Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37133703›Full record

ArticleJournal of thrombosis and thrombolysis2023

Comparison of three risk assessment models for thromboembolism in multiple myeloma patients receiving immunomodulators: a Brazilian historical cohort.

Iwyson Henrique Fernandes da Costa, Cristiane Aparecida Menezes de Pádua, Paula Lana de Miranda Drummond, Lívia Pena Silveira, Jéssica Soares Malta, Roberta Márcia Marques Dos Santos, Adriano Max Moreira Reis

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of thrombosis and thrombolysis, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.3field-weighted citation impact, top 11% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 8 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Iwyson Henrique Fernandes da CostaPrograma de Pós-Graduação em Medicamentos e Assistência Farmacêutica, Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais, Belo Horizonte, Minas Gerais, Brazil. iwyson@gmail.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8629-334X
Cristiane Aparecida Menezes de PáduaPrograma de Pós-Graduação em Medicamentos e Assistência Farmacêutica, Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais, Belo Horizonte, Minas Gerais, Brazil.
Paula Lana de Miranda DrummondPrograma de Pós-Graduação em Medicamentos e Assistência Farmacêutica, Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais, Belo Horizonte, Minas Gerais, Brazil.
Lívia Pena SilveiraHospital das Clínicas, Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais, Belo Horizonte, Minas Gerais, Brazil.
Jéssica Soares MaltaFaculdade de Farmácia, Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais, Belo Horizonte, Minas Gerais, Brazil.
Roberta Márcia Marques Dos SantosFundação Ezequiel Dias, Belo Horizonte, Minas Gerais, Brazil.
Adriano Max Moreira ReisPrograma de Pós-Graduação em Medicamentos e Assistência Farmacêutica, Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais, Belo Horizonte, Minas Gerais, Brazil.
Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais · BREzequiel Dias Foundation · BRHospital das Clínicas da Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais · BR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is among the complications of Multiple Myeloma (MM) and may occur in up to 10% of this patient population. However, medications used in MM therapy such as immunomodulators (IMID) may raise these rates. Thus, risk prediction models have been developed to quantify the risk of VTE in MM patients. The aim of this study is to compare the performance of three risk assessment models for VTE in newly diagnosed MM (NDMM) patients using immunomodulatory agents. A historical cohort study during a 10-year period in a Brazilian metropolis with NDMM treated with IMID. Data were collected from patient's medical charts for the period of one year to calculate the scores using IMPEDE VTE, SAVED, and International Myeloma Working Group (IMWG) guidelines. The area under the curve (AUC) of the Receiver Operating Characteristic curve analysis was calculated to assess the discriminative power of three risk assessment models. We included 131 patients (9 in the VTE group versus 122 in the non VTE group). According to IMPEDE, 19.1, 62.6, and 18.3% of patients were considered low, intermediate, and high risk, respectively. SAVED classified 32.1% as high risk and 64.9% had ≥2 risk factors based on IMWG guidelines. The AUC of the IMPEDE VTE score was 0.80 (95% CI 0.66-0.95, p = 0.002), of the SAVED score was 0.69 (95% CI 0.49-0.89, p = 0.057), and of the IMWG risk score was 0.68 (95% CI 0.48-0.88, p = 0.075). IMPEDE VTE was the most accurate in predicting the development of VTE in Brazilian patients on IMID therapy. The SAVED score and the IMWG guidelines did not show discriminative ability in predicting VTE based on the population involved in this study.

Indexed as

Multiple MyelomaVenous ThromboembolismAnticoagulantsBrazilCohort StudiesHumansImmunologic FactorsRetrospective StudiesRisk AssessmentRisk FactorsAnticoagulantsImmunologic FactorsMultiple myelomaRisk assessment modelsVenous thromboembolism

Identifiers

PMID37133703
OpenAlexW4367833847

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.