SynthesisThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews2014
Anticoagulation for people with cancer and central venous catheters.
Synthesis in The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers, 5 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
18 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 82 citations in OpenAlex.
- American Society of Hematology 2021 guidelines for management of venous thromboembolism: prevention and treatment in patients with cancer.Blood advances · 2021Guideline
- Anticoagulation for people with cancer and central venous catheters.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2018Pooled it
- Parenteral anticoagulation in ambulatory patients with cancer.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2017Pooled it
- Anticoagulants for the prevention and treatment of catheter-related thrombosis in adults and children on parenteral nutrition: a systematic review and critical appraisal.Blood transfusion = Trasfusione del sangue · 2017Pooled it
- Association of Anaesthetists of Great Britain and Ireland: Safe vascular access 2016.Anaesthesia · 2016Guideline
- Is Peripherally Inserted Central Catheter-Related Thrombosis Associated With ABO Blood Group? A Case-Control Pilot Study.Clinical and applied thrombosis/hemostasis : official journal of the International Academy of Clinical and Applied Thrombosis/Hemostasis · 2018Trial
- Upper Extremity Deep Vein Thrombosis: Incidence, Risk Factors, and Effectiveness of Chemoprophylaxis.Southern medical journal · 2024Article
- Primary Thromboprophylaxis for the Prevention of Venous Thromboembolism in Cancer Patients with Central Venous Catheters: A Literature Review.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Review
- Review
- Predictive risk factors of venous thromboembolism (VTE) associated with peripherally inserted central catheters (PICC) in ambulant solid cancer patients: retrospective single Centre cohort study.Thrombosis journal · 2019Review
- A state of the art review on optimal practices to prevent, recognize, and manage complications associated with intravascular devices in the critically ill.Intensive care medicine · 2018Review
- Upper-Extremity Deep Vein Thrombosis in Patients With Breast Cancer With Chest Versus Arm Central Venous Port Catheters.Breast cancer : basic and clinical research · 2018Article
- UK practice in the prevention of central venous catheter-associated thrombosis in adults on home parenteral nutrition.Frontline gastroenterology · 2017Article
- The risk of venous thromboembolism associated with peripherally inserted central catheters in ambulant cancer patients.Thrombosis journal · 2017Article
- Port catheter versus peripherally inserted central catheter for postoperative chemotherapy in early breast cancer: a retrospective analysis of 448 patients.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2016Article
- New Insights in the Pathogenesis of Autoimmune Hemolytic Anemia.Transfusion medicine and hemotherapy : offizielles Organ der Deutschen Gesellschaft fur Transfusionsmedizin und Immunhamatologie · 2015Review
- Venous Access Devices: Clinical Rounds.Asia-Pacific journal of oncology nursingReview
- Prophylaxis and treatment of venous thromboembolism in patients with cancer: the Saudi clinical practice guideline.Annals of Saudi medicineArticle
Corrections and comments
- Updated by
- Update of
Authors and funding
8 authors at 3 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundCentral venous catheter (CVC) placement increases the risk of thrombosis in people with cancer. Thrombosis often necessitates the removal of the CVC, resulting in treatment delays and thrombosis-related morbidity and mortality.
objectivesTo evaluate the relative efficacy and safety of anticoagulation for thromboprophylaxis in people with cancer with a CVC. SEARCH
methodsWe searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL, Issue 12, 2012), MEDLINE Ovid (January 1966 to February 2013), and EMBASE Ovid (1980 to February 2013). We handsearched conference proceedings, checked references of included studies, used the 'related citations' feature within PubMed, and searched clinicaltrials.gov for ongoing studies. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing the effects of any dose of unfractionated heparin (UFH), low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH), vitamin K antagonists (VKA), or fondaparinux with no intervention or placebo or comparing the effects of two different anticoagulants in people with cancer and a CVC. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Teams of two review authors independently used a standardized form to extract data in duplicate. They resolved any disagreements by discussion. They extracted data on risk of bias, participants, interventions, and outcomes. Outcomes of interest included mortality, symptomatic deep venous thrombosis (DVT), asymptomatic DVT, major bleeding, minor bleeding, infection, and thrombocytopenia. Where possible, we conducted meta-analyses using the random-effects model. MAIN
resultsOf 9559 identified citations, we included 12 RCTs (17 publications) reporting follow-up data on 2823 participants. Two of the RCTs included children. Of the 10 RCTs including 2564 adults, one compared prophylactic dose heparin with low-dose VKA. Three RCTs compared VKA with no VKA and four RCTs compared heparin with no heparin. Two additional trials had three separate arms comparing heparin, VKA, and no intervention. Prophylactic-dose heparin, compared with no heparin, was associated with a statistically significant reduction in symptomatic DVT (risk ratio (RR) 0.48; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.27 to 0.86; moderate-quality evidence). However, results did not confirm or exclude a beneficial or detrimental effect of heparin on mortality (RR 0.82; 95% CI 0.53 to 1.26; moderate-quality evidence), major bleeding (RR 0.49; 95% CI 0.03 to 7.84; low-quality evidence), infection (RR 1.00; 95% CI 0.54 to 1.85; moderate-quality evidence); thrombocytopenia (RR 1.03; 95% CI 0.80 to 1.33; moderate-quality evidence), or minor bleeding (RR 1.35; 95% CI: 0.62 to 2.92). Low-dose VKAs, compared with no VKAs, were associated with a statistically significant reduction in asymptomatic DVT (RR 0.43; 95% CI 0.30 to 0.62). Results did not confirm or exclude a beneficial or detrimental effect of VKAs on mortality (RR 1.04; 95% CI 0.89 to 1.22; low-quality evidence), symptomatic DVT (RR 0.51; 95% CI 0.21 to 1.22; low-quality evidence), major bleeding (RR 7.60; 95% CI 0.94 to 61.49; very-low-quality evidence), or minor bleeding (RR 3.14; 95% CI 0.14 to 71.51). The use of heparin, compared with VKA was associated with a statistically significant increase in thrombocytopenia (RR 3.73; 95% CI 2.26 to 6.16; low-quality evidence) and asymptomatic DVT (RR 1.74; 95% CI 1.20 to 2.52). However, results did not show or exclude a beneficial or detrimental effect on any of the other outcomes of interest (very-low-quality evidence). AUTHORS'
conclusionsCompared with no anticoagulation, we found a statistically significant reduction of symptomatic DVT with heparin and asymptomatic DVT with VKA. Heparin was associated with a higher risk of thrombocytopenia and asymptomatic DVT when compared with VKA. However, the findings did not rule out other clinically important benefits and harms. People with cancer with CVCs considering anticoagulation should balance the possible benefit of reduced thromboembolic complications with the possible harms and burden of anticoagulants.
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.