Observational studyMedicine2025
Clinical evaluation of hypercoagulability in advanced malignant tumors using thromboelastography and conventional coagulation tests.
Observational study in Medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Prothrombotic Tendency in the Shadow of Cancer: Hypercoagulability, Impaired Clot Contraction and Fibrinolysis in Colorectal Cancer and Gastric Cancer Patients Undergoing Chemotherapy.International journal of molecular sciences · 2026Article
- Incidence and risk factors for catheter-related thrombosis in elderly patients with malignant tumors: a single-center retrospective cohort study.Frontiers in oncology · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study compares the diagnostic value of conventional coagulation tests (CCTs) and thromboelastography (TEG) for high blood coagulation states in advanced malignant tumors and to explore the diagnostic efficacy of their combination. In this study, 120 patients with advanced malignancy were divided into hypercoagulable state (n = 62) and non-hypercoagulable state (n = 58) groups. Traditional coagulation tests or CCTs (including prothrombin time, activated partial thromboplastin time, international normalized ratio, fibrinogen, D-dimer, and platelet count) were conducted. Simultaneously, TEG parameters, such as kinetic time, reaction time, clotting angle, maximum amplitude, and coagulation index, were assessed. Baseline demographic and pathological data were also collected. The role of conventional coagulation indicators, TEG indicators, and their combination in diagnosing high blood coagulation states was explored. The diagnostic efficiency was evaluated by constructing curves and calculating the area under the curve (AUC). Among 120 patients with advanced malignancy, 51.67% (62/120) had a hypercoagulable state. Among CCTs, activated partial thromboplastin time, D-dimer, and platelet count were associated with a hypercoagulable state, whereas no significant differences were found in other indicators. Among TEG parameters, maximum amplitude, reaction time, and clotting angle were associated with a hypercoagulable state, whereas kinetic time and coagulation index were not significantly different. The combined use of CCTs and TEG parameters was more effective in diagnosing hypercoagulable states than either test alone. The AUC values for the diagnostic efficacy of the CCTs, TEG, and TEG combined with CCTs for the diagnosis of hypercoagulable transitions in blood were 0.825, 0.744, and 0.947, respectively, with the highest AUC value in the combined test group. This study indicates that TEG parameters were highly correlated with hypercoagulability in patients with malignant tumors. The combined use of CCTs and TEG parameters is more effective for diagnosing hypercoagulability. These results can guide the clinical management and treatment of patients with malignant tumors.
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.