ArticleFrontiers in pharmacology2026
Exploratory assessment of bleeding risk associated with concurrent use of Anti-VEGF agents and anticoagulants in oncology.
Article in Frontiers in pharmacology, 2026. 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.
- Personalized Anticoagulation in Cancer Patients: Current Evidence and Future Perspectives.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2026Review
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
Background: The concurrent use of anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) agents and anticoagulants has become increasingly unavoidable in oncology, while the associated bleeding risk remains poorly characterized. Methods: A retrospective analysis combined with pharmacovigilance assessment was conducted to assess the associated bleeding risk. Patients who received concurrent use of anti-VEGF agents and anticoagulants at Hunan Cancer Hospital between 1 January 2010, and 1 October 2025, were included. Data on demographics, safety and duration of co-administration were collected. Additionally, drug-drug interaction signals were analyzed using FDA Adverse Event Reporting System (FAERS) (Q1, 2013 - Q4, 2024) via Ω shrinkage measure. Results: Among 208 patients (83 on TKIs, 125 on Bev), 32.53% of TKI users and 41.6% of Bev users received anticoagulants for VTE treatment. In the TKI/Bev VTE treatment groups, 51.85% and 61.54% of patients were administered prophylactic anticoagulants, respectively. Rivaroxaban was the primary anticoagulant, followed by low molecular weight heparin (LMWH). For TKIs, the median co-administration duration was 4 days in the prophylaxis group and 30 days in the treatment group, whereas for Bev, the corresponding duration was 28.5 days and 50 days, respectively. Bleeding events were rare across all groups (<6%), with no grade ≥3 events observed. In FAERS, only a potential bleeding signal was observed for Bev-LMWH co-administration (Ω Conclusion: TKI-DOAC/LMWH and Bev-DOAC co-administration appeared to be safe, especially with short-term, prophylactic anticoagulant dosage. Given a potential bleeding signal, Bev-LMWH co-administration requires rigorous clinical monitoring. Owing to the hypothesis-generating nature of our study, definitive safety or causality require prospective validation.
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.