ArticleMedical oncology (Northwood, London, England)2018
Evaluation of risk factors and assessment models for predicting venous thromboembolism in lung cancer patients.
Article in Medical oncology (Northwood, London, England), 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 31 papers, 4 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
31 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 53 citations in OpenAlex.
- Accuracy of the COMPASS-CAT thrombosis risk assessment scale in predicting venous thromboembolism in cancer patients: a meta-analysis.Journal of thrombosis and thrombolysis · 2024Pooled it
- A systematic review of risk prediction model of venous thromboembolism for patients with lung cancer.Thoracic cancer · 2024Pooled it
- Do lung cancer patients require routine anticoagulation treatment? A meta-analysis.The Journal of international medical research · 2020Pooled it
- The Khorana score for prediction of venous thromboembolism in cancer patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Haematologica · 2019Pooled it
- Cancer-Associated Thrombosis in Patients Treated with Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors.International journal of molecular sciences · 2026Review
- Targeted therapies in non-small cell lung cancer and their cardiovascular impact: mechanisms, clinical profiles, and strategies of management.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2026Review
- Construction and verification of a nomogram to predict the probability of venous thromboembolism in lung cancer patients.Frontiers in molecular biosciences · 2026Article
- Thrombosis and cancer what do the recommandations say.Cancer chemotherapy and pharmacology · 2025Review
- Article
- External Validation of Risk Scores for Predicting Venous Thromboembolism in Ambulatory Patients with Lung Cancer.Cancers · 2024Article
- The Alfalfa-inpatient-CAT assessment model: a thrombotic risk assessment model for inpatient cancer patients.BMC cancer · 2024Article
- Review
- Review
- A nomogram for predicting the risk of venous thromboembolism in patients with solid cancers.Journal of thrombosis and thrombolysis · 2023Article
- A New Risk Prediction Model for Venous Thromboembolism and Death in Ambulatory Lung Cancer Patients.Cancers · 2023Article
- Article
- Management of venous thromboembolism in patients with lung cancer: a state-of-the-art review.BMJ open respiratory research · 2023Review
- Stratification of Risk Factors of Lung Cancer-Associated Venous Thromboembolism and Determining the Critical Point for Preemptive Intervention: A Systematic Review With Meta-analysis.Clinical Medicine Insights. Oncology · 2023Review
- Mitigating acute chemotherapy-associated adverse events in patients with cancer.Nature reviews. Clinical oncology · 2022Review
- Arteriovenous thrombotic events in a patient with advanced lung cancer following bevacizumab plus chemotherapy: A case report.World journal of clinical cases · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The aim of the study was to investigate the prognostic significance of selected risk assessment models (RAMs) for predicting venous thromboembolism (VTE) events in patients undergoing outpatient chemotherapy for lung cancer. We evaluated the following VTE-risk assessment tools: Khorana risk score (KRS), PROTECHT score, CONKO score and COMPASS-cancer-associated thrombosis score (COMPASS-CAT). Retrospective analyses were performed on 118 patients with lung cancer, 20 of whom developed VTE with a median of 2.5 months from diagnosis. Patients receiving gemcitabine-based regimen (25%), patients with a history of atrial fibrillation (AF) and patients with chronic kidney disease developed VTE more often than other patients. In the multivariate analysis, high COMPASS-CAT score (OR 8.73; 95% CI 1.01-75.22, P = 0.049), gemcitabine chemotherapy (OR 3.37; 95% CI 1.09-10.39, P = 0.035) and AF (OR 7.19; 95% CI 1.89-27.33, P = 0.004) were all significantly associated with VTE development. VTE occurred in; 13% (n = 2) of the KRS high-risk group, 17.7% (n = 11) of the PROTECHT high-risk group, 15% (n = 4) of the CONKO high-risk group and 23.8% (n = 20) of the COMPASS-CAT high-risk group (n = 84). Only the COMPASS-CAT score was able to identify 100% of patients who developed VTE, and best discriminated between patients with high and low risk of VTE development (C statistic 0.89). The ROC analysis indicated a cutoff value of 11 points (95% CI 0.821-0.962) for COMPASS-CAT for VTE development in patients with lung cancer. In conclusion, in our study of all the VTE-RAMs analyzed, the COMPASS-CAT model was the most accurate predictor of VTE development in patients with lung cancer.
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.