ArticleESMO open2025
The Vienna CATScore for predicting cancer-associated venous thromboembolism: an external validation across multiple time points.
Article in ESMO open, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- Distinct changes in plasma protein profiles of cancer patients receiving immune checkpoint inhibitors versus chemotherapy: implications for thrombosis risk and adverse outcomes.Research and practice in thrombosis and haemostasis · 2026Article
- External validation of established clinical risk scores for cancer-associated venous thromboembolism in a Brazilian registry.Journal of thrombosis and thrombolysis · 2026Article
- From Physiology to Clinical Practice in Pancreatic Cancer-Related Thromboembolism-A Review.Cancers · 2026Review
- Cancer-Associated Thrombosis in Patients Treated with Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors.International journal of molecular sciences · 2026Review
- Implementation failure: thromboprophylaxis in ambulatory patients with cancer.Hematology. American Society of Hematology. Education Program · 2025Review
- Article
- Validation of risk assessment models for venous thromboembolism in patients with cancer receiving systemic therapies.Blood advances · 2025Observational
- Longitudinal dynamics of hemostatic biomarkers in patients with cancer receiving immune checkpoint inhibitors vs chemotherapy: results from the Vienna CAT-BLED study.Research and practice in thrombosis and haemostasis · 2025Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPatients with cancer undergoing systemic therapies have a high risk for venous thromboembolism (VTE). Risk assessment models were developed to select high-risk subgroups that might benefit from primary thromboprophylaxis, yet currently available models reportedly underperform in contemporary cancer treatment populations and risk models across multiple time points throughout therapy are not available. PATIENTS AND
methodsWe, therefore, aimed to validate the Vienna CATScore, a nomogram-based model including tumor type and continuous D-dimer levels, in a prospective cohort study of patients initiating contemporary systemic anticancer therapies. The validity of the model was tested at study inclusion, 3 weeks, and 3 months after start of therapy.
resultsOverall, 598 patients were included [49% women, median age 62 years (interquartile range 53-70 years)]. Most patients had stage IV disease (68.2%). The 6-month cumulative incidence of VTE was 9.2% [95% confidence interval (CI) 6.8% to 11.5%]. The Vienna CATScore demonstrated good discriminatory ability (c-statistics: 0.69, 95% CI 0.61-0.76) at study baseline and across all evaluated time points (c-statistics: 0.68, 95% CI 0.63-0.73). Applying a 6-month predicted VTE risk threshold of 8%, the CATScore effectively distinguished between low- and high-risk groups at study inclusion (7.1% versus 15.1% observed VTE risk, P = 0.004) and across all three time points (6.3% versus 13.6% observed VTE risk, P < 0.001). Assuming a 50% risk reduction with thromboprophylaxis, this threshold resulted in a number needed to treat (NNT) of 13 and 15, respectively, in the high-risk group, while the NNT was 28 and 32, respectively, in the low-risk group.
conclusionsThis external validation of the Vienna CATScore confirms its effectiveness in predicting VTE risk in the initial months of state-of-the-art systemic anticancer therapies and across multiple time points.
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.