ArticleThoracic cancer2022
Conditional catheter-related thrombosis free probability and risk-adapted choices of catheter for lung cancer.
Article in Thoracic cancer, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Conditional catheter-related thrombosis free probability and risk-adapted choices of catheter for lung cancer.Thoracic cancer · 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
9 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundCurrent predictive tools assess catheter-related thrombosis (CRT) in patients with lung cancer in a static manner at a single time point of catheterization. The subsequent hazard changes over time are unknown. The conditional catheter-related thrombosis-free probability (CCFP) can provide dynamic information on continual CRT-free expectations. This study aimed to assess the CCFP and hazard rates based on risk categories and various venous access devices (VADs).
methodsThis retrospective study reviewed 939 patients with lung cancer with peripherally inserted central venous catheters (PICCs) or central venous catheters (CVCs) identified at the National Clinical Research Center for Cancer between January 1, 2015 and December 31, 2018. The incidence of CRT has also been reported. Patients were stratified into low- and high-risk groups according to multivariate Cox regression analyses. CCFP is defined as the CRT-free probability given that patients have no CRT for a definite time.
resultsA total of 507 patients with PICCs and 432 patients with CVCs were included in this study. The 3-month CCFP increased from 74.2% at catheter insertion to 93.6% at 3 months. The hazards of CRT in the first month were highest (16.4%) and slightly thereafter. The high-risk group initially had a higher (21.4%) but significantly decreased CRT hazard after 2 months (8.3%), whereas the low-risk group maintained a comparable lower risk hazard of less than 5% after 1 month. In the overall cohort, patients with CVCs had lower CRT probability than those with PICCs (HR, 1.76; 95% CI: 1.28-2.41; p < 0.01). Further analysis demonstrated that compared with PICCs, CVCs provided a CRT-free benefit in low-risk patients (p = 0.02) but not in high-risk patients (p = 0.06).
conclusionsCCFP increased, and the hazards of CRT decreased over time in a risk-dependent manner in patients with lung cancer. These valuable dynamic data may help optimize risk-adjusted choices of VADs and risk-adjusted prophylactic anticoagulation strategies for patients.
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.