ArticleCancer medicine2024
Simple, Effective and Validated. VTE CASE Risk Assessment Score for Venous Thromboembolism in Metastatic Germ Cell Tumour Patients Before First-Line Chemotherapy.
Article in Cancer medicine, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundVenous thromboembolism (VTE) may jeopardise excellent treatment results of germ cell tumours (GCT). We previously constructed a VTE risk score for GCT patients qualified for first-line chemotherapy (CTH), including vein compression, clinical stage (CS) and haemoglobin concentration.
aimValidating our score in a separate cohort and establishing the cut-off point for the score. Re-assessing the numerical score in the training cohort. MATERIALS AND
methodsWe retrospectively analysed a new cohort of GCT patients staged IS-IIIC. Area under the curve of receiver-operating characteristic (AUC-ROC) was calculated for the developed score, Khorana Risk Score (KRS) and Padua Prediction Score (PPS). AUC-ROC of the integer score was calculated for the training cohort. Cut-off point was established by Youden's and Liu's indices.
resultsAmong 336 eligible patients in the validation cohort, VTE occurred in 41 (12.2%). AUC-ROC for our score, KRS and PPS were 0.818 (95% confidence interval (CI): 0.746-0.891), 0.608 (0.529-0.688) and 0.634 (0.547-0.720), respectively, p < 0.001. The optimal cut-off point for a low/high risk was 6 (≤ 6 vs. ≥ 7). In the training cohort, 369 patients had complete data on vein compression. AUC-ROC for our score, KRS and PPS were 0.819 (95% CI: 0.758-0.879), 0.710 (0.637-0.782) and 0.725 (0.651-0.800), p ≤ 0.001 and 0.015, respectively. Positive and negative predictive values were 30.8% and 96.5%, respectively.
conclusionsOur VTE risk score is a handy tool for GCT patients before first-line CTH for metastatic disease. Outperforming KRS and PPS, it has a good discriminatory value, especially for identifying low-risk 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.