ReviewDrugs2016
Prevention and Treatment of Venous Thromboembolism in Patients with Cancer: Focus on Drug Therapy.
Review in Drugs, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Prediction of bleeding in patients being considered for venous thromboembolism prophylaxis.Journal of vascular surgery. Venous and lymphatic disorders · 2023Article
- Comparison of the Effects of Fucoidans on the Cell Viability of Tumor and Non-Tumor Cell Lines.Marine drugs · 2019Article
- Thrombodynamics-A new global hemostasis assay for heparin monitoring in patients under the anticoagulant treatment.PloS one · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is a frequent complication in patients with cancer and is associated with significant morbidity and mortality. The use of anticoagulants for the prevention and treatment of VTE in this population is challenging given the high risk of both recurrent VTE and bleeding complications. Thromboprophylaxis with subcutaneous low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) is recommended in cancer patients hospitalized for an acute medical illness and in those undergoing major surgery. In ambulatory cancer patients with or without central venous catheters, routine thromboprophylaxis is not recommended because of the relatively low benefit-to-risk ratio. To identify cancer outpatients at very high risk of VTE who may benefit from thromboprophylaxis, VTE risk stratification tools based on tumour type, clinical parameters, or coagulation biomarkers have been proposed, but their clinical utility needs validation. The mainstay of treatment for cancer-associated VTE is LMWH for at least 6 months or longer in case of active disease. The same initial and long-term treatment for incidental VTE as for symptomatic VTE can be suggested while awaiting additional studies in this area.
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.