ArticleVascular health and risk management2025
Evaluating Rivaroxaban for Thromboprophylaxis in Cancer Patients with Long-Term Venous Access Devices: A Retrospective Cohort Study.
Article in Vascular health and risk management, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Long-term venous access devices, including PICCs and implantable ports, increase the risk of catheter-related thrombosis (CRT) in cancer patients. The role of prophylactic rivaroxaban in this setting remains uncertain. Methods: We retrospectively analyzed adult cancer patients who underwent peripherally inserted central catheter (PICC) or implantable port (PORT) placement between January 2019 and May 2023. CRT was diagnosed via B-ultrasound. To reduce surveillance bias, only patients who underwent ≥4 ultrasound examinations were included. Kaplan-Meier and Cox regression were used to assess the effect of rivaroxaban prophylaxis and to explore subgroup differences. Results: Among 1,585 patients with upper-limb catheters, 822 met inclusion criteria, with 135 CRT events. The median time to CRT was 55 days (IQR: 29.5-121.5), and 66.2% occurred within 90 days post-catheterization. Prophylactic rivaroxaban significantly reduced CRT risk (HR = 0.47, 95% CI: 0.33-0.67; p < 0.001), particularly in high-risk groups such as those with PICC lines or active tumors. No significant benefit was observed in patients with no-evidence-of-disease (NED) or those with cardiac stents, atrial fibrillation, or prior cerebral infarction. In the PORT subgroup, risk reduction was not statistically significant overall (HR = 0.66, p = 0.07), but became significant after excluding NED and cardiovascular conditions (HR = 0.52, p = 0.0195). Conclusion: Rivaroxaban prophylaxis reduces CRT in cancer patients with long term central venous catheters, particularly those with PICCs or active disease. Routine use appears unnecessary in NED or patients on antiplatelet therapy, highlighting the importance of individualized prophylaxis strategies.
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.