70.821.40.630.13−0.75–0.097
Platelet count (×103/µL)362134.8369147.50.845−63.4–77.4
Albumin (gram/dL)4.10.543.80.490.095−0.52–0.042
ESR (mm/hour)60.538.66838.750.49−14.07–29
Khorana score1.780.751.670.720.56−0.5–0.27
ThroLy score2.71.33.41.30.07−0.05–1.3
VTE: venous thromboembolism; SD: standard deviation; CI: confidence interval; BMI: body mass index; WBC: white blood cell; ESR: erythrocyte sedimentation rate.
Table 3. Univariate analysis of categorical variables.
Table 3. Univariate analysis of categorical variables.
CharacteristicNo VTEVTEp-Value
GenderMale
Female
50.7%
49.3%
53.3%
46.7%
0.839
ECOG performance status (PS)≤1
>1
96.7%
3.3%
93.3%
6.7%
0.481
BMI (kg/m2)≤30
>30
<35
≥35
71.6%
28.4%
89.2%
10.8%
60%
40%
80%
20%
0.335

0.269
Smoking historyCurrent/prior smoker
Never smoked
Current smoker
Prior smoker/never smoked
44.1%
55.9%
36.6%
63.4%
66.7%
33.3%
53.3%
46.7%
0.087

0.191
Prior thrombosisYes
No
2.9%
97.1%
6.7%
93.3%
0.417
B-symptomsNo
Yes
53.1%
46.9%
40%
60%
0.645
HistologyNodular sclerosis
Mixed cellularity
Lymphocyte-depleted
Lymphocyte-rich
Classical (NOS)
75.%
14.4%
0.3%
0.7%
9.2%
80%
0%
0%
0%
20%
0.395
Bulky diseaseNon-bulky
Bulky
71.9%
28.1%
66.7%
33.3%
0.661
Mediastinal involvementNo
Yes
22.9%
77.1%
6.7%
93.3%
0.14
Extranodal involvementNo
Yes
63.7%
36.3%
46.7%
53.3%
0.182
StageEarly stage (I/II)
Advanced stage (III/IV)
48%
52%
33.3%
66.7%
0.265
Stage I–III
Stage IV
69.9%
30.1%
46.7%
53.3%
0.057
Hemoglobin (gram/dL)>10.5
<10.5
≥10
<10
75.8%
24.2%
81.4%
18.6%
93.3%
6.7%
100%
0%
0.118

0.065
WBC (×103/µL)WBC count ≤ 11
WBC count > 11
58.2%
41.8%
40%
60%

0.165
Platelet count (×103/µL)Platelet count < 350
Platelet count ≥ 350
51.3%
48.7%
53.3%
46.7%
0.878
Neutrophil count (×103/µL)Neutrophil count ≥ 1
Neutrophil count < 1
99%
1%
100%
0%
0.7
Serum AlbuminNormal
Low albumin
64.4%
35.6%
53.3%
46.7%
0.385
Number of ABVD cycles2–4 cycles
>4 cycles
18%
82%
26.7%
73.3%
0.396
RadiotherapyNo radiotherapy
Radiotherapy
46.1%
53.9%
73.3%
26.7%
0.039
Response to initial therapyNo relapse or refractory disease
Relapsed or refractory disease
85.6%
14.4%
53.3%
46.7%
0.001
BMTNo BMT
BMT
88.6%
11.4%
73.3%
26.7%
0.078
Khorana score0–1
>1
0–2
>2
40.2%
59.8%
82.7%
13.3%
46.7%
53.3%
86.7%
13.3%
0.618

0.689
ThroLy score0–1
2–3
>3
0–2
>2
9.8%
61.8%
28.4%
45.8%
54.2%
0%
60%
40%
33.3%
66.7%
0.343


0.345
ECOG PS: Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status; BMI: body mass index; WBC: white blood cell; ABVD: adriamycin, bleomycin, vinblastine, and dacarbazine; BMT: bone marrow transplant.
Table 4. Multivariate analysis.
Table 4. Multivariate analysis.
EffectOdds Ratio
(OR)
95% Confidence Interval (CI)p-Value
Age1.0471.009–1.0870.014
Relapsed/refractory disease5.6141.783–17.6810.003
No radiotherapy2.0040.587–6.8470.267
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Ma’koseh, M.; Abufara, A.; Albaghdadi, D.; Ghalayni, R.; Abdel-Razeq, S.; Alzughali, E.; Abdel Rahman, F.; Alhalaseh, Y.; Halahleh, K.; Abdel-Razeq, H. The Application of Existing Risk Assessment Models (RAMS) to Predict the Occurrence of Venous Thromboembolic Events among Patients with Classic Hodgkin Lymphoma. J. Clin. Med. 2024, 13, 436. https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm13020436

AMA Style

Ma’koseh M, Abufara A, Albaghdadi D, Ghalayni R, Abdel-Razeq S, Alzughali E, Abdel Rahman F, Alhalaseh Y, Halahleh K, Abdel-Razeq H. The Application of Existing Risk Assessment Models (RAMS) to Predict the Occurrence of Venous Thromboembolic Events among Patients with Classic Hodgkin Lymphoma. Journal of Clinical Medicine. 2024; 13(2):436. https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm13020436

Chicago/Turabian Style

Ma’koseh, Mohammad, Alaa Abufara, Dana Albaghdadi, Ruba Ghalayni, Sarah Abdel-Razeq, Eman Alzughali, Fadwa Abdel Rahman, Yazan Alhalaseh, Khalid Halahleh, and Hikmat Abdel-Razeq. 2024. "The Application of Existing Risk Assessment Models (RAMS) to Predict the Occurrence of Venous Thromboembolic Events among Patients with Classic Hodgkin Lymphoma" Journal of Clinical Medicine 13, no. 2: 436. https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm13020436

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop