ArticleFrontiers in cardiovascular medicine2023
Assessment of bleeding risk in cancer patients treated with anticoagulants for venous thromboembolic events.
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.
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
12 citing papers in PubMed, 14 citations in OpenAlex.
- Tailored management of a melanoma patient with bleeding brain metastases and deep vein thrombosis with thrombectomy.CNS oncology · 2026Article
- Development and validation of a nomogram for predicting venous thromboembolism risk in colorectal cancer patients undergoing postoperative chemotherapy.Medical oncology (Northwood, London, England) · 2026Article
- Revisiting bleeding risk in cancer-associated thrombosis: Beyond the asian paradox.Journal of thrombosis and thrombolysis · 2026Article
- Antithrombotic Therapy After PCI in High-Risk Cardiovascular Patients: Navigating Complexity Beyond Guidelines.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Review
- Bleeding events in Asian patients with cancer-associated thrombosis: a 10-year single-centre experience.Journal of thrombosis and thrombolysis · 2026Article
- Anti-thrombotic therapy in patients with cancer at the end of life: A cohort study using population-linked routinely collected data.British journal of haematology · 2025Article
- Tumor Characteristics and Clinical Features of the Patient as Prognostic Factors in PDAC.Cancers · 2025Review
- Radiotherapy-the not-so-insignificant contributor to cancer-associated venous thrombosis.Research and practice in thrombosis and haemostasis · 2025Review
- Article
- Validating Khorana Risk Score in gastric cancer patients on immune checkpoint inhibitors and chemotherapy.Immunotherapy · 2025Article
- Growth Differentiation Factor-15 Predicts Major Bleeding in Cancer Patients: Results From the Vienna CAT-BLED Study.JACC. CardioOncology · 2025Article
- 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/HemostasisReview
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 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
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
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.