Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37968882›Full record

SynthesisActa obstetricia et gynecologica Scandinavica2024

Risk of venous thromboembolism in pregnant patients with active malignancy: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Sara Folkins, Ashley Miller, Christopher M Nash

Open access · diamondAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Acta obstetricia et gynecologica Scandinavica, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
3.3field-weighted citation impact, top 7% 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

9 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 12 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Cancer in pregnancy: FIGO Best practice advice and narrative review.International journal of gynaecology and obstetrics: the official organ of the International Federation of Gynaecology and Obstetrics · 2025
    Review
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Venous Thromboembolism in Women with Breast and Gynaecological Cancers: What Do We Know and What Should We Do?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

3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Sara FolkinsDalhousie University Medical School, Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada.
Ashley MillerDivision of General Internal Medicine, Department of Medicine, Dalhousie University, Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada.
Christopher M NashDivision of Maternal-Fetal Medicine, Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Dalhousie University, Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada.ORCID 0000-0001-5856-6662
Dalhousie University · CA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionCancer currently occurs in about 1 in 1000 pregnancies. Both active malignancy and pregnancy are individual risk factors for venous thromboembolism (VTE). The purpose of this systematic review/meta-analysis was to evaluate the rate of VTE in pregnant patients with active malignancy compared with pregnant patients without malignancy. MATERIAL AND

methodsEmbase, Medline/PubMed, Cochrane Database, and clinicaltrial.gov were search by a trained librarian from inception until June 2021, and limited to English and French language human studies using keywords related to pregnancy, neoplasm, and thrombosis. This study was prospectively registered with PROSPERO (CRD42021245886). Title, abstract, and full-text review was performed using the Covidence data management system. Two authors reviewed the studies independently. Of the 3821 articles screened, seven cohort studies were included that reported VTE rate in patients with active malignancy in pregnancy.

resultsA total of 5928 individuals had active malignancy and pregnancy. Active malignancy in pregnancy significantly increased the odds of a VTE (odds ratio [OR] 6.8, 95% confidence interval [CI] 3.8-12.1). Specifically, patients with thyroid (OR 2.7, 95% CI 1.3-6.3), cervix (OR 6.6, 95% CI 2.4-18.0), or other gynecological (OR 10.6, 95% CI 4.4-25.8) cancers; Hodgkin's lymphoma (OR 8.7, 95% CI 3.3-23.4); or acute leukemia (OR 17.1, 95% CI 10.9-26.8) all had increased odds, whereas those with brain cancer (OR 6.1, 95% CI 0.4-98.2), breast cancer (OR 2.5, 95% CI 0.3-17.4), malignant melanoma (OR 5.5, 95% CI 0.3-88.1), or non-Hodgkin's lymphoma (OR 3.2, 95% CI 0.8-12.9) malignancies did not have statistically significant increased odds for VTE. No studies reported whether prophylactic anticoagulation was used during pregnancy in this population; nor did they report timing in pregnancy of the VTE. The absolute risk for VTE in those with active malignancy was 0.9% compared with 0.2% in those without active malignancy in pregnancy.

conclusionsPregnancy with active malignancy confers a significant increased risk for VTE compared with pregnancy alone. Given this finding, prophylactic anticoagulation during pregnancy and postpartum could be considered in this patient population. Data are underpowered to make firm recommendations per cancer type.

Indexed as

Pregnancy Complications, NeoplasticVenous ThromboembolismFemaleHumansNeoplasmsPregnancyPregnancy Complications, CardiovascularRisk Factorscancermalignancypregnancysystematic reviewthromboprophylaxisvenous thromboembolism

Identifiers

PMID37968882
PMCPMC10993334
OpenAlexW4388733017

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.