Trial reportThe oncologist2020
D-Dimer Enhances Risk-Targeted Thromboprophylaxis in Ambulatory Patients with Cancer.
Trial report in The oncologist, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 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
15 citing papers in PubMed, 26 citations in OpenAlex.
- Von Willebrand, factor VIII, and D-dimer levels as predictors of risk and clinical outcomes in acute myeloid leukemia.Clinical and experimental medicine · 2026Article
- Facts and Misfacts on D-Dimer Testing. Consensus Guidance From the Italian Society on Thrombosis and Hemostasis (SISET).American journal of hematology · 2026Review
- Implementation failure: thromboprophylaxis in ambulatory patients with cancer.Hematology. American Society of Hematology. Education Program · 2025Review
- Development, validation, and clinical utility of risk prediction models for cancer-associated venous thromboembolism: A retrospective and prospective cohort study.Asia-Pacific journal of oncology nursing · 2025Article
- Predictive Modeling of Heterogeneous Treatment Effects in RCTs: A Scoping Review.JAMA network open · 2025Article
- Anticoagulation Failure in Stroke: Causes, Risk Factors, and Treatment.Journal of stroke · 2025Review
- Potential clinical impact of predictive modeling of heterogeneous treatment effects: scoping review of the impact of the PATH Statement.medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences · 2025Article
- The Vienna CATScore for predicting cancer-associated venous thromboembolism: an external validation across multiple time points.ESMO open · 2025Article
- Risk assessment and prevention of cancer-associated venous thromboembolism in ambulatory patients with solid malignancies.Research and practice in thrombosis and haemostasis · 2025Article
- Association of D-dimer level with thrombotic events, bleeding, and mortality in Japanese patients with solid tumors: a Cancer-VTE Registry subanalysis.International journal of clinical oncology · 2024Article
- How we manage a high D-dimer.Haematologica · 2024Review
- Venous Thromboembolism and Primary Thromboprophylaxis in Perioperative Pancreatic Cancer Care.Cancers · 2023Review
- The Khorana score and venous and arterial thrombosis in patients with cancer treated with immune checkpoint inhibitors: A Danish cohort study.Journal of thrombosis and haemostasis : JTH · 2022Article
- Validation of the Khorana score for predicting venous thromboembolism in 40 218 patients with cancer initiating chemotherapy.Blood advances · 2022Article
- Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThromboprophylaxis for ambulatory patients with cancer is effective, although uncertainties remain on who should be targeted. Using D-dimer values from individuals enrolled to the AVERT trial, we sought to identify and validate a more efficient venous thromboembolism (VTE) risk threshold for thromboprophylaxis. MATERIALS AND
methodsThe AVERT trial compared thromboprophylaxis with apixaban with placebo among patients with cancer with a Khorana Risk Score ≥2. The D-dimer measured at randomization was used to calculate an individualized 6-month VTE risk using the validated CATScore. A modified intention-to-treat analysis was used to assess efficacy (VTE) and safety (major and overall bleeding) in the (a) complete cohort and (b) ≥8% and < 8% 6-month VTE risk thresholds.
resultsFive hundred seventy-four patients were randomized in the AVERT trial; 466 (81%) with baseline D-dimer were included in the study. Two hundred thirty-seven subjects received apixaban; 229 received placebo. In the complete cohort, there were 13 (5.5%) VTE events in the apixaban arm compared with 26 (11.4%) events in the placebo arm (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] 0.49 [0.25-0.95], p < .05). Number needed to treat (NNT) to prevent one VTE = 17. Eighty-two (35%) and 72 (31%) patients in the apixaban and placebo arms, respectively, had a 6-month VTE risk ≥8%. In this subgroup, 7 (8.4%) VTE events occurred with apixaban and 19 (26.3%) events with placebo (aHR 0.33 [0.14-0.81], p < .05), NNT = 6. Individuals with a VTE risk <8% derived no benefit from apixaban thromboprophylaxis (aHR 0.89 [0.30-2.65), p = .84). Increased rates of overall bleeding were observed with apixaban in both the complete (aHR 2.11 [1.09-4.09], p < .05) and ≥ 8% predicted risk cohorts (aHR 2.87 [0.91-9.13], p = .07).
conclusionA 6-month VTE risk threshold of ≥8% increases the efficiency of risk-targeted thromboprophylaxis in ambulatory patients with cancer. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: Ambulatory patients with cancer receiving chemotherapy have an increased risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE). A Khorana Risk Score (KRS) ≥2 is currently the suggested threshold for thromboprophylaxis. Using baseline D-dimer values from individuals enrolled to the AVERT trial, this retrospective validation study identifies a 6-month VTE risk of ≥8% as a more efficient threshold for thromboprophylaxis. At this threshold, the number needed to treat to prevent one VTE is 6, compared with 17 when using a KRS ≥2. Conversely, individuals with a predicted risk of <8% derive no clinical benefit from thromboprophylaxis. Future prospective studies should validate this threshold for outpatient thromboprophylaxis.
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.