Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37671139›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in cardiovascular medicine2023

Assessment of bleeding risk in cancer patients treated with anticoagulants for venous thromboembolic events.

Géraldine Poénou, Emmanuel Tolédano, Hélène Helfer, Ludovic Plaisance, Florent Happe, Edouard Versini, Nevine Diab, Sadji Djennaoui, Isabelle Mahé

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed
3.9field-weighted citation impact, top 6% 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

12 citing papers in PubMed, 14 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Emerging Insights of Management of Venous Thromboembolism in Patients With Cancer.Clinical and applied thrombosis/hemostasis : official journal of the International Academy of Clinical and Applied Thrombosis/Hemostasis
    Review
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

9 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Géraldine PoénouMédecine Interne, Hôpital Louis Mourier, Assistance Publique Hôpitaux de Paris, Colombes, France.
Emmanuel TolédanoMédecine Interne, Hôpital Louis Mourier, Assistance Publique Hôpitaux de Paris, Colombes, France.
Hélène HelferMédecine Interne, Hôpital Louis Mourier, Assistance Publique Hôpitaux de Paris, Colombes, France.
Ludovic PlaisanceMédecine Interne, Hôpital Louis Mourier, Assistance Publique Hôpitaux de Paris, Colombes, France.
Florent HappeMédecine Interne, Hôpital Louis Mourier, Assistance Publique Hôpitaux de Paris, Colombes, France.
Edouard VersiniMédecine Interne, Hôpital Louis Mourier, Assistance Publique Hôpitaux de Paris, Colombes, France.
Nevine DiabMédecine Interne, Hôpital Louis Mourier, Assistance Publique Hôpitaux de Paris, Colombes, France.
Sadji DjennaouiMédecine Interne, Hôpital Louis Mourier, Assistance Publique Hôpitaux de Paris, Colombes, France.
Isabelle MahéMédecine Interne, Hôpital Louis Mourier, Assistance Publique Hôpitaux de Paris, Colombes, France.
Hôpital Louis-Mourier · FRAssistance Publique – Hôpitaux de Paris · FRInserm · FR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: Anticoagulant is the cornerstone of the management of VTE at the cost of a non-negligible risk of bleeding. Reliable and validated clinical tools to predict thromboembolic and hemorrhagic events are crucial for individualized decision-making for the type and duration of anticoagulant treatment. We evaluate the available risk models in real life cancer patients with VTE. The objectives of the study were to describe the bleeding of cancer patients with VTE and to evaluate the performance of the different bleeding models to predict the risk of bleeding during a 6-month follow-up. Materials and Methods: VTE-diagnosed patient's demographic and clinical characteristics, treatment regimens and outcomes for up to 6 months were collected. The primary endpoint was the occurrence of a major bleeding (MB) or a clinically relevant non major bleeding (CRNMB) event, categorized according to the ISTH criteria. Results: During the 6-months follow-up period, 26 out of 110 included patients (26.7%) experienced a bleeding event, with 3 recurrences of bleeding. Out of the 29 bleeding events, 19 events were CRNMB and 10 MB. One patient died because of a MB. Bleeding occurred in 27 % of the patients treated with DOACs and 22% of the patients treated with LMWH. Most of the bleedings were gastrointestinal (9 events, 31%); 26.9% of the bleedings occurred in patient with colorectal cancer and 19.6% in patients with lung cancer. In our cohort, none of the 10 RAMs used in our study were able to distinguish cancer patients with a low risk of bleeding, from all bleeding or non-bleeding patients. The Nieto et al. RAM had the best overall performance (C-statistic = 0.730, 95% CI (0.619-0.840)). However, it classified 1 out of 5 patients with major bleeding in the low risk of bleeding group. The rest of the RAMs showed a suboptimal result, with a range of C-statistic between 0.489, 95%CI (0.360-0.617)) and 0.532, 95%CI (0.406-0.658)). Conclusions: The management of CAT patients is challenging due to a higher risk of both recurrent VTE and bleeding events, as compared with non-cancer patients with VTE. None of the existing RAMs was able to consistently identify patients with risk of anticoagulant associated bleeding events.

Indexed as

anticoagulantbleedingcancerrisk assessment model (RAM)venous thromboembolism

Identifiers

PMID37671139
PMCPMC10475592
OpenAlexW4386031543

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.