ArticleCardio-oncology (London, England)2026
Performance status and outcomes in patients with cancer receiving thromboprophylaxis: a subanalysis of the AVERT trial.
Article in Cardio-oncology (London, England), 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
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status (ECOG-PS) is central to cancer care planning and prognostication. Whether ECOG-PS also carries prognostic value in the setting of primary thromboprophylaxis for cancer-associated venous thromboembolism (VTE) remains unknown.
objectivesTo evaluate the impact of ECOG-PS on clinical outcomes in ambulatory patients with cancer initiating chemotherapy.
methodsThis was a post-hoc analysis of the AVERT randomized controlled trial that evaluated apixaban (2.5 mg twice daily) for thromboprophylaxis in patients at intermediate-to-high VTE risk. Multivariable survival models assessed the association between ECOG-PS (0-1 versus 2-3) and the composite primary outcome of VTE or clinically relevant bleeding (CRB), as well as its individual components and all-cause mortality, over 180 days.
resultsOf 428 patients included, 368 (86.0%) and 60 (14.0%) had an ECOG-PS of 0-1 and 2-3, respectively. The primary composite outcome occurred in 12.8% (n = 47) in those with ECOG 0-1 and 18.3% (n = 11) with ECOG-PS 2-3 (6-month cumulative incidence: 13.0% [95% CI: 9.8%-16.7%] versus 19.9% [95% CI: 10.5%-31.4%], respectively). Worse performance status was associated with higher risks for the composite outcome (aHR: 1.76; 95% CI: 1.14-2.72; p = 0.011), CRB (aHR: 1.58; 95%CI: 1.53-1.63; p < 0.0001), and all-cause mortality (aHR: 5.77; 95% CI: 4.98-6.67; p < 0.0001). In exploratory treatment-effect analyses, apixaban reduced VTE risk across ECOG-PS strata, including among participants with ECOG-PS 2-3, without clear evidence of excess CRB in this subgroup.
conclusionsECOG-PS predicts VTE-related outcomes in ambulatory patients with cancer and may inform individualized, value-based shared decision-making regarding anticoagulant thromboprophylaxis.
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.