SynthesisThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews2012
Primary prophylaxis for venous thromboembolism in ambulatory cancer patients receiving chemotherapy.
Synthesis in The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 29 papers, 9 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
29 citing papers in PubMed, 9 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 262 citations in OpenAlex.
- Primary prophylaxis for venous thromboembolism in ambulatory cancer patients receiving chemotherapy.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2020Pooled it
- The Khorana score for prediction of venous thromboembolism in cancer patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Haematologica · 2019Pooled it
- Primary prophylaxis for venous thromboembolism in ambulatory cancer patients receiving chemotherapy.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2016Pooled it
- Treatment for superficial infusion thrombophlebitis of the upper extremity.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2015Pooled it
- Primary prophylaxis for venous thromboembolism in patients undergoing cardiac or thoracic surgery.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2015Pooled it
- Clinical guide SEOM on venous thromboembolism in cancer patients.Clinical & translational oncology : official publication of the Federation of Spanish Oncology Societies and of the National Cancer Institute of Mexico · 2014Guideline
- Heparin for the prevention of venous thromboembolism in acutely ill medical patients (excluding stroke and myocardial infarction).The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2014Pooled it
- Primary venous thromboembolism prophylaxis in patients with solid tumors: a meta-analysis.Journal of thrombosis and thrombolysis · 2014Pooled it
- Systemic treatments for the prevention of venous thrombo-embolic events in paediatric cancer patients with tunnelled central venous catheters.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2013Pooled it
- Construction and verification of a nomogram to predict the probability of venous thromboembolism in lung cancer patients.Frontiers in molecular biosciences · 2026Article
- A Challenging Decision: Identifying and Managing Hepatic Hydrothorax in the Setting of a Pancreatic Neuroendocrine Tumor.Case reports in gastrointestinal medicine · 2025Article
- Thrombosis risk prediction in lymphoma patients: A multi-institutional, retrospective model development and validation study.American journal of hematology · 2024Article
- A Clinical-Genetic Risk Score for Predicting Cancer-Associated Venous Thromboembolism: A Development and Validation Study Involving Two Independent Prospective Cohorts.Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology · 2023Article
- Prophylactic Anticoagulation in Patients with Cancer: When and How?Current oncology reports · 2023Review
- Cancer-Associated Thrombosis: A New Light on an Old Story.Diseases (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Review
- Using big data to retrospectively validate the COMPASS-CAT risk assessment model: considerations on methodology.Journal of thrombosis and thrombolysis · 2021Article
- Fibrinogen gamma geneHaematologica · 2020Article
- Khorana score and thromboembolic risk in stage II-III colorectal cancer patients: aTherapeutic advances in medical oncology · 2020Article
- Clinical outcomes of comorbid cancer patients with venous thromboembolism: A retrospective, single-center study in Korea.Medicine · 2019Observational
- Safety and efficacy of primary thromboprophylaxis in cancer patients.Clinical & translational oncology : official publication of the Federation of Spanish Oncology Societies and of the National Cancer Institute of Mexico · 2017Review
Corrections and comments
- Updated by
Authors and funding
6 authors at 2 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundVenous thromboembolism (VTE) often complicates the clinical course of cancer disease. The risk is further increased by chemotherapy but the safety and efficacy of primary thromboprophylaxis in cancer patients treated with chemotherapy is uncertain.
objectivesTo assess the efficacy and safety of primary thromboprophylaxis in ambulatory cancer patients receiving chemotherapy. SEARCH
methodsThe Cochrane Peripheral Vascular Diseases Group searched their Specialised Register (last searched 3 May 2011) and CENTRAL (2011, Issue 2). The authors searched clinical trials registries and reference lists of relevant studies. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing unfractionated heparin (UFH), low molecular weight heparin (LMWH), vitamin K antagonists (VKA), direct thrombin inhibitors, direct factor Xa inhibitors or mechanical intervention to no intervention or placebo; or comparing two different anticoagulants. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Data were extracted on methodological quality, patients, interventions and outcomes including symptomatic VTE and major bleeding as the primary effectiveness and safety outcomes, respectively. MAIN
resultsNine RCTs with a total of 3538 patients were considered. None of the RCTs tested UFH, fondaparinux, direct factor Xa inhibitors or mechanical interventions. Overall, the risk of bias was low in most of the studies. LMWH, when compared with inactive control, significantly reduced the incidence of symptomatic VTE (risk ratio (RR) 0.62, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.41 to 0.93) with no evidence of heterogeneity (I(2) = 0%). The number needed to treat to prevent a symptomatic VTE was 60. LMWH was associated with a 60% increase in major bleeding when compared with inactive control, although this was not statistically significant (RR 1.57, 95% CI 0.69 to 3.60; I(2) = 10%). There was a 45% reduction in overall VTE (RR 0.55, 95% CI 0.34 to 0.88; I(2) = 0%) while for symptomatic pulmonary embolism, asymptomatic VTE, minor bleeding and one-year mortality the differences between the LMWH and control groups were not statistically significant. The effect of the vitamin K antagonist warfarin on preventing symptomatic VTE, measured in only one study, was not statistically significant (RR 0.15, 95% CI 0.02 to 1.20). In one RCT of patients with myeloma, LMWH was associated with a 67% reduction in symptomatic VTE (RR 0.33, 95% CI 0.14 to 0.83) compared with warfarin, with no differences in major bleeding. Antithrombin, evaluated in one study on paediatric patients, had no significant effect on VTE nor major bleeding when compared with inactive control. AUTHORS'
conclusionsPrimary thromboprophylaxis with LMWH significantly reduced the incidence of symptomatic VTE in ambulatory cancer patients treated with chemotherapy. However, the lack of power hampers definite conclusions on the effects on major safety outcomes, which mandates additional studies to determine the risk to benefit ratio of LMWH in this setting.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.