ArticleResearch and practice in thrombosis and haemostasis2026
Integrating pharmacovigilance and machine learning: bleeding signal detection and risk prediction for oral anticoagulants in cancer patients.
Article in Research and practice in thrombosis and haemostasis, 2026. 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Oral anticoagulants (OACs) have been widely used for the prevention and treatment of thrombosis in cancer patients, but the bleeding signals associated with different OACs in this population have not been fully studied. Objectives: This study aimed to compare bleeding signals, identify risk factors, and establish a prediction model for OACs in cancer patients. Methods: This study was based on the Food and Drug Administration Adverse Event Reporting System database and used the reporting odds ratio to evaluate the bleeding event signals associated with OACs in cancer patients from Q1 2014 to Q1 2024. Additionally, this study used a retrospective cohort design to assess the impact of OACs on bleeding risk in cancer patients. Results: This study analyzed 29,897 adverse event reports of OACs in cancer patients, which included 4084 bleeding events. We found that bleeding events were mainly concentrated within the first 2 months of medication use. Compared with apixaban, the other 4 OACs (warfarin, edoxaban, rivaroxaban, and dabigatran) showed increased risks of bleeding, especially in the gastrointestinal system. Male, cardiovascular diseases, cerebral infarction, renal insufficiency, gastrointestinal cancer, and elevated international normalized ratio are linked to an increased risk of bleeding from OACs in cancer patients. The XGBoost model was the top-performing model among the 4 bleeding prediction models (training set area under the curve = 0.788; test set area under the curve = 0.783). Conclusion: Bleeding adverse events related to OACs primarily occur early in the treatment. Apixaban shows weaker bleeding signals. Male sex, cardiovascular diseases, cerebral infarction, renal insufficiency, gastrointestinal cancer, and an elevated international normalized ratio may be potential risk factors for bleeding events. The prediction model for OACs-related bleeding developed in this study demonstrated acceptable performance in internal 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.