Observation versus antiplatelet therapy as primary prophylaxis for thrombosis in low-risk essential thrombocythemia

The effectiveness of antiplatelet therapy as primary prophylaxis for thrombosis in low-risk essential thrombocythemia (ET) is not proven. In this study, the incidence rates of arterial and venous thrombosis were retrospectively analyzed in 300 low-risk patients with ET treated with antiplatelet drugs as monotherapy (n = 198) or followed with careful observation (n = 102). Follow-up was 802 and 848 person-years for antiplatelet therapy and observation, respectively. Rates of thrombotic events were 21.2 and 17.7 per 1000 person-years for antiplatelet therapy and observation, respectively (P = .6). JAK2 V617F-positive patients not receiving antiplatelet medication showed an increased risk of venous thrombosis (incidence rate ratio [IRR]: 4.0; 95% CI: 1.2-12.9; P = .02). Patients with cardiovascular risk factors had increased rates of arterial thrombosis while on observation (IRR: 2.5; 95% CI: 1.02-6.1; P = .047). An increased risk of major bleeding was observed in patients with platelet count greater than 1000 x 10(9)/L under antiplatelet therapy (IRR: 5.4; 95% CI: 1.7-17.2; P = .004). In conclusion, antiplatelet therapy reduces the incidence of venous thrombosis in patients with JAK2-positive ET and the rate of arterial thrombosis in patients with associated cardiovascular risk factors. In the remaining low-risk patients, this therapy is not effective as primary prophylaxis of thrombosis, and observation may be an adequate option. (Blood. 2010; 116(8): 1205-1210)