SynthesisThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews2020
Primary prophylaxis for venous thromboembolism in ambulatory cancer patients receiving chemotherapy.
Synthesis in The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 29 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
29 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- SEOM clinical guidelines on venous thromboembolism (VTE) and cancer (2023).Clinical & translational oncology : official publication of the Federation of Spanish Oncology Societies and of the National Cancer Institute of Mexico · 2024Guideline
- The Role of Anticoagulation on Venous Thromboembolism Primary Prophylaxis in Low- to Intermediate-Risk Ambulatory Cancer Patients: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.Asian Pacific journal of cancer prevention : APJCP · 2024Pooled it
- Venous Thromboembolism Prophylaxis in Inflammatory Bowel Disease Inpatients: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Acta haematologica · 2024Pooled it
- Oral anticoagulation in people with cancer who have no therapeutic or prophylactic indication for anticoagulation.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2021Pooled it
- Antithrombotic therapy for ambulatory patients with multiple myeloma receiving immunomodulatory agents.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2021Pooled it
- Prevention of Venous Thromboembolism in Patients With Pancreatic Cancer: A Nationwide Survey.Cancer medicine · 2026Article
- Clinically Relevant Bleeding in Individuals With Cancer: Insights From a Nationwide Cohort Study.American journal of hematology · 2026Article
- Implementation failure: thromboprophylaxis in ambulatory patients with cancer.Hematology. American Society of Hematology. Education Program · 2025Review
- Best evidence summary on anticoagulant management in patients with cancer-associated venous thromboembolism.Asia-Pacific journal of oncology nursing · 2025Review
- Advancing thromboprophylaxis in ambulatory high-risk cancer patients: addressing challenges and new insights from the TARGET-TP trial.Annals of medicine and surgery (2012) · 2025Article
- Incidence, Risk Factors, and Modified Risk Assessment Model of Venous Thromboembolism in Non-Hodgkin Lymphoma Patients.Cancer medicine · 2024Article
- Time to address bleeding and clotting in cancer.Blood · 2024Article
- Article
- [Primary thromboembolism prophylaxis in outpatient cancer patients receiving chemotherapy].Urologie (Heidelberg, Germany) · 2024Article
- Cost-effectiveness analysis of direct oral anticoagulants versus low-molecular-weight heparin and no thromboprophylaxis in primary prevention of cancer-associated venous thromboembolism in China.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2024Article
- Epidemiology, biology, and management of venous thromboembolism in gliomas: An interdisciplinary review.Neuro-oncology · 2023Article
- Acute Oncologic Complications: Clinical-Therapeutic Management in Critical Care and Emergency Departments.Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.) · 2023Review
- Anticoagulation for the Prevention of Arterial Thrombosis in Ambulatory Cancer Patients: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.JACC. CardioOncology · 2023Article
- Derivation and Validation of a Clinical Risk Assessment Model for Cancer-Associated Thrombosis in Two Unique US Health Care Systems.Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology · 2023Article
- Assessing the need for venous thromboembolism prophylaxis at the time of neoadjuvant chemotherapy for ovarian cancer: A literature review.Gynecologic oncology · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
- Update of
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundVenous thromboembolism (VTE) often complicates the clinical course of cancer. The risk is further increased by chemotherapy, but the trade-off between safety and efficacy of primary thromboprophylaxis in cancer patients treated with chemotherapy is uncertain. This is the third update of a review first published in February 2012.
objectivesTo assess the efficacy and safety of primary thromboprophylaxis for VTE in ambulatory cancer patients receiving chemotherapy compared with placebo or no thromboprophylaxis, or an active control intervention. SEARCH
methodsFor this update, the Cochrane Vascular Information Specialist searched the Cochrane Vascular, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase and CINAHL databases and World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform and ClinicalTrials.gov trials registers to 3 August 2020. We also searched the reference lists of identified studies and contacted content experts and trialists for relevant references. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials comparing any oral or parenteral anticoagulant or mechanical intervention to no thromboprophylaxis or placebo, or comparing two different anticoagulants. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We extracted data on risk of bias, participant characteristics, interventions, and outcomes including symptomatic VTE and major bleeding as the primary effectiveness and safety outcomes, respectively. We applied GRADE to assess the certainty of evidence. MAIN
resultsWe identified six additional randomised controlled trials (3326 participants) for this update, bringing the included study total to 32 (15,678 participants), all evaluating pharmacological interventions and performed mainly in people with locally advanced or metastatic cancer. The certainty of the evidence ranged from high to very low across the different outcomes and comparisons. The main limiting factors were imprecision and risk of bias. Thromboprophylaxis with direct oral anticoagulants (direct factor Xa inhibitors apixaban and rivaroxaban) may decrease the incidence of symptomatic VTE (risk ratio (RR) 0.43, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.18 to 1.06; 3 studies, 1526 participants; low-certainty evidence); and probably increases the risk of major bleeding compared with placebo (RR 1.74, 95% CI 0.82 to 3.68; 3 studies, 1494 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). When compared with no thromboprophylaxis, low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) reduced the incidence of symptomatic VTE (RR 0.62, 95% CI 0.46 to 0.83; 11 studies, 3931 participants; high-certainty evidence); and probably increased the risk of major bleeding events (RR 1.63, 95% CI 1.12 to 2.35; 15 studies, 7282 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). In participants with multiple myeloma, LMWH resulted in lower symptomatic VTE compared with the vitamin K antagonist warfarin (RR 0.33, 95% CI 0.14 to 0.83; 1 study, 439 participants; high-certainty evidence), while LMWH probably lowers symptomatic VTE more than aspirin (RR 0.51, 95% CI 0.22 to 1.17; 2 studies, 781 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). Major bleeding was observed in none of the participants with multiple myeloma treated with LMWH or warfarin and in less than 1% of those treated with aspirin. Only one study evaluated unfractionated heparin against no thromboprophylaxis, but did not report on VTE or major bleeding. When compared with placebo or no thromboprophylaxis, warfarin may importantly reduce symptomatic VTE (RR 0.15, 95% CI 0.02 to 1.20; 1 study, 311 participants; low-certainty evidence) and may result in a large increase in major bleeding (RR 3.82, 95% CI 0.97 to 15.04; 4 studies, 994 participants; low-certainty evidence). One study evaluated antithrombin versus no antithrombin in children. This study did not report on symptomatic VTE but did report any VTE (symptomatic and incidental VTE). The effect of antithrombin on any VTE and major bleeding is uncertain (any VTE: RR 0.84, 95% CI 0.41 to 1.73; major bleeding: RR 0.78, 95% CI 0.03 to 18.57; 1 study, 85 participants; very low-certainty evidence). AUTHORS'
conclusionsIn ambulatory cancer patients, primary thromboprophylaxis with direct factor Xa inhibitors may reduce the incidence of symptomatic VTE (low-certainty evidence) and probably increases the risk of major bleeding (moderate-certainty evidence) when compared with placebo. LMWH decreases the incidence of symptomatic VTE (high-certainty evidence), but increases the risk of major bleeding (moderate-certainty evidence) when compared with placebo or no thromboprophylaxis. Evidence for the use of thromboprophylaxis with anticoagulants other than direct factor Xa inhibitors and LMWH is limited. More studies are warranted to evaluate the efficacy and safety of primary prophylaxis in specific types of chemotherapeutic agents and types of cancer, such as gastrointestinal or genitourinary 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.